Shipbuilding spending as employment and deterrence

What share of British economic output would the equitable treaty require?

Probably little more than historical spending, because shipbuilding employment would replace some welfare costs while preserving industry and deterrence.

The proposed programme might cost little more than Britain already spent once unemployment relief is counted. Keeping shipyards and skilled workers active could soften depression-era damage and redirect some public spending into productive construction. Steady orders would preserve yards, machinery suppliers, and mobilisation capacity that otherwise had to be recreated during a crisis. A stronger fleet might deter conflict, which would cost less than fighting after industrial strength had been allowed to decay.