5 ms·

Where's the USA cited in all this? Curious. I can't imagine the supply lines here would make it feasible. From the article, Mexico, India, Vietnam, Indonesia,

by joshmn 7y ago

Where's the USA cited in all this? Curious. I can't imagine the supply lines here would make it feasible. From the article, Mexico, India, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia: > The countries being considered include Mexico, India, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia. India and Vietnam are among the favorites for smartphones, Nikkei said, citing sources who did not want to be identified as the discussions are private.

Mtinie 7y ago
I’m envisioning an outcome beyond the article. Labor costs are higher in the U.S.A. to be sure but I wonder how much of a difference it ultimately is if you look at the related costs/benefits. I can think of a couple of reasons it is worth considering: - Distribution and Shipping efficiencies - Higher levels of productivity and training efficacy - Nationalistic sentiment and contra-beneficial protectionism
- cududa 7y ago
  When you have to ship in 100 parts to make the phone that shipping efficiency disappears. They do just fine taking in shipments of their phones at 3 hubs and getting them all over the country. “National sentiment” isn’t going to lower wages to $2/hr
  - reaperducer 7y ago
    When you have to ship in 100 parts to make the phone that shipping efficiency disappears. The auto manufacturers make it work. Japanese, German, and Korean car makers all have factories in the U.S.
    - cududa 7y ago
      There’s a difference when most all the parts are manufactured within 2km of the production facility
- obtino 7y ago
  When they started building the current Mac Pro in the USA, they couldn't find the correct screws for a particular component. When they eventually found a supplier who could deliver something that was close to spec, the owner of the factory hand-delivered it to them over 22 trips in his Lexus: https://9to5mac.com/2019/01/28/apple-mac-pro-screwed/ https://9to5mac.com/2019/01/28/apple-mac-pro-screwed/ You won't be facing these kinds of delays in China.
  - reaperducer 7y ago
    You won't be facing these kinds of delays in China. On day one, China has this advantage. But on day 300? It's not like there is no company in the United States That can ever make the matching screw.
    - crdoconnor 7y ago
      It's probably a lot more than 300 and China can turn off the tap on day one.
    - pinkfoot 7y ago
      Its not just the capacity to make a screw - its the contract with Apple that they will buy it once your investors have started paying for the company to make it. Good luck merely getting registered as a new vendor for anything a multinational company makes. Let alone winning a tender.
  - Fjolsvith 7y ago
    I groaned at this. Purchased a Chinese made lawn mower engine and the bolts for it weren't long enough to mount it in my mower. So, I went looking for longer bolts. Turned out that the Chinese bolts weren't Metric or SAE. Totally nonstandard junk.
- cycrutchfield 7y ago
  >I’m envisioning an outcome beyond the article. Also known as speculative wishful thinking
  - Mtinie 7y ago
    It’s hard to have something happen without first imagining how and why it would work. Is there something wrong with that if you also are aware of The existing problems and future pitfalls? I’m not blind to the challenges but also expect the current economic and political situations aren’t going to just go away over night. This will make decisions which make not make sense today potentially more attractive in the future.
    - cycrutchfield 7y ago
      Leave the speculation to the actual economists. By the way, they are all almost unanimous that protectionist tariffs to prop up domestic manufacturing is an awful idea.
amluto 7y ago
It would be great if government policy, trade or otherwise, actually resulted in good supply chains becoming available in the US.
- DevKoala 7y ago
  As supply chains become more automated, they slowly start to migrate back to the US. These tariffs will accelerate the process. https://www.vox.com/2017/5/26/15656120/manufacturing-jobs-automation-ai-us-increase-robot-sales-reshoring-offshoring https://www.vox.com/2017/5/26/15656120/manufacturing-jobs-au... Perhaps you won’t have Americans assembling phones, but for sure you’ll have them maintain the assembly machines and supervising.
  - TomMckenny 7y ago
    I hope so. But for automation to make fiscal sense, necessarily there would be fewer jobs, fewer hours and net lower pay servicing and supervising the machines. (assuming annual phone purchases have essentially flattened of course) I hope otherwise, but an unhappy alternative forecast would be "Perhaps you won't have Americans assembling phones, but for sure a few people will own all the machines that do so"
    - rswail 7y ago
      Not sure why automating boring and repetitive and eminently automatable jobs is such an "unhappy alternative". The entire history of technological progress that has brought more people out of poverty is of better and more automated agriculture and manufacturing and distribution. Things become more efficient in the use of resources over time. Automation aids in that by reducing wastage. Yes Apple shareholders might own the machines that make iPhones, but people working, doing service activities that can't be automated, they will be buying them. If there's no one to buy, there won't be any reason to make them.
      - TomMckenny 7y ago
        >The entire history of technological progress that has brought more people out of poverty is of better and more automated agriculture and manufacturing and distribution. Absolutely agreed. But previous technical progress has moved the bulk of people from one repetitive task (farming) to another (manufacturing). It is a great goal to eliminate dreary jobs, but if the current process does not create new repetitive jobs but eliminates that category of task in favor of high skill tasks, then there is going to have to be some mechanism to impart those skills. During previous technical revolutions, there was no effort to do so and luckily the new jobs could be learned in minimal time. But these are the exact jobs that are going to disappear now. And ironically people are becoming more skeptical of universities not less. So yes, it is a great goal to eliminate low skill jobs, but assuming some invisible force will give everyone a challenging job that they can do is perhaps magical thinking. Consider: if you tell a factory worker that his job will be automated away, he is not relived by it but panicked. If it is an improvement for him, one has to ask why. > If there's no one to buy, there won't be any reason to make them. This is what caused of the great depression: concentration of wealth away from consumers who drive the economy and into a tiny number of hands. If it's just one company or even sector that fails then it's just a bump. If it's widespread or systemic then it's a disaster.

by joshmn 7y ago

Mtinie 7y ago

I’m envisioning an outcome beyond the article. Labor costs are higher in the U.S.A. to be sure but I wonder how much of a difference it ultimately is if you look at the related costs/benefits. I can think of a couple of reasons it is worth considering: - Distribution and Shipping efficiencies - Higher levels of productivity and training efficacy - Nationalistic sentiment and contra-beneficial protectionism

cududa 7y ago
When you have to ship in 100 parts to make the phone that shipping efficiency disappears. They do just fine taking in shipments of their phones at 3 hubs and getting them all over the country. “National sentiment” isn’t going to lower wages to $2/hr
- reaperducer 7y ago
  When you have to ship in 100 parts to make the phone that shipping efficiency disappears. The auto manufacturers make it work. Japanese, German, and Korean car makers all have factories in the U.S.
  - cududa 7y ago
    There’s a difference when most all the parts are manufactured within 2km of the production facility
obtino 7y ago
When they started building the current Mac Pro in the USA, they couldn't find the correct screws for a particular component. When they eventually found a supplier who could deliver something that was close to spec, the owner of the factory hand-delivered it to them over 22 trips in his Lexus: https://9to5mac.com/2019/01/28/apple-mac-pro-screwed/ https://9to5mac.com/2019/01/28/apple-mac-pro-screwed/ You won't be facing these kinds of delays in China.
- reaperducer 7y ago
  You won't be facing these kinds of delays in China. On day one, China has this advantage. But on day 300? It's not like there is no company in the United States That can ever make the matching screw.
  - crdoconnor 7y ago
    It's probably a lot more than 300 and China can turn off the tap on day one.
  - pinkfoot 7y ago
    Its not just the capacity to make a screw - its the contract with Apple that they will buy it once your investors have started paying for the company to make it. Good luck merely getting registered as a new vendor for anything a multinational company makes. Let alone winning a tender.
- Fjolsvith 7y ago
  I groaned at this. Purchased a Chinese made lawn mower engine and the bolts for it weren't long enough to mount it in my mower. So, I went looking for longer bolts. Turned out that the Chinese bolts weren't Metric or SAE. Totally nonstandard junk.
cycrutchfield 7y ago
>I’m envisioning an outcome beyond the article. Also known as speculative wishful thinking
- Mtinie 7y ago
  It’s hard to have something happen without first imagining how and why it would work. Is there something wrong with that if you also are aware of The existing problems and future pitfalls? I’m not blind to the challenges but also expect the current economic and political situations aren’t going to just go away over night. This will make decisions which make not make sense today potentially more attractive in the future.
  - cycrutchfield 7y ago
    Leave the speculation to the actual economists. By the way, they are all almost unanimous that protectionist tariffs to prop up domestic manufacturing is an awful idea.

amluto 7y ago

It would be great if government policy, trade or otherwise, actually resulted in good supply chains becoming available in the US.

DevKoala 7y ago
As supply chains become more automated, they slowly start to migrate back to the US. These tariffs will accelerate the process. https://www.vox.com/2017/5/26/15656120/manufacturing-jobs-automation-ai-us-increase-robot-sales-reshoring-offshoring https://www.vox.com/2017/5/26/15656120/manufacturing-jobs-au... Perhaps you won’t have Americans assembling phones, but for sure you’ll have them maintain the assembly machines and supervising.
- TomMckenny 7y ago
  I hope so. But for automation to make fiscal sense, necessarily there would be fewer jobs, fewer hours and net lower pay servicing and supervising the machines. (assuming annual phone purchases have essentially flattened of course) I hope otherwise, but an unhappy alternative forecast would be "Perhaps you won't have Americans assembling phones, but for sure a few people will own all the machines that do so"
  - rswail 7y ago
    Not sure why automating boring and repetitive and eminently automatable jobs is such an "unhappy alternative". The entire history of technological progress that has brought more people out of poverty is of better and more automated agriculture and manufacturing and distribution. Things become more efficient in the use of resources over time. Automation aids in that by reducing wastage. Yes Apple shareholders might own the machines that make iPhones, but people working, doing service activities that can't be automated, they will be buying them. If there's no one to buy, there won't be any reason to make them.
    - TomMckenny 7y ago
      >The entire history of technological progress that has brought more people out of poverty is of better and more automated agriculture and manufacturing and distribution. Absolutely agreed. But previous technical progress has moved the bulk of people from one repetitive task (farming) to another (manufacturing). It is a great goal to eliminate dreary jobs, but if the current process does not create new repetitive jobs but eliminates that category of task in favor of high skill tasks, then there is going to have to be some mechanism to impart those skills. During previous technical revolutions, there was no effort to do so and luckily the new jobs could be learned in minimal time. But these are the exact jobs that are going to disappear now. And ironically people are becoming more skeptical of universities not less. So yes, it is a great goal to eliminate low skill jobs, but assuming some invisible force will give everyone a challenging job that they can do is perhaps magical thinking. Consider: if you tell a factory worker that his job will be automated away, he is not relived by it but panicked. If it is an improvement for him, one has to ask why. > If there's no one to buy, there won't be any reason to make them. This is what caused of the great depression: concentration of wealth away from consumers who drive the economy and into a tiny number of hands. If it's just one company or even sector that fails then it's just a bump. If it's widespread or systemic then it's a disaster.