Trump signs executive order to revitalize US shipbuilding industry

A piece of paper isn't going to teach brats playing Candy Crush how to weld.

I would, however, take a formal decree from the GOP admitting Reagan was wrong on free trade and that trickle-down was a fraud sold by the chamber of commerce types who wanted to bust unions.

Today's Republicans purport to be more pro-worker. That means they will sign off on living wage laws and not block them, right? All goods Americans buy must be produced here by 2040--otherwise a daisy cutter will drop on the NYSE.

On labor
https://phys.org/news/2025-04-freedom-linked-greater-financial-stability.htmlhttps://phys.org/news/2025-04-credit-workers-ideas-critical-organizational.htmlhttps://phys.org/news/2025-04-giant-wage-retailing-economy.htmlhttps://phys.org/news/2025-04-psychological-theory-context-digital-labor.htmlhttps://phys.org/news/2025-04-demand-centric-labor-intensive-industries.html
The latest
 
Last edited:
America produces I think 100 thousand tons of ships China has about 25 to 33 million tons of ships. If America wants to restore manufacturing, it must restore steel production from 1970s or 140 millions of steel That requires ore and lots of coal or electricity. It will take at least 6 years to return

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/countries-dominate-global-shipbuilding/
 
maybe U.S should reconsider that idea from World War I about ships from concrete or hemp combined with concrete (hempconcrete)
 
It will take at least 6 years to return
Click to expand...

With the daily uncertainty of the markets/economy brought about by the current administration next great idea no one in their right mind would look to invest in the US in any area.

If for instance you wanted to start a new factory, permits, regulations are one thing yet not knowing what the dream team will do tomorrow is a deal breaker.

The US has a massive trade deficient because it cannot make anything at the prices the US consumers want to pay.

125% on China is not going to hurt anyone other than the US, probably will go to +200% and then will go back to nothing.

A piece of paper isn't going to teach brats playing Candy Crush how to weld.
Click to expand...

Great statement, completely correct never going to happen and as said on another thread 18y/o's can make 200k a month on tick tock and YouTube and the list goes on.

Regards,
 
Huh, curious, posts about the Executive order but no reference given to the order itself,
so,
I shall go find out what is in its text,
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/restoringamericasmaritimedominance/
White House also provides this,
https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-she...j-trump-restores-americas-maritime-dominance/
Interesting,

Sec. 13. Expand Mariner Training and Education.
Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of Education, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall deliver a report to the President through the APNSA for inclusion in the MAP with recommendations to address workforce challenges in the maritime sector through maritime educational institutions and workforce transitions.
(a) In preparing their report, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of Education, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult, as needed, with industry stakeholders including private industry and labor organizations.
(b) The report shall:
(i) include the current number of credentialed mariners and estimate the additional credentialed mariners required to support the policies described in this order;
(ii) analyze the impact of establishing new and expanding existing merchant marine academies as a means of educating, training, and certifying the additional credentialed merchant mariners estimated under subsection (b)(i) of this section;
(iii) identify any requirements for credentialing mariners that are unnecessary, insufficient, or unduly burdensome and provide recommendations for reform;
(iv) inventory existing educational and technical training grants and scholarships to colleges and vocational-technical training institutions for critical shipbuilding specialties and other maritime studies, and provide recommendations for enhancement; and
(v) assess the United States Coast Guard credentialing program applicability to United States Navy Active Duty and Reserve sailors to increase opportunities for sailors to transfer into the Merchant Marine with validated skills.
(c) Consistent with the findings of the report and in conjunction with the formulation of the President’s Budget, the Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of Education, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall deliver a legislative proposal to the APNSA and the OMB Director that:
(i) reflects the recommendations of the report required under this section;
(ii) establishes national maritime scholarships to send promising maritime experts abroad to learn cutting edge techniques and subjects, such as innovative maritime logistics, clean fuels and advanced nuclear energy, human-machine teaming, and additive manufacturing and other advanced technologies; and
(iii) offers scholarships to maritime experts from allied countries to teach at United States institutions.


