7 ms·

Deglobalization -- In the US, we're about to be forced to rebuild all the manufacturing we outsourced since the 1970s. It's not going to go well for thos countr

Deglobalization -- In the US, we're about to be forced to rebuild all the manufacturing we outsourced since the 1970s. It's not going to go well for thos countries dependent on imported food or energy. It's possible a billion people will face famine in the next year or two as a result of the loss of grain from Russia and Ukraine, along with the loss of Fertilizers (or being priced out of them) Energy Blindness -- We're so used to having free flowing oil cheap enough to burn for energy, it's an assumption built into everything. Unless we plan for the end of easy to reach oil, we could have supply chains collapsing everywhere.

tkgally 4y ago
> Deglobalization That’s what I was going to say. Some people have been talking about it [1, 2], but it’s not yet getting the attention it deserves. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20220702164210/https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/08/opinion/globalization-global-culture-war.html https://web.archive.org/web/20220702164210/https://www.nytim... [2] https://www.harperbusiness.com/book/9780063230477/The-End-of-the-World-Is-Just-the-Beginning-Peter-Zeihan/ https://www.harperbusiness.com/book/9780063230477/The-End-of...
- TrapLord_Rhodo 4y ago
  For discussing deglobalization, those articles have a very perceivable 'Western Bias' and i'm from the US
kvothe_ 4y ago
unlikely we'll rebuild locally. We will outsource it to a friendlier country with cheap labor. In 50 yrs the cycle will repeat. (Probably South America.)
- orangepurple 4y ago
  That country will be Mexico. There is already a strong logistics relationship with that country and it will only get stronger
  - TrapLord_Rhodo 4y ago
    Colombia has one of the biggest ports in the Gulf. With the huge flight of people out of Venezuela into colombia, I foresee labor being very cheap there and logistics to southern states very cheap.
  - whimsicalism 4y ago
    Not for chips it won't be.
kragen 4y ago
How does rebuilding manufacturing work? Does it look the same as it did 50 years ago, or is it different? What happens if the attempt fails?
- orangepurple 4y ago
  There is too much environmental and labor regulation in the US so it will have to be done in a puppet state in geographical proximity to the US.
- swader999 4y ago
  Robots this time.
  - kragen 4y ago
    Can you elaborate? "Robots" is more a slogan or even a metaphor than a plan.
JasserInicide 4y ago
Deglobalization I mean, I think it'd be nice, but in the US our leaders are so fucking corrupt and owned by business interests that I don't see it happening until at least all the boomers/Gen Xers die off.
- SoftTalker 4y ago
  Of course when they were young, the Boomers said that about all the people in power at that time. Big government power attracts corruptible people. This doesn't change in a generation. It probably doesn't change ever.
  - orangepurple 4y ago
    I'd go a step further and assert that big government generally only allows corruptible people to ascend in power
- aaronsimpson 4y ago
  Is globalization really the result of corrupt leaders though, or a shift in corporate practice to accommodate the rising demands of consumers? It seems like no amount of corruption really matters as long as we're drinking lattes and eating avocado every day.
  - orangepurple 4y ago
    It's cyclical because demand is induced through media propaganda. In turn US media is owned by oligarchs, which in turn have a stake in companies that benefit from rising demands of consumers.
    - aaronsimpson 4y ago
      I think your understanding of how consumers come to the decisions they do is sorely lacking in terms of stripping agency from the people that consume. We're not blank slate robots.
yrgulation 4y ago
The issue is that this goes both ways. The eu is regularly imposing harsh rules on american tech. With deglobalisation there will be job losses as there will be fewer open markets.
tootie 4y ago
"Next year or two" is extremely unlikely. The US is absolutely no going to switch back to a manufacturing base. It's only attempting to gain leverage against adversaries when it comes to critical supply chain components. China is all but guaranteed to see slowing growth compared to the past 40 years simply because there aren't enough farmers left to exploit for cheap labor and living standards are already so much higher. They'll be in for mild economic winter then emerge just fine. Famine seems incredibly unlikely anywhere in the world.
- nostrebored 4y ago
  But critical supply chain components are more frequent than people would like to think. In a period where sea freight becomes less stable, it's not a question of 'what goods can we not live without' but 'what goods can we not live without if delivery isn't stable and regular'? The U.S. is already losing sea hegemony. This was a key piece that enabled globalization to begin with.
  - azemetre 4y ago
    Do you have examples of freight becoming unstable due to military actions and not supply constraints? The de globalization thesis makes sense but I don’t see examples of regional powers flexing their muscles causing supply chain problems, at least not publicly. I suppose Russia is an obvious example in the EU but are their other examples?
  - pasttense01 4y ago
    The answer to 'what goods can we not live without if delivery isn't stable and regular' is that you go back to the traditional approach which was used for centuries when delivery wasn't stable and regular: simply keep large inventories of the goods. [In recent decades business switched to Just In Time, but this has been shown not to work with irregular delivery--so business is going back to the traditional methods.]
mullen 4y ago
> Deglobalization -- In the US, we're about to be forced to rebuild all the manufacturing we outsourced since the 1970s. It's not going to go well for those countries dependent on imported food or energy Hogwash. Globalization is good, Globalization is here to stay. Whatever is the current location causing issues with Globalization will simply be routed around. There are plenty of countries that would love to be part of the global supply chain with. The only way any manufacturing is coming back to the rich industrialized countries is that it involves a lot of really good robots. Which is also good. > It's possible a billion people will face famine in the next year or two as a result of the loss of grain from Russia and Ukraine, along with the loss of Fertilizers (or being priced out of them) Again, hogwash. The market will force diets to change and producers will start producing more. Fertilizer production could be an issue but again, diets and markets will adjust. > Energy Blindness -- We're so used to having free flowing oil cheap enough to burn for energy, it's an assumption built into everything. Unless we plan for the end of easy to reach oil, we could have supply chains collapsing everywhere. A known issue that will not happen overnight. The world is racing toward non-oil based energy, so I don't see this being an issue. Don't get me wrong, this one I actually agree with, but it won't happen overnight. The world/markets will adapt.
- HobbseanMess 4y ago
  Virtually everything you said is wrong.
- twirlock 4y ago
- Thorentis 4y ago
  Energy is one thing, but I don't see any good replacements for plastics, especially medical grade plastic. We rely on oil for far more than just energy.
- creakingstairs 4y ago
  I don’t think the current state of globalisation can last. It won’t be complete deglobalisation either. I think we’d see the world market divided in two. It’s already starting with semi conductors (chip 4 alliance). For some key industries US will also bring some of the manufacturing in house instead of only relying on allies. Again you are already seeing this with semi conductors: US is bringing manufacturing to its own soil and South Korea has already made some raw material processing domestic instead of relying on cheaper global market.
pasttense01 4y ago
The U.S. uses 40% of its corn crop to make ethanol. If the famine situation actually happens this will shift to food for people.

tkgally 4y ago

> Deglobalization That’s what I was going to say. Some people have been talking about it [1, 2], but it’s not yet getting the attention it deserves. [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20220702164210/https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/08/opinion/globalization-global-culture-war.html https://web.archive.org/web/20220702164210/https://www.nytim... [2] https://www.harperbusiness.com/book/9780063230477/The-End-of-the-World-Is-Just-the-Beginning-Peter-Zeihan/ https://www.harperbusiness.com/book/9780063230477/The-End-of...

TrapLord_Rhodo 4y ago
For discussing deglobalization, those articles have a very perceivable 'Western Bias' and i'm from the US

kvothe_ 4y ago

unlikely we'll rebuild locally. We will outsource it to a friendlier country with cheap labor. In 50 yrs the cycle will repeat. (Probably South America.)

orangepurple 4y ago
That country will be Mexico. There is already a strong logistics relationship with that country and it will only get stronger
- TrapLord_Rhodo 4y ago
  Colombia has one of the biggest ports in the Gulf. With the huge flight of people out of Venezuela into colombia, I foresee labor being very cheap there and logistics to southern states very cheap.
- whimsicalism 4y ago
  Not for chips it won't be.

kragen 4y ago

How does rebuilding manufacturing work? Does it look the same as it did 50 years ago, or is it different? What happens if the attempt fails?

orangepurple 4y ago
There is too much environmental and labor regulation in the US so it will have to be done in a puppet state in geographical proximity to the US.
swader999 4y ago
Robots this time.
- kragen 4y ago
  Can you elaborate? "Robots" is more a slogan or even a metaphor than a plan.

JasserInicide 4y ago

Deglobalization I mean, I think it'd be nice, but in the US our leaders are so fucking corrupt and owned by business interests that I don't see it happening until at least all the boomers/Gen Xers die off.

SoftTalker 4y ago
Of course when they were young, the Boomers said that about all the people in power at that time. Big government power attracts corruptible people. This doesn't change in a generation. It probably doesn't change ever.
- orangepurple 4y ago
  I'd go a step further and assert that big government generally only allows corruptible people to ascend in power
aaronsimpson 4y ago
Is globalization really the result of corrupt leaders though, or a shift in corporate practice to accommodate the rising demands of consumers? It seems like no amount of corruption really matters as long as we're drinking lattes and eating avocado every day.
- orangepurple 4y ago
  It's cyclical because demand is induced through media propaganda. In turn US media is owned by oligarchs, which in turn have a stake in companies that benefit from rising demands of consumers.
  - aaronsimpson 4y ago
    I think your understanding of how consumers come to the decisions they do is sorely lacking in terms of stripping agency from the people that consume. We're not blank slate robots.

yrgulation 4y ago

The issue is that this goes both ways. The eu is regularly imposing harsh rules on american tech. With deglobalisation there will be job losses as there will be fewer open markets.

tootie 4y ago

"Next year or two" is extremely unlikely. The US is absolutely no going to switch back to a manufacturing base. It's only attempting to gain leverage against adversaries when it comes to critical supply chain components. China is all but guaranteed to see slowing growth compared to the past 40 years simply because there aren't enough farmers left to exploit for cheap labor and living standards are already so much higher. They'll be in for mild economic winter then emerge just fine. Famine seems incredibly unlikely anywhere in the world.

nostrebored 4y ago
But critical supply chain components are more frequent than people would like to think. In a period where sea freight becomes less stable, it's not a question of 'what goods can we not live without' but 'what goods can we not live without if delivery isn't stable and regular'? The U.S. is already losing sea hegemony. This was a key piece that enabled globalization to begin with.
- azemetre 4y ago
  Do you have examples of freight becoming unstable due to military actions and not supply constraints? The de globalization thesis makes sense but I don’t see examples of regional powers flexing their muscles causing supply chain problems, at least not publicly. I suppose Russia is an obvious example in the EU but are their other examples?
- pasttense01 4y ago
  The answer to 'what goods can we not live without if delivery isn't stable and regular' is that you go back to the traditional approach which was used for centuries when delivery wasn't stable and regular: simply keep large inventories of the goods. [In recent decades business switched to Just In Time, but this has been shown not to work with irregular delivery--so business is going back to the traditional methods.]

mullen 4y ago

> Deglobalization -- In the US, we're about to be forced to rebuild all the manufacturing we outsourced since the 1970s. It's not going to go well for those countries dependent on imported food or energy Hogwash. Globalization is good, Globalization is here to stay. Whatever is the current location causing issues with Globalization will simply be routed around. There are plenty of countries that would love to be part of the global supply chain with. The only way any manufacturing is coming back to the rich industrialized countries is that it involves a lot of really good robots. Which is also good. > It's possible a billion people will face famine in the next year or two as a result of the loss of grain from Russia and Ukraine, along with the loss of Fertilizers (or being priced out of them) Again, hogwash. The market will force diets to change and producers will start producing more. Fertilizer production could be an issue but again, diets and markets will adjust. > Energy Blindness -- We're so used to having free flowing oil cheap enough to burn for energy, it's an assumption built into everything. Unless we plan for the end of easy to reach oil, we could have supply chains collapsing everywhere. A known issue that will not happen overnight. The world is racing toward non-oil based energy, so I don't see this being an issue. Don't get me wrong, this one I actually agree with, but it won't happen overnight. The world/markets will adapt.

HobbseanMess 4y ago
Virtually everything you said is wrong.
twirlock 4y ago
Thorentis 4y ago
Energy is one thing, but I don't see any good replacements for plastics, especially medical grade plastic. We rely on oil for far more than just energy.
creakingstairs 4y ago
I don’t think the current state of globalisation can last. It won’t be complete deglobalisation either. I think we’d see the world market divided in two. It’s already starting with semi conductors (chip 4 alliance). For some key industries US will also bring some of the manufacturing in house instead of only relying on allies. Again you are already seeing this with semi conductors: US is bringing manufacturing to its own soil and South Korea has already made some raw material processing domestic instead of relying on cheaper global market.

pasttense01 4y ago

The U.S. uses 40% of its corn crop to make ethanol. If the famine situation actually happens this will shift to food for people.