8 ms·

Huh. For all the claims that US manufacturing is down, it does seem that if we adjusted per-capita it's on par with China based on the figures presented here, w

by advael 2y ago

Huh. For all the claims that US manufacturing is down, it does seem that if we adjusted per-capita it's on par with China based on the figures presented here, which I really didn't expect to see I'm no expert and of course I have no clue if it even makes sense to measure per-capita manufacturing share, and also assume a lot of other factors matter here - what kinds of things we're manufacturing, how much those products serve domestic versus export markets, etc - but it's still surprising

elashri 2y ago
> it does seem that if we adjusted per-capita it's on par with China based on the figures presented here Ironically this will make Taiwan the manufacturing superpower if it is calculated per-capita. Which is the other china (I am just referring to the history of both PRC and Taiwan claiming to be the historical China successor). And the claims that US manifacruting is down is correct because it used to be much higher percentage wise from the world total manifacruting power. China was only about 3% when people who are now 30yrs were born. That's massive increase in manifacturing share. There is a discussion about domestic vs export in the study too that you might find interesting..
- seanmcdirmid 2y ago
  > (I am just referring to the history of both RPC and Taiwan claiming to be the historical China successor). Semantics, but the ROC (Republic of China) claims Taiwan, along with the mainland and Outer Mongolia. It isn’t the case that Taiwan claims the ROC (although if the in power DPP decided not to be the ROC anymore, the PRC would probably invade since declaring independence from the ROC would be the same as refuting one China). When the ROC/KMT retook Taiwan in 1946, they weren’t exactly seen as liberators. And when the KMT and a bunch of rich mainlanders relocated there in 1949, there were protests, genocide, and so on.
ipnon 2y ago
You might be surprised to learn that manufacturing is larger industry in the US than our tech industry, or that our domestic oil industry is even larger. America produces more oil than any other country. America was the world's factory for over a century. This dominance only ended around 2010, when China took the lead. It was our advantage to lose, and it was the result of deliberate political action. We offshored manufacturing, and treated China as a good faith trading partner, waiting decades for a cooperative international trade diplomacy that has not materialized to this day. All the while Beijing did everything in its power to enrich the Chinese worker, no matter the cost to outsiders. The results speak for themselves.
- danans 2y ago
  > All the while Beijing did everything in its power to enrich the Chinese worker, no matter the cost to outsiders. The results speak for themselves. In fairness, during this period, the US did everything it could to suppress the wages and benefits of its own manufacturing workers. Recall that the first rounds of manufacturing outsourcing were to US states with non-existent labor protections, mostly in the South.
  - wakawaka28 2y ago
    The only way to protect wages in the face of competition that works for 1/10 to 1/3 the rate is to institute protectionist policies. That has also been unpopular because there's money to be made in offshoring as well. Americans are getting the worst at both ends, and only experiencing short-term benefits of having cheaper goods.
    - rat87 2y ago
      Some people don't like protectionism because in the long term it's worse for both countries. You have a short term benefit of protecting a handful of jobs in exchange for vastly more expensive goods for everyone as well as more expensive inputs to your other products undercutting other local industries. Protectionism is popular because the benifits for the few are visible while the downsides are diffuse but add up. And in the end your business ends up going out of business anyway like the Soviet factories
      - maeil 2y ago
        > Some people don't like protectionism because in the long term it's worse for both countries. I keep seeing these statements on here and they're utterly misleading. Protectionism is a spectrum. It is practiced by every single country. It's a very bold assumption to make that if every country would completely eliminate everything resembling it, this would benefit everyone. The opposite is very likely. There are numerous cases of protectionist policies where the country instituting them very clearly benefited from them, even in the long run. I have spent more than a decade in two countries, each having been on a different part of the protectionist spectrum since many decades ago. It is clear as day that the more protectionist one has, throughout, continuing to this day, seen very large benefits from this policy, larger than the benefits from the less protectionist country. We really need to stop propagating this myth among the educated in the West, it's just as harmful as "trickle-down economics" used to be before it became common knowledge that it's a fairy tale.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
kayewiggin 2y ago
1.) The article is from January 2024. 2.) Some of the data that it's based on is up to 2023. And some are up to 2020 3.) There has been massive movement of manufacturing out of China between 2020 and 2024. I won't provide the references here, as there are too many to mention, from Japanese/Taiwanese/South Korean/European/American companies. They are easily chatgpted/googled. Also the reason why Shenzhen and Guangzhou has suffered deeper drop of real estate price and employment. 4.) In 2024, Mexico was the biggest exporter to US. United States was the biggest exporter to Europe. US was the largest export destination of Japan. 5.) Trump's 60%-100% tariff on China will accelerate the exodus of manufacturing
- advael 2y ago
  Again, I really don't feel qualified to weigh in on most of these matters, though I will say that I generally do prefer direct citations if you'd like me to take the epistemic credibility of a claim more seriously than any other thing someone on the internet said (in other words, saying "go look it up" provides no more additional credibility than simply making the statement, and is thus kind of pointless, and in fact you take a not insignificant epistemic credibility hit for my purposes by suggesting that asking an LLM for factual information should be taken as a reliable source) That said, it's interesting to see how the supply shocks of a global pandemic can shift these kinds of relationships. It doesn't surprise me that Mexico, being a huge source of food for the US, is the largest exporter to it. What I do wonder is how much exports pertain to manufacturing relationships. Like in the case of Mexico -> US, I think we wouldn't count e.g. stuff we buy for the produce section to be manufactured goods, but that would still count toward import/export numbers. Does this apply to other things too? Do things like IP count?
  - kayewiggin 2y ago
    Very comprehensive list of how China has lost export power to US over the years. Remember that US has the largest consumer market in the world, more than double the second place, EU. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_consumer_markets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_consumer_marke... https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenroberts/2024/06/25/us-imports-from-china-plunging-mexico-near-shoring-not-big-winner/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenroberts/2024/06/25/us-import... - Chinese imports into the United States are down 19.78% from April of 2018 — when Trump first started imposing tariffs — to today, or $31.88 billion. - Cell phones: Big winner is India. China has gone from a market share of 63.59% in 2018 to a still strong 42.14%. That’s a decline of 33.73%. - Computers: Big winners are Taiwan, Vietnam. China has gone from a market share from 53.45% in the first four months of 2018 to 28.11%, a decline of 47.40%. - Furniture: Big winner is Vietnam. China, meanwhile, accounted for 23.55% this year, down from 48.54% in 2018, a decline of 51.49% compared to a gain of 88.67% for Vietnam. - TVs and monitors: Big winner is Vietnam. Mexico overtook China as the import leader in this category just before the pandemic and has remained on top. It gained market share from China, which fell from 53.68% in 2018, when it was No. 1, to 33.64%, a 37.32% decline. - Digital storage devices: Big winners are Korea, Vietnam. China accounted for 39.50% of those imports in 2018, more than double that of any other nation. In 2024, its percentage is 4.23% and it ranks No. 9. - Digital cameras: Yep, Vietnam again. China, meanwhile, has seen its share go from a majority, at 50.09%, to 17.57%, a decline of 64.92%.
maxglute 2y ago
Gross production is sales $$$, it's not actual output of widgets. I imagine if measure gross production by some units of stuff made, PRC would be far ahead.
- baxtr 2y ago
  Maybe true. But how do you get quality into the equation. Is all the garbage on temu/shein also part of the gross production KPI? I couldn’t care less about these cheap plastic widgets.
  - maxglute 2y ago
    Some don't, but many do. Does a 600k NVIDIA AI rack provide as much value as 600k worth of commodity solar panels, or 10,000 entry level mopeds? Most of the world (developing) benefits more from commodity widgets.
    - baxtr 2y ago
      Fair. But isn’t that exactly what money is there for? You can objectively compare the value (to the world in this case) of two very different set of items.
- deepsun 2y ago
  Yes, but $$$ is the currently the most accurate metric of "units of stuff" by their usefulness. At least there's no other widely used metric. So $$$ is the most correct way to measure the output.
  - maxglute 2y ago
    I think it's just the simplest (also default*) way of measuring, which doesn't mean it most correct or accurate. If PRC makes 5 cars @10k for every 1 US car @50k , and each PRC car is 80% as good, which metric do you use to measure gross manufacturing. Most people would say the guy that makes 5 cars. They might say the guy that makes 1 car if the 5 car guy's cars were 10% as good. What if its 3 cars that is just as good as 1 car charged at 3x. Across the board you have made in America stuff that's a little to a lot better (or worse) than PRC stuff, but cost 2-5x more. * by default I mean, these metrics/calculations are downstream of national accounting methods, i.e. most of world standardized on UN SNA which measures "value" as in $$$ vs something like (deprecated) soviet material production system (MPS) that measures physical material widgets produced. One proxy metric is PRC container throughput of her ports last year was ~300 million TEU vs US is about ~60 million TEU (with slightly higher ratio of empty containers).
mcmcmc 2y ago
As with anything it’s useful in context, but it does discount the labor force advantage China has in pure population numbers.
Hilift 2y ago
Some manufacturing is down. Look at the state of sophisticated shipbuilding. The US Navy has stated numerous times that the US essentially has minimal capacity. Maintenance and construction are years behind schedule. It isn't about funding. 40% of attack submarines aren't fit for service or deployable. The new Columbia class submarine will use a new steam turbine. Northrup Grumman was selected for the manufacture of the steam turbine in 2014. It isn't ready yet. Sophisticated manufacturing is in crisis in the US. It's the reason that the US bigfooted France in the AUKUS submarine deal. To revive a failing industry. These are interesting tests due to there are restrictions on sourcing of parts and personnel for a project. https://news.usni.org/2024/04/10/late-turbines-have-major-impact-on-columbia-sub-delivery-schedule-says-secnav https://news.usni.org/2024/04/10/late-turbines-have-major-im... https://news.usni.org/2024/04/10/late-turbines-have-major-impact-on-columbia-sub-delivery-schedule-says-secnav https://news.usni.org/2024/04/10/late-turbines-have-major-im...
- manishader 2y ago
  There is also the USS Zumwalt type problem. We spent $22.5 billion to get two active. Imagine what $22.5 billion USD buys in Chinese manufacturing capacity.
  - slaw 2y ago
    $22.5 billion would be 2 million Teslas Y, but from BYD.

by advael 2y ago

elashri 2y ago

> it does seem that if we adjusted per-capita it's on par with China based on the figures presented here Ironically this will make Taiwan the manufacturing superpower if it is calculated per-capita. Which is the other china (I am just referring to the history of both PRC and Taiwan claiming to be the historical China successor). And the claims that US manifacruting is down is correct because it used to be much higher percentage wise from the world total manifacruting power. China was only about 3% when people who are now 30yrs were born. That's massive increase in manifacturing share. There is a discussion about domestic vs export in the study too that you might find interesting..

seanmcdirmid 2y ago
> (I am just referring to the history of both RPC and Taiwan claiming to be the historical China successor). Semantics, but the ROC (Republic of China) claims Taiwan, along with the mainland and Outer Mongolia. It isn’t the case that Taiwan claims the ROC (although if the in power DPP decided not to be the ROC anymore, the PRC would probably invade since declaring independence from the ROC would be the same as refuting one China). When the ROC/KMT retook Taiwan in 1946, they weren’t exactly seen as liberators. And when the KMT and a bunch of rich mainlanders relocated there in 1949, there were protests, genocide, and so on.

ipnon 2y ago

You might be surprised to learn that manufacturing is larger industry in the US than our tech industry, or that our domestic oil industry is even larger. America produces more oil than any other country. America was the world's factory for over a century. This dominance only ended around 2010, when China took the lead. It was our advantage to lose, and it was the result of deliberate political action. We offshored manufacturing, and treated China as a good faith trading partner, waiting decades for a cooperative international trade diplomacy that has not materialized to this day. All the while Beijing did everything in its power to enrich the Chinese worker, no matter the cost to outsiders. The results speak for themselves.

danans 2y ago
> All the while Beijing did everything in its power to enrich the Chinese worker, no matter the cost to outsiders. The results speak for themselves. In fairness, during this period, the US did everything it could to suppress the wages and benefits of its own manufacturing workers. Recall that the first rounds of manufacturing outsourcing were to US states with non-existent labor protections, mostly in the South.
- wakawaka28 2y ago
  The only way to protect wages in the face of competition that works for 1/10 to 1/3 the rate is to institute protectionist policies. That has also been unpopular because there's money to be made in offshoring as well. Americans are getting the worst at both ends, and only experiencing short-term benefits of having cheaper goods.
  - rat87 2y ago
    Some people don't like protectionism because in the long term it's worse for both countries. You have a short term benefit of protecting a handful of jobs in exchange for vastly more expensive goods for everyone as well as more expensive inputs to your other products undercutting other local industries. Protectionism is popular because the benifits for the few are visible while the downsides are diffuse but add up. And in the end your business ends up going out of business anyway like the Soviet factories
    - maeil 2y ago
      > Some people don't like protectionism because in the long term it's worse for both countries. I keep seeing these statements on here and they're utterly misleading. Protectionism is a spectrum. It is practiced by every single country. It's a very bold assumption to make that if every country would completely eliminate everything resembling it, this would benefit everyone. The opposite is very likely. There are numerous cases of protectionist policies where the country instituting them very clearly benefited from them, even in the long run. I have spent more than a decade in two countries, each having been on a different part of the protectionist spectrum since many decades ago. It is clear as day that the more protectionist one has, throughout, continuing to this day, seen very large benefits from this policy, larger than the benefits from the less protectionist country. We really need to stop propagating this myth among the educated in the West, it's just as harmful as "trickle-down economics" used to be before it became common knowledge that it's a fairy tale.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

kayewiggin 2y ago

1.) The article is from January 2024. 2.) Some of the data that it's based on is up to 2023. And some are up to 2020 3.) There has been massive movement of manufacturing out of China between 2020 and 2024. I won't provide the references here, as there are too many to mention, from Japanese/Taiwanese/South Korean/European/American companies. They are easily chatgpted/googled. Also the reason why Shenzhen and Guangzhou has suffered deeper drop of real estate price and employment. 4.) In 