Sec. 14. Modernize the United States Merchant Marine Academy.
(a) The Secretary of Transportation shall:
(i) within 30 days of this order consistent with applicable law and available appropriations, take action to hire the necessary facilities staff and reprogram budgetary resources needed to execute urgent deferred maintenance projects and any other mission critical repair works at the USMMA;
(ii) take immediate action to finalize a long-term master facilities plan (LMFP) for the modernization of the USMMA campus and submit such plan to the APNSA and OMB Director for concurrence; and
(iii) within 90 days of the concurrence described in subsection (a)(ii) of this section, in consultation with the Department of Government Efficiency, submit a 5-year capital improvement plan (CIP) consistent with the LMFP to the APNSA and OMB Director that includes capital project budgets, schedules, and sequencing, as well as an inventory of deferred maintenance items necessary to sustain campus operations through completion of the CIP.
(b) All actions taken pursuant to this section shall be detailed in the MAP.
Click to expand...
 
Halcyon66 said:
Great statement, completely correct never going to happen and as said on another thread 18y/o's can make 200k a month on tick tock and YouTube and the list goes on.

Regards,
Click to expand...


Not really a great statement at all (mostly because only people over 35 play candy crush) and the TikTok remark is also rather pointless.

The issue US shipbuilding faces comes down to being utterly unattractive to already existing skilled workers and young people who want to learn and work in the field.

The pay is terrible, the working conditions are terrible, the schedules are also often an issue. In essence, why would anyone work harder, in worse conditions for less money when other places provide better pay etc? Out of patriotism? Lmfao.

If the US is serious about keeping their shipyards alive and their navy afloat, they should better start to make working in their yards attractive to younger people. A decent pay, better conditions and humane schedules would be required. It all comes down to how much a functional navy is worth for the US government. Because young people, welders, metal workers etc. are not the issue. Especially the former would literally throw themselves off a bridge for a well paying, stable job. Like literally, people below their 30s would do many things for a decent paying and stable job, including putting in the effort to learn the necessary skills and get work done. The issue lies completely with the US government and the Shipyards, it's really that easy.

Outsourcing, like many others have suggested in relation to this topic is not helpful for the US, outsourcing is what brought the United States into this position in the first place. When South Korea and Japan make US warships, then what's left in the US? Nuclear subs and carriers and that's it probably. No, the top priority should be to make working in US shipyards as attractive and lucrative as possible to win over existing skilled workers and new ones.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for posting the links to the EO and Fact Sheet.

To be honest the whole thing is kind of confusing. In general the EO appears to throw alot of different things together and lacks overalll clarity.

Specifically in "Section 1 - Purpose" it states that "the United States constructs less than one percent of commercial ships globally" and then talks about the need for a "comprehensive approach that includes securing consistent, predictable, and durable Federal funding, making United States-flagged and built vessels commercially competitive in international commerce, rebuilding America’s maritime manufacturing capabilities (the Maritime Industrial Base), and expanding and strengthening the recruitment, training, and retention of the relevant workforce."

However several sections of the EO appear to focus on the training of "Credentialed" Mariners to man ships, Harbor Maintenance Fees, Customs, Taxes and Duties, concerns that th cranes used in ports are Chinese made, the establishment of "Maritime Propserity Zones", improving "Federal vessel procurement" (which typically aren't realy commerical vessels), deregulation, and the Inactive Reserve Fleet.

In generall, to me at least there appears to be some degree of conflating "Mariners" and graduates from maritime academies with a "shipyard labor force. Overall there may be some overlap, but I believe a lot of the core laborers in many shipyards aren't maritime school grads, but are rather tradesmen and women who have learned trades of welding, pipe fitting, HVAC installlation, cable installation/practical electrical engineering, and other such trades.

Overall the sections that seem to most directy deal with actual commerciall shipbuilding seem to be Sections 12 and 17, where Section 12 notes several already existing programs such as the Maritime Administration's (MARAD's) "Tanker Security Program, Cable Security Fleet, Maritime Security Programs, Maritime Environmental and Technical Assistance Program, Title XI, Assistance to Small Shipyards, Port Infrastructure Development Program, the United States Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA), and programs that support the State Maritime Academies" as well as "existing domestic cargo preference laws, including the Military Cargo Preference Act of 1904, as amended, (10 U.S.C. 2631) and the Cargo Preference Act of 1954, as amended".

