4 ms·

Can we all agree that outsourcing the production of critical medical supplies to China over recent decades was a bad idea? I understand the “golden arches” the

by jtdev 7y ago

Can we all agree that outsourcing the production of critical medical supplies to China over recent decades was a bad idea? I understand the “golden arches” theory, and the intent if globalism, but I feel that COVID19 has revealed what a short sighted, deeply flawed view the globalists have.

kingaillas 7y ago
Exactly! I too understand the theory of competitive advantage, but in light of this new information, current economic/business/free-market theory needs to be rebuilt from the ground up to take into account risks (global supply chain disruption, customer base vanishing, etc) seriously considered.
phreeza 7y ago
I would argue the opposite is the case. The disease affects basically all countries, so what matters is the global supply of these goods. So we are better off if countries can specialize on their respective competitive advantages. In the scenario you propose, every country would have their own very inefficient mask industry which would now be just as or even more overwhelmed.
- nradov 7y ago
  We all understand Ricardo's law of comparative advantage. The problem is what happens in a supply chain disruption. In that case it's better to have at least some inefficient local capacity instead of nothing. As an extreme example, the US continues to manufacture it's own military aircraft instead of buying from China. Even though China might be willing to sell them cheaper than we can make them.
- SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
  The problem is that each individual country will (reasonably!) not allow critical medical supplies to be exported during a crisis. It worked out mostly okay this time, because the countries with large domestic mask production all got their crisis under control before the rest of the world got it. If the next pandemic happens in China and the US simultaneously, we're not going to have any masks at all. And note that "mostly okay" here doesn't mean we have anywhere close to enough masks. Just that, with extreme rationing, we can ensure most but not all doctors have the absolute bare minimum of protective gear.
the8472 7y ago
Not just that, global air travel has enabled the rapid spread of the virus in the first place.
libertine 7y ago
Or maybe shouldn't there be emergency plans that had all the steps to remodel current production lines in the country to adjust to production of medical supplies? Like, in China, factories that made bedding products are re engineered to make masks, suits, etc. These are exceptional conditions, so if you had the protocols in place (blue prints, machine configurations, assembly line structure, briefings for management, briefing and courses for factory workers), maybe it was doable. And maybe it would be of low maintenance, just when new machines were introduced, you'd release a new document to configure that machine. The main problem would be raw material, but again, maybe with planning and study new materials and combinations could be used (even if not perfect). This would be only a problem for countries with little to no industry, but that's where organizations like the EU should come into play.

by jtdev 7y ago

kingaillas 7y ago

Exactly! I too understand the theory of competitive advantage, but in light of this new information, current economic/business/free-market theory needs to be rebuilt from the ground up to take into account risks (global supply chain disruption, customer base vanishing, etc) seriously considered.

phreeza 7y ago

I would argue the opposite is the case. The disease affects basically all countries, so what matters is the global supply of these goods. So we are better off if countries can specialize on their respective competitive advantages. In the scenario you propose, every country would have their own very inefficient mask industry which would now be just as or even more overwhelmed.

nradov 7y ago
We all understand Ricardo's law of comparative advantage. The problem is what happens in a supply chain disruption. In that case it's better to have at least some inefficient local capacity instead of nothing. As an extreme example, the US continues to manufacture it's own military aircraft instead of buying from China. Even though China might be willing to sell them cheaper than we can make them.
SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
The problem is that each individual country will (reasonably!) not allow critical medical supplies to be exported during a crisis. It worked out mostly okay this time, because the countries with large domestic mask production all got their crisis under control before the rest of the world got it. If the next pandemic happens in China and the US simultaneously, we're not going to have any masks at all. And note that "mostly okay" here doesn't mean we have anywhere close to enough masks. Just that, with extreme rationing, we can ensure most but not all doctors have the absolute bare minimum of protective gear.

the8472 7y ago

Not just that, global air travel has enabled the rapid spread of the virus in the first place.

libertine 7y ago

Or maybe shouldn't there be emergency plans that had all the steps to remodel current production lines in the country to adjust to production of medical supplies? Like, in China, factories that made bedding products are re engineered to make masks, suits, etc. These are exceptional conditions, so if you had the protocols in place (blue prints, machine configurations, assembly line structure, briefings for management, briefing and courses for factory workers), maybe it was doable. And maybe it would be of low maintenance, just when new machines were introduced, you'd release a new document to configure that machine. The main problem would be raw material, but again, maybe with planning and study new materials and combinations could be used (even if not perfect). This would be only a problem for countries with little to no industry, but that's where organizations like the EU should come into play.