I’ll disagree with most of what you’ve said. A handheld VHF, while cheaper, is limited to 5 watts of transmit power. A fixed mount VHF has up to 25 watts, which means that when paired with the proper antenna, it has an incredibly longer effective transmit range.
Why have two radios? A couple reasons. The most obvious is to be able to monitor multiple channels simultaneously, since all vessels with a functional VHF installation are required to monitor CH16 at all times. I find the scan function on most recreational-grade VHFs to be pretty poor, hence, two radios- one for CH16 hailing/distress, one for a working channel, whether broadcast, whatever. Another good reason is redundancy, of course, but modern electronics are pretty reliable so this is less critical than in past days.
There’s plenty of near-shore areas with good shore station VHF coverage where VHF communications are perfectly feasible within about 40 miles offshore. You may not be able to hear the shore station, but they can usually hear you. Combine that with a DSC distress message, and VHF remains very viable as a means of distress signaling close to shore. A satellite phone in this situation isn’t necessary, and also usually represents a significant and recurring expense- there’s a good case to be made for InReach-style satellite communicators, but they’re still pricey and require a subscription.
I’ll also disagree with your statement: “ The less wires, antennas, and built in electronics - the better!” As a whole, a permanently mounted, properly installed piece of communications equipment, when installed as part of a well designed, well maintained electrical system, is a far more reliable piece of gear than smaller handheld devices that need to be charged, can be dropped or left at home, etc. There’s no downside to having additional or backup permanently installed equipment, aside from cost.