And Section 17 talks about deveoping a plan to "ensure that adequate cubed footage and gross tonnage of United States-flagged commercial vessels can be called upon in times of crisis, while limiting the likelihood of Government waste" and providing "incentives that will:
(i) grow the fleet of United States built, crewed, and flagged vessels that serve as readily deployable assets for national security purposes; and
(ii) increase the participation of United States commercial vessels in international trade; and
(c) enhances existing subsidies to include coverage of certain construction or modification costs in a manner designed to enhance incentives for the commercial shipping industry to operate militarily useful ships that trade internationally under the flag of the United States."

To be honest, much of this has already been done in the past and/or are aready ongoing (as evidenced by the program noted in Section 12).

As such, its reallly unclear, what this EO is really expected to accomplish other than callling for several studies and such.

In addition, one of the things that kind of seems missing from the EO to me is that while it talks about "component supply chains" I didn't really see anything about "proprietary information". Specifically on probably most all commerical ships now a days a shipyard may do the structural work but items like the propulsion plant, auxiliary machinery, deck equipment, Heating/Ventilation/Air Conditioning, and even Outfit/Furnishings may be designed, constructed and supplied to the yard by outside vendors. And some yards even also subcontract things like painting or Aluminum construction work to other facilities.

As such, while the EO talks about the need to " identify key maritime components in the supply chain that are essential for rebuilding and expanding the Maritime Industrial Base and that should be prioritized for investment" its unclear to me whether having a facility that can license build components that were designed overseas (and which may already be in service on numerous ships) is OK or is it the intent of the Government that the US also needs to have the ability to "develope and modify/improve" the design of these subcomponents on their own, where "license building" would imply the need to pay a licensing fee overseas for any components built.

In the end, after reading/reviewing the EO I'm more or less lleft with the impression that there will likely be some studies and potentially up-funding of programs for loans and subsidies to yards and ship owners for a while, but I see very little that seems to likelly change much anything about getting significantly more ships built in the US.

:(
 
EmoBirb said:
Not really a great statement at all (mostly because only people over 35 play candy crush) and the TikTok remark is also rather pointless.

The issue US shipbuilding faces comes down to being utterly unattractive to already existing skilled workers and young people who want to learn and work in the field.

The pay is terrible, the working conditions are terrible, the schedules are also often an issue. In essence, why would anyone work harder, in worse conditions for less money when other places provide better pay etc? Out of patriotism? Lmfao.

If the US is serious about keeping their shipyards alive and their navy afloat, they should better start to make working in their yards attractive to younger people. A decent pay, better conditions and humane schedules would be required. It all comes down to how much a functional navy is worth for the US government. Because young people, welders, metal workers etc. are not the issue. Especially the former would literally throw themselves off a bridge for a well paying, stable job. Like literally, people below their 30s would do many things for a decent paying and stable job, including putting in the effort to learn the necessary skills and get work done. The issue lies completely with the US government and the Shipyards, it's really that easy.

Outsourcing, like many others have suggested in relation to this topic is not helpful for the US, outsourcing is what brought the United States into this position in the first place. When South Korea and Japan make US warships, then what's left in the US? Nuclear subs and carriers and that's it probably. No, the top priority should be to make working in US shipyards as attractive and lucrative as possible to win over existing skilled workers and new ones.
Click to expand...

Dreaming, the ship has sailed so to say,. How exactly is the US going to rebuild an entire industry that no one wants to work in?

The US is in over ~37 trillion debt, so exactly where is the money coming from?

Money makes the world go around, not hope. Private companies will never step up as no upside.

The US 10yr bonds are getting sold off due to the tariff plaything by the current administration and the yields are moving higher which mean the US has to pay even more interest on their never-ending pile of debt.

Add to the fact that the US$ is tanking because of the tariff plaything they have to pay even more interest due to the FX loss.

Anyone can write a 20 pager to fix the issues, unfortunately never going to happen.

https://www.csis.org/analysis/china...stablished itself,market is huge and growing.
https://www.csis.org/analysis/ship-wars-confronting-chinas-dual-use-shipbuilding-empire
https://features.csis.org/hiddenreach/china-shipyard-tiers/
The US accounts for 0.1% of global shipbuilding for a reason.

Regards,
 
Last edited:
EmoBirb said:
Nuclear subs and carriers and that's it probably.
Click to expand...
Well, if USN could be forced to declassify at least their Cold War era reactor technology, then US shipbuilding could enter the market of commerical nuclear marine. Here they won't face any kind of serious competition - China is significantly behind in marine reactors, and Russia did not have major export shipbuilding (on the other hand, if Russia and China cooperate with Rosatom providing reactors for Chinese-build merchant ships...)
 
