Dan questions whether an earlier American building program would leave Congress unwilling to fund replacement ships after paying for a large fleet. Alex Clarke offers a different interpretation: if employment is the motive, politicians still have reason to order ships after the Navy's immediate needs are met. Under that assumption, selling relatively new ships to sustain construction could become a greater risk than stopping orders. The discussion also allows for ships being built in forms the Navy did not request. This is a conditional argument about procurement incentives, not a claim that a particular fleet-renewal program would necessarily follow.
Notable Point · 59:42-1:03:03
When naval orders serve employment goals
A larger nineteenth-century US fleet raises a disagreement about future orders when employment drives naval spending.