I think supporting "Made in the USA" is fine and laudable. But - IMHO - there are nuances. If the decision of whether to support or not can turn on 100% vs. 99% USA components, should we limit the analysis to materials and labor, or should we expand to looking at the citizenship and residence of owners (including passive investors), method of transportation of materials and personnel, the equipment they use to make and advertise the product, take orders, etc.? Those seem like ridiculous inquiries to me, but I think that some would say the same about saying a pack isn't 100% USA Made if it contains a snap or zipper sourced outside of the USA.
Even focusing on just materials can have unintended consequences. I have a friend who is one of two owners of a company that makes outdoor and other products. The owners are US citizens and residents, and they are vets. But if they make all of their gear with *only* pure USA materials, then it limits their offering, increases their costs, and may limit them from being able to hire other US employees. And maximizing profit could be characterized as greed, but for a startup, it's sometimes the difference between survival and failure.