4 ms·

US domestic manufacturing became a major theme in the last two prior US elections. If you look at growth charts in US factory capital it started spiking just b

by dmix 3y ago

US domestic manufacturing became a major theme in the last two prior US elections. If you look at growth charts in US factory capital it started spiking just before the signing of CHIPS act which was pitched to congress in 2019, which was a bipartisan effort seeded from the Trump admin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act And the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act which Biden admin pitched to congress, which also got pretty smooth bipartisan support: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Investment_and_Jobs_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Investment_and_... But it's success will be defined on how successful the factories are, not just how many billions/trillions of free $$ the US gov gives to megacorps to prop up these projects. We've seen many, many gov-incentivized factory announcements that went no where. Or worse wasted a ton of time & money of local govs + small town employees. The Obama admin had a few really bad examples of this.

jonnycomputer 3y ago
Yes, but the CHIPS act was also signed by Biden. I think we can fairly credit him for seeing it through. Trump talked a lot about bringing manufacturing back, but he did not have the self-discipline to actually see any of it through; legislatively, Trump is a master of self-sabotage. But it is true that the CHIP had bipartisan support, but the ones who supported it were not MAGA types, but people like McConnell.
- edgyquant 3y ago
  This is just not true. Trumps tariffs have been one of the biggest motivators of reshoring, which started under him. Yes the chips act is also great, there is no need to pretend one guy was useless and the other did all of the work its bipartisan and the two presidents work in this arena has complimented each other.
- dmix 3y ago
  Trump was the first president with no political, military, or even lawyer experience. And it showed, badly, when it came to congressional policy making. But he no doubt was a major reason domestic manufacturing shot to the top of Biden's election priorities, after it was a major sticking point that Trump fared far better with the working class vs Hillary. Even Michael Moore conceded back then that his messaging around rebuilding gutted industry was far better, so it's not surprising it was co-opted. Which is a good thing, what matters is listening to people and getting results at the end of the day.
seadan83 3y ago
> Or worse wasted a ton of time & money of local govs + small town employees. The Obama admin had a few really bad examples of this. Indeed. China had even more examples, but overall they found the winners and boosted them. The US instead defunded and now China produces 80% of all solar panels in the world. It's similar for VC firm, for example, they'll invest in 10 companies and expect only a couple to be profitable. > If you look at growth charts in US factory capital it started spiking just before the signing of CHIPS act which was pitched to congress in 2019, which was a bipartisan effort seeded from the Trump admin. Do you have those charts available? I was initially going to give a commendation for pointing out the Trump's administration's role in the Chips act, but... the Chips act was passed in late 2022! "The bill was signed into law by President Joe Biden on August 9, 2022." [1] What's more, while the CHIPS act was initially bi-partisan, it passed in a relatively partisan vote: "Every senator in the Senate Democratic Caucus except for Bernie Sanders voted in favor of passing the CHIPS Act, and they were joined by seventeen Republican senators" [1] Bottom line, seems like this bill was presented to Senators* in 2019 and then took time to work its way through Congress. It does not seem the Trump admin had much to do with this (I would more says the CHIPS act was seeded from an initial bipartisan effort that originated in the Senate; there's no mention I see that the executive branch had anything to do with it in 2019; if anything, it seems that congress of 2019 and whatever role the executive had at the time both _failed_ to get the CHIPS act through; it was the next congress that got it done in 2022) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act * I'm not entirely sure if 'presented' to senators means there was an executive branch role. My reading of the wiki article is that it sounds like the original 2019 bill originated in the Senate. I just don't see anything that mentions the executive's role in 2019 or 2020.
- dmix 3y ago
  You can find the growth charts here: https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/unpacking-the-boom-in-us-construction-of-manufacturing-facilities https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/unpacking-th... but these charts/analysis come from the White House so they are going to be a bit biased (how much is proposed vs real, etc). I don't really see the value in debating the details of the policies as it's pretty clear Trump made rebuilding industry his #1 message, which was later co-opted by Biden in the 2nd election. Trump was just an utter failure at working with (a very hostile) congress and COVID destroying factory construction didn't help private industry either, or public spending priorities. I also take issue with the idea China's success in manufacturing was a result of the gov choosing winners = a good thing. Gov as a giant VC sounds like a horrible idea, here in Canada they tried that in tech and it was an embarrassment. China's mass urbanization, huge cheap labour base, a culture of hard work, and the West happily destroying their own industry...it's easy to 'pick' winners in a flush market. Rebuilding a dead one is different story.

by dmix 3y ago

jonnycomputer 3y ago

Yes, but the CHIPS act was also signed by Biden. I think we can fairly credit him for seeing it through. Trump talked a lot about bringing manufacturing back, but he did not have the self-discipline to actually see any of it through; legislatively, Trump is a master of self-sabotage. But it is true that the CHIP had bipartisan support, but the ones who supported it were not MAGA types, but people like McConnell.

edgyquant 3y ago
This is just not true. Trumps tariffs have been one of the biggest motivators of reshoring, which started under him. Yes the chips act is also great, there is no need to pretend one guy was useless and the other did all of the work its bipartisan and the two presidents work in this arena has complimented each other.
dmix 3y ago
Trump was the first president with no political, military, or even lawyer experience. And it showed, badly, when it came to congressional policy making. But he no doubt was a major reason domestic manufacturing shot to the top of Biden's election priorities, after it was a major sticking point that Trump fared far better with the working class vs Hillary. Even Michael Moore conceded back then that his messaging around rebuilding gutted industry was far better, so it's not surprising it was co-opted. Which is a good thing, what matters is listening to people and getting results at the end of the day.

seadan83 3y ago

> Or worse wasted a ton of time & money of local govs + small town employees. The Obama admin had a few really bad examples of this. Indeed. China had even more examples, but overall they found the winners and boosted them. The US instead defunded and now China produces 80% of all solar panels in the world. It's similar for VC firm, for example, they'll invest in 10 companies and expect only a couple to be profitable. > If you look at growth charts in US factory capital it started spiking just before the signing of CHIPS act which was pitched to congress in 2019, which was a bipartisan effort seeded from the Trump admin. Do you have those charts available? I was initially going to give a commendation for pointing out the Trump's administration's role in the Chips act, but... the Chips act was passed in late 2022! "The bill was signed into law by President Joe Biden on August 9, 2022." [1] What's more, while the CHIPS act was initially bi-partisan, it passed in a relatively partisan vote: "Every senator in the Senate Democratic Caucus except for Bernie Sanders voted in favor of passing the CHIPS Act, and they were joined by seventeen Republican senators" [1] Bottom line, seems like this bill was presented to Senators* in 2019 and then took time to work its way through Congress. It does not seem the Trump admin had much to do with this (I would more says the CHIPS act was seeded from an initial bipartisan effort that originated in the Senate; there's no mention I see that the executive branch had anything to do with it in 2019; if anything, it seems that congress of 2019 and whatever role the executive had at the time both _failed_ to get the CHIPS act through; it was the next congress that got it done in 2022) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act * I'm not entirely sure if 'presented' to senators means there was an executive branch role. My reading of the wiki article is that it sounds like the original 2019 bill originated in the Senate. I just don't see anything that mentions the executive's role in 2019 or 2020.

dmix 3y ago
You can find the growth charts here: https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/unpacking-the-boom-in-us-construction-of-manufacturing-facilities https://home.treasury.gov/news/featured-stories/unpacking-th... but these charts/analysis come from the White House so they are going to be a bit biased (how much is proposed vs real, etc). I don't really see the value in debating the details of the policies as it's pretty clear Trump made rebuilding industry his #1 message, which was later co-opted by Biden in the 2nd election. Trump was just an utter failure at working with (a very hostile) congress and COVID destroying factory construction didn't help private industry either, or public spending priorities. I also take issue with the idea China's success in manufacturing was a result of the gov choosing winners = a good thing. Gov as a giant VC sounds like a horrible idea, here in Canada they tried that in tech and it was an embarrassment. China's mass urbanization, huge cheap labour base, a culture of hard work, and the West happily destroying their own industry...it's easy to 'pick' winners in a flush market. Rebuilding a dead one is different story.