The slide’s authenticity was confirmed by a Navy spokesperson, who cautioned that it was not meant to be an in-depth analysis.

The slide shows that Chinese shipyards have a capacity of about 23.2 million tons compared to less than 100,000 tons in the U.S., making Chinese shipbuilding capacity more than 232 times greater than that of the U.S.

The slide also shows the “battle force composition” of the countries’ two navies side-by-side, which includes “combatant ships, submarines, mine warfare ships, major amphibious ships, and large combat support auxiliary ships.” The ONI estimated that China had 355 such naval vessels in 2020 while the U.S. had 296. The disparity is expected to continue to grow every five years until 2035, when China will have an estimated 475 naval ships compared to 305-317 U.S. ships.

Another section of the slide provides an estimate on the percentage each country allocates to naval production in its shipyards, with China garnering roughly 70% of its shipbuilding revenue from naval production, compared to about 95% of American shipbuilding revenue.

Because of China’s centrally planned economy, the country is able to control labor costs and provide subsidies to its shipbuilding infrastructure, allowing the Chinese to outbid most competitors around the world and dominate the commercial shipping industry, Sadler said.

Alternative title - “Central planning is more efficient than markets” confirms US Navy

    • Hexbear2 [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The US wastes so much money on failed projects to enrich defense contractors. The F35, Ford Class, DDG-1000, LCS program, etc. The US military is a defense contractor welfare program.

    • Gucci_Minh [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah this sounds like they’re just saying “give us another trillion dollars to build shipyards we’re definitely not going to spend it on private jets and coke.”

        • pillow [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          MAD is weird, if the PLA didn’t exist at all the US could just roll up and blockade china and say “cool you have nukes, if you use them then we retaliate and a billion of your people die” and that’s that

          • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            that is true but MAD also means that the US and China can never afford to get into a direct conflict. If China were to invade Taiwan America could supply Taiwan arms but China seem to have far too much sense for that after all why go to war when you’re winning the peace

            China also don’t seem interested in military involvement in conflicts they have no stake in