4 ms·

I think you're leaving a few things off the list. Gasoline, steel, machine shops, chemical plants... by the time you added everything that could lead to crisis

I think you're leaving a few things off the list. Gasoline, steel, machine shops, chemical plants... by the time you added everything that could lead to crisis if it ran out or stopped working you'd be a proponent of the Juche Idea. ;)

hda2 5y ago
Most countries I know of already consider power and basic manufacturing (chemical, construction) to be crucial, and do their best to secure their production or procurement. My argument is that semiconductor manufacturing must also be added to that list. A natural disaster or a war between two countries shouldn't lead to wide-spread famine or throw humanity back into the dark ages.
- pasabagi 5y ago
  Would it be the dark ages, though? I don't think it would be so terrible if we were all thrown back to PDP 11's or something, and there's no way it could ever be anywhere near that drastic. Hardware advances are nice, but the main innovations in computers have been infrastructural and social (the internet, email, open source, etc).
  - whatshisface 5y ago
    Don't forget about engine control computers, which are necessary for much of today's ICE efficiency gains.
    - pasabagi 5y ago
      Or, as the volkswagen scandal showed us, necessary for most of today's ICE's to pretend to be more efficient than they are by cheating emissions tests :).
unethical_ban 5y ago
Earlier today I was thinking about this positively. None of my ideas are original, but some anti-corporatism thought struck a chord today. Why do we rely on dictatorships and unstable countries for critical infrastructure? Why do we rely on slave labor overseas for such basics as textiles when we could make it here? It isn't "markets" that are wrong altogether, but there is something destabilizing and unethical about shipping a neighbor's job away to a slave to save a penny for the stockholder. Supply chains and globalization should be very much rethought in this century.
- jhugo 5y ago
  > Why do we rely on slave labor overseas for such basics as textiles when we could make it here? Calling it slave labour is a great sound bite but glosses over the wide variety in working conditions "overseas", and the fact that trade has vastly improved conditions in many such "overseas" countries. I have broadly the opposite view about supply chains and globalisation; the inter-reliance of countries and the trade in labour/goods/services leads to diplomacy, negotiation, communication, better understanding and ultimately a safer, better world. History has demonstrated this consistently if you take a long view. The direction of "make everything in your own country, rely on no other country for anything" is the opposite to all of the above: less need for diplomacy, less leverage in negotiation, less communication, less understanding. That's a sad direction for the world to move in.
  - riffraff 5y ago
    It's worth noting this was one of the foundations of the European free market and then the European union: make the European countries so integrated that a war becomes unthinkable.
  - unethical_ban 5y ago
    Yes, good counterpoint. And to the other poster, yes, the EU was apparently designed with this point explicitly in mind. However, the EU countries are on the same order of magnitude of wealth. Is there any point at which we say "it is wrong to remove wealth from my country, put a fraction of it into working conditions unthinkable in my country, and let the owners of the means of production pocket the rest"? Shouldn't we mandate US-like living conditions and safety regulations if we are going to ethically export labor?
siva7 5y ago
Sure, it’s called critical infrastructure and semiconductor should be added to this list.

hda2 5y ago

Most countries I know of already consider power and basic manufacturing (chemical, construction) to be crucial, and do their best to secure their production or procurement. My argument is that semiconductor manufacturing must also be added to that list. A natural disaster or a war between two countries shouldn't lead to wide-spread famine or throw humanity back into the dark ages.

pasabagi 5y ago
Would it be the dark ages, though? I don't think it would be so terrible if we were all thrown back to PDP 11's or something, and there's no way it could ever be anywhere near that drastic. Hardware advances are nice, but the main innovations in computers have been infrastructural and social (the internet, email, open source, etc).
- whatshisface 5y ago
  Don't forget about engine control computers, which are necessary for much of today's ICE efficiency gains.
  - pasabagi 5y ago
    Or, as the volkswagen scandal showed us, necessary for most of today's ICE's to pretend to be more efficient than they are by cheating emissions tests :).

unethical_ban 5y ago

Earlier today I was thinking about this positively. None of my ideas are original, but some anti-corporatism thought struck a chord today. Why do we rely on dictatorships and unstable countries for critical infrastructure? Why do we rely on slave labor overseas for such basics as textiles when we could make it here? It isn't "markets" that are wrong altogether, but there is something destabilizing and unethical about shipping a neighbor's job away to a slave to save a penny for the stockholder. Supply chains and globalization should be very much rethought in this century.

jhugo 5y ago
> Why do we rely on slave labor overseas for such basics as textiles when we could make it here? Calling it slave labour is a great sound bite but glosses over the wide variety in working conditions "overseas", and the fact that trade has vastly improved conditions in many such "overseas" countries. I have broadly the opposite view about supply chains and globalisation; the inter-reliance of countries and the trade in labour/goods/services leads to diplomacy, negotiation, communication, better understanding and ultimately a safer, better world. History has demonstrated this consistently if you take a long view. The direction of "make everything in your own country, rely on no other country for anything" is the opposite to all of the above: less need for diplomacy, less leverage in negotiation, less communication, less understanding. That's a sad direction for the world to move in.
- riffraff 5y ago
  It's worth noting this was one of the foundations of the European free market and then the European union: make the European countries so integrated that a war becomes unthinkable.
- unethical_ban 5y ago
  Yes, good counterpoint. And to the other poster, yes, the EU was apparently designed with this point explicitly in mind. However, the EU countries are on the same order of magnitude of wealth. Is there any point at which we say "it is wrong to remove wealth from my country, put a fraction of it into working conditions unthinkable in my country, and let the owners of the means of production pocket the rest"? Shouldn't we mandate US-like living conditions and safety regulations if we are going to ethically export labor?

siva7 5y ago

Sure, it’s called critical infrastructure and semiconductor should be added to this list.