Seriously who would want fleets of nuclear powered panamax/merchant ships all over the place?

What is the saying, "Accident waiting to happen"

Regards,
 
Whole lot of preformative acts but industry and manufacturing are not coming back in 90% of the branches,only ones with high enough added value and lots of automation.
Or you end up with an Italian designer clothes production model, sure it made in the country but with Chinese sweatshops and 100% chinese labor force , there is no domestic workforce for revitalised shipbuilding.

Meanwhile Navy master class in project managment, maybe Trump needs to put Rear Admiral Tom Andersen in charge , if not Tom is surely most deserving of board position at one of the main defense contractors
 
Mr.T said:
there is no domestic workforce for revitalised shipbuilding.
Click to expand...
Yep. Life is too comfortable nowadays. Who wants to spend 9 hours shirtless holding a blaze rod gun in deep, damp, hot as hell slips manhandling steel plates together? And which company would pay American workers when your Asian worker would accept 10x less wages and no social security contract.

Hard time create great men. Great men create great time. Great time create soft men. The only way to a revitalized US heavy industry is WW3.
 
Halcyon66 said:
Seriously who would want fleets of nuclear powered panamax/merchant ships all over the place?

What is the saying, "Accident waiting to happen"

Regards,
Click to expand...
I think it's not as much of an issue as you may think.

Russia for example operates a large nuclear icebreaker fleet, the Sevmorput nuclear cargo ship and of course the Admiral Nakhimov/Pyotr Velikiy nuclear guided missile cruiser. So they have a large nuclear surface fleet that's been operating for many years.

Same goes for the US and their super carriers. Or the world's nuclear submarine fleets.

I'm not saying the US should build a ton of nuclear powered tankers and cargo vessels (although it would drastically reduce greenhouse emissions). I'm just saying that such vessels are not more accident prone than any other. They are in fact arguably safer. And when Russia can cruise their nuclear icebreakers through 3m thick arctic ice since Soviet times without concern, I don't doubt the US could operate nuclear ships safely. I think they actually once did with the Savannah
 
yeetmahboi said:
Yep. Life is too comfortable nowadays. Who wants to spend 9 hours shirtless holding a blaze rod gun in deep, damp, hot as hell slips manhandling steel plates together? And which company would pay American workers when your Asian worker would accept 10x less wages and no social security contract.

Hard time create great men. Great men create great time. Great time create soft men. The only way to a revitalized US heavy industry is WW3.
Click to expand...

And then it may be already too late.
 
Halcyon66 said:
Private companies will never step up as no upside.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it's time for the US to nationalize their remaining Shipbuilding. It would give the government more control and thus the opportunity to implement the changes they'd want and view as worthwhile. The fact that the US MIC as a whole is still basically 100% privatized is quite frankly mind boggling. And especially shipbuilding is in dire need of a huge change. Chinas shipyards are owned by the state too, so it isn't like that's an issue. Same with the Soviets/Russians.
 
EmoBirb said:
Perhaps it's time for the US to nationalize their remaining Shipbuilding. It would give the government more control and thus the opportunity to implement the changes they'd want and view as worthwhile. The fact that the US MIC as a whole is still basically 100% privatized is quite frankly mind boggling. And especially shipbuilding is in dire need of a huge change. Chinas shipyards are owned by the state too, so it isn't like that's an issue. Same with the Soviets/Russians.
Click to expand...
emmm, it's going to be hard. Especially when we take into account the interests that the reform is going to touch...
 
SUPER=BUG said:
emmm, it's going to be hard. Especially when we take into account the interests that the reform is going to touch...
Click to expand...
It wouldn't be impossible though, at least in theory. In practice the US government is firmly under the thumb of private interest groups etc.

So it's not going to happen either. So the USN is virtually doomed, sucks to be SEA in the future I guess.
 
Oh, don't be too anxious to talk about the results, maybe there will be some variables in the future, and let's stay tuned for what the American shipbuilding industry will become in the future.
 
EmoBirb said:
Perhaps it's time for the US to nationalize their remaining Shipbuilding. It would give the government more control and thus the opportunity to implement the changes they'd want and view as worthwhile. The fact that the US MIC as a whole is still basically 100% privatized is quite frankly mind boggling. And especially shipbuilding is in dire need of a huge change. Chinas shipyards are owned by the state too, so it isn't like that's an issue. Same with the Soviets/Russians.
Click to expand...

Yeah...let's turn shipbuilding into Amtrak
 
kocovgoce said:
America produces I think 100 thousand tons of ships China has about 25 to 33 million tons of ships. If America wants to restore manufacturing, it must restore steel production from 1970s or 140 millions of steel That requires ore and lots of coal or electricity. It will take at least 6 years to return

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/countries-dominate-global-shipbuilding/
Click to expand...

I wonder what industries got hit hardest by tariffs...

Justo Miranda said:
If China's shipping networks collapse, there will be many business opportunities for healthy democracies.
Click to expand...

The current plan for democracies is to lean heavier with PRC. Besides, they treat their workers better than any American shipyard.
 
edwest4 said:
Pure fiction.
Click to expand...
Maybe, maybe not. Europe just paused discussions on tariffs against the US. Plus a couple of press releases on how they are planning to combat cheap Pinduoduo/Shein/child labor employing services flooding the market.

One thing I am confident on, is the West's combined resolve to bring China to her knees. But I will wait.
 
yeetmahboi said:
Maybe, maybe not. Europe just paused discussions on tariffs against the US. Plus a couple of press releases on how they are planning to combat cheap Pinduoduo/Shein/child labor employing services flooding the market.

One thing I am confident on, is the West's combined resolve to bring China to her knees. But I will wait.
Click to expand...

You are misinformed. China operates a large fleet of cargo ships. The desire to bring China in line with fair trade goes back a few administrations. No one did anything. Now that something is being done, the media in the U.S. is anxious to discredit the current administration for taking action. While the incessant whining from the media continues, those in government claiming to be opposed to this action are shown in videos dating to the late 1990s where they advocate for the same action. Prior to this, the average person had nothing specific to go on. Trade deficits were none of their concern. But a trade deficit means the U.S. paid more for tariffs from other countries. Europe is operating under the same fiction, claiming great offense that a long-time ally would treat them this way. And what way is that?

An item is charged a 2.5% tariff by the U.S. The U.S. is charged a 10% tariff to import the same item from another country.
 
yeetmahboi said:
Maybe, maybe not. Europe just paused discussions on tariffs against the US. Plus a couple of press releases on how they are planning to combat cheap Pinduoduo/Shein/child labor employing services flooding the market.

One thing I am confident on, is the West's combined resolve to bring China to her knees. But I will wait.
Click to expand...

Except the concept of a "collective West" is dead. It's almost as antiquated as Marxist-Leninism.

For most Americans, Europe is little better than Japan or China, in the sense that it's taken something from us and needs to be punished. In classic American fashion, this is the United States acting unilaterally and expecting the rest of Europe and our Asian allies to fall in lockstep, but they won't. They can't. They don't even want to. The EU is scheduled to speak with Chinese trade representatives in July, before the 90-day tariff pause hits, likely to coordinate response measures and agree on a mutual plan of attack against the U.S.

If they sign the Comprehensive Agreement on Investment that was stalled out by COVID then the U.S. will stand only with Russia and India.
 
Oh please. What "most Americans" does the above refer to? And that crap about "needs to be punished." Nonsense.

To anyone who was paying attention, the current President warned Europe, spend more on defense. Now. Some countries with low incomes were given notice. They were not expected to pay more than they could bear. Since the end of World War II, what? Britain was bankrupt. The United States sent over money to rebuild. Food rationing occurred during the war. Did anyone forget that? And how long did rationing continue after the war?

During the Cold War, the United States stood as Europe's shield. In the 1980s, I read scenario after scenario in military journals that illustrated various attacks in Europe. And what about all those SAC bases in the UK?

The Soviet Union withdraws from eastern Europe in the 1990s. Predictably, defense contracts dry up. All those missing defense dollars means it's wild spending time in Europe. More money for tourist attractions. More money for trade. More money for millionaires to become billionaires. And to join the ranks of the idle rich.

There is no attacking the 900 pound gorilla in the room. The U.S. is the world's largest economy, followed by China, for now. And what is the current trade deficit in the U.S.? Anyone? The EU has very little leverage. Very little. The British have even less.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom