4 ms·

"Machinery" (not including airplanes) is still one of the largest exports of the US. The list [1] of exports by size is: Mineral fuels including oil: US$378.6

by bumby 3y ago

"Machinery" (not including airplanes) is still one of the largest exports of the US. The list [1] of exports by size is: Mineral fuels including oil: US$378.6 billion Machinery including computers: $229.6 billion Electrical machinery, equipment: $197.7 billion Vehicles: $134.9 billion Aircraft, spacecraft: $102.8 billion Optical, technical, medical apparatus: $99.1 billion Gems, precious metals: $92.5 billion Pharmaceuticals: $83.5 billion So the top 3 "non-aircraft" machinery categories are still exported at 5x the amount of aerospace. It seems like people [2] are still interested in the stuff the US manufactures. [1] https://www.worldstopexports.com/united-states-top-10-exports/ https://www.worldstopexports.com/united-states-top-10-export... [2] https://www.usitc.gov/research_and_analysis/tradeshifts/2020/machinery.htm#_ftn1 https://www.usitc.gov/research_and_analysis/tradeshifts/2020...

corethree 3y ago
Yes but Asia dominates the "building" category overall by a massive margin. It's just true. Pharmaceuticals, medical and gems are off topic. I'm sure there's other small niches the US dominates in. But overall what I said is the objective truth no matter how much you desire it to be not true. If Asia doesn't dominate a niche yet they are aggressively on track to dominate in the near future.
- bumby 3y ago
  Can you elaborate on what you mean by "building"? It's a nebulous term. If you mean building infrastructure, that's true, but also partly because the US invested heavily in the same type of infrastructure a generation or two prior. I would disagree with the pharmaceuticals because that is a manufacturing-intensive industry. Throwing out gems (because that probably isn't a good case, like you said), it still amounts to over $1.2 trillion in exports. I'm sure other countries would love that kind of "niche" business.
  - corethree 3y ago
    Gems isn't good also because it's mostly aesthetic. No intrinsic utility other then being rare and pretty. You won't actually "improve" society with gems. It's hard to distill this in technical terms but I hope you're able to understand without the need to get pedantic. Gemstones therefore are more of a reflection of countries with the ability to purchase the gemstones as an import and less of a reflection of the country actually exporting the gemstones. Right? If a country exports a huge amount of gemstones it means a lot of external countries have an abundance of economic output such that they can purchase frivolous goods that ultimately don't contribute much to the economy. North Korea doesn't purchase gemstones but maybe a rich country would. And the place where diamonds are mined are mostly from some poor countries in Africa. >Can you elaborate on what you mean by "building"? It's a nebulous term. Manufacturing and infrastructure I believe are the two words that cover it best off the top of my head but it's unnecessary to specify this to the level of pedantic detail you're going for here. I think those two terms are clear enough. I think we both know, in general the direction China/Asia is going and where they're completely dominating the US. It's at a general tipping point now. Where one can say they're better than the US overall in the general area of infrastructure/manufacturing. Manufacturing is pretty broad and general and that's the right word to use because broadly and generally Asia is just ahead of the US in this matter. The problem with these things is that even though it's obvious people still like to debate pedantic details in some vain attempt to use the pedantic details to obscure the obvious truth or even shift the advantage in the favor of the US. Why else would you bring up gemstones and pharmaceuticals? I don't think I need to elaborate as you requested. You know what I'm talking about and deep down you most likely agree. The trouble here is less about getting at the most accurate truth and more about the inability to accept the truth.
    - tim333 3y ago
      I know what you mean but it's not that clear cut. Rockets? USA. Phones? Assembled in Asia but running iOS or Android. Electric cars? Tesla's still ahead. A lot of the move to China was a choice to have them do the work because they quoted cheaper, which is not irreversible.
      - corethree 3y ago

by bumby 3y ago

corethree 3y ago

Yes but Asia dominates the "building" category overall by a massive margin. It's just true. Pharmaceuticals, medical and gems are off topic. I'm sure there's other small niches the US dominates in. But overall what I said is the objective truth no matter how much you desire it to be not true. If Asia doesn't dominate a niche yet they are aggressively on track to dominate in the near future.

bumby 3y ago
Can you elaborate on what you mean by "building"? It's a nebulous term. If you mean building infrastructure, that's true, but also partly because the US invested heavily in the same type of infrastructure a generation or two prior. I would disagree with the pharmaceuticals because that is a manufacturing-intensive industry. Throwing out gems (because that probably isn't a good case, like you said), it still amounts to over $1.2 trillion in exports. I'm sure other countries would love that kind of "niche" business.
- corethree 3y ago
  Gems isn't good also because it's mostly aesthetic. No intrinsic utility other then being rare and pretty. You won't actually "improve" society with gems. It's hard to distill this in technical terms but I hope you're able to understand without the need to get pedantic. Gemstones therefore are more of a reflection of countries with the ability to purchase the gemstones as an import and less of a reflection of the country actually exporting the gemstones. Right? If a country exports a huge amount of gemstones it means a lot of external countries have an abundance of economic output such that they can purchase frivolous goods that ultimately don't contribute much to the economy. North Korea doesn't purchase gemstones but maybe a rich country would. And the place where diamonds are mined are mostly from some poor countries in Africa. >Can you elaborate on what you mean by "building"? It's a nebulous term. Manufacturing and infrastructure I believe are the two words that cover it best off the top of my head but it's unnecessary to specify this to the level of pedantic detail you're going for here. I think those two terms are clear enough. I think we both know, in general the direction China/Asia is going and where they're completely dominating the US. It's at a general tipping point now. Where one can say they're better than the US overall in the general area of infrastructure/manufacturing. Manufacturing is pretty broad and general and that's the right word to use because broadly and generally Asia is just ahead of the US in this matter. The problem with these things is that even though it's obvious people still like to debate pedantic details in some vain attempt to use the pedantic details to obscure the obvious truth or even shift the advantage in the favor of the US. Why else would you bring up gemstones and pharmaceuticals? I don't think I need to elaborate as you requested. You know what I'm talking about and deep down you most likely agree. The trouble here is less about getting at the most accurate truth and more about the inability to accept the truth.
  - tim333 3y ago
    I know what you mean but it's not that clear cut. Rockets? USA. Phones? Assembled in Asia but running iOS or Android. Electric cars? Tesla's still ahead. A lot of the move to China was a choice to have them do the work because they quoted cheaper, which is not irreversible.
    - corethree 3y ago