Every large company is itself a "centrally planned economy". I worked for General Motors - it was much more like the Soviet Union than people want to admit. Every conglomerate I have worked for that had more than 10,000 workers was run like dictatorships.

Ok, so those company dictators are interested in national security instead of profits? The entire topic here is how to maintain or build skills within the U.S.

ive been at a few F500 companies, and while internally that might be true... you can just quit.

if anything, that "I can just go" leads to more of a cult or prison than a dictatorship.

> The U.S. doesn't have a centrally planned economy.

You don't need a centrally planned economy. Subsidies are enough incentive to at least keep a bit of production around.

> Easy to know U.S. lost expertise, but tough question how do you get it back?

Invest money into subsidies / R&D like in the icebreaker case, or raise tariffs against Chinese and Indian price dumping.

> The U.S. doesn't have a centrally planned economy. Each business is free to do as it wishes...

Currently US federal government spending is around 36% of GDP, which means 36% of the US economy is in fact centrally planned, albeit with some devolution in some cases.

I don't really disagree with you, but that's very misleading to say.

64% of the federal budget goes to social security, medicare/medicaid, disability etc. That is, it goes to individuals. It's not meaningful to call that economic planning. It's not in the slightest like paying for defense contractors or research or infrastructure.

11% goes to interest payments, ie people who bought bonds etc. For individuals that's certainly not central planning, since they are the ones who decided to buy. A large amount goes towards paying of quant. easing etc, but it seems a little goofy to count that like we spend it every year still.

You raise valid points and I agree with the thrust of what you're saying. To quibble a bit though I'd say that Medicare and Medicaid aren't really individual spending, but rather a pharmaceuticals and healthcare subsidy, much like how food assistance programs amount to a food and agriculture subsidy.