What all of this points to is a failure of proper government planning. The US is supposed to have a strategic stockpile of medical equipment (which makes perfect sense; better to have a large supply of backups warehoused in a few spots so that they can be sent where needed, just as with supplies for natural disasters. However, the stockpile was originally designed to respond to bioterror attacks, and a lot of what is in it is geared to that, like anthrax vaccine.
This is one of those things that bureaucrats are really needed for, to stay on top of the inventory and rotate it out as it ages, and to liaise with epidemiologists to keep up with projections of the most likely items that will be needed. (It really doesn't do to keep stocking supplies for treatment that would have been cutting-edge 20 years ago; we have to have up-to-date technology in it, and should be selling off the aging stuff gradually before it reaches obsolescence.)
The thing is, costs have risen, but tax levies to pay for it all have fallen. So, naturally, the agencies in charge have chosen to try to get more for our money by buying supplies from less expensive foreign suppliers. That's all well and good, but when you are talking about preparing for events that can punch large holes in your supply chain, you really need to make sure that there are backups on backups, even if it means paying a bit above market in order to keep domestic suppliers in business. It goes against current "Just In Time" supply chain management gospel, but every rule has exceptions, and this should be one of them. Unfortunately, the current situation seems to be revealing that it hasn't been.
We can get related manufacturers switched over to producing these things, but ramping up fast will cost us a lot more than it should have, both in time and in tax money, and we have to keep workplaces functional to make it happen.
I think we, as Americans, believe (sometimes naively) that in a time of national crisis, we will be taken care of & our needs will be met.
And, up to a certain point, that’s probably true, for the most part. But, after a certain point, it becomes not sustainable, & things start to fall apart quickly.
After things get really critical, the wealthy will, at first, have the means to pay extra for whatever they need (medical supplies, medical care, food, etc.), but the vast majority of people will find themselves at the mercy of a government who is not really all that prepared for a widespread national crisis.
Too, I think we rely on & demand our American freedoms & liberties which are great (I love America!), but, in some instances, our freedom could end up being our downfall when, unlike countries like Italy & China, we react too slowly when it comes to things like school closures, travel bans, border closures, etc.
COVID-19 will probably end up just like a really bad flu, as many experts say, & the over-hyping media has caused a lot of unnecessary panic. However, if it’s not ”just the flu” or if it had ended up being something else, I think, out of American optimism, we didn’t react quickly enough to really protect our citizens.
Edited to add: There was some TV show or movie DH & I watched a few years ago, & there was line that stuck out at me, even at the time -
“When civilization falls, it falls quickly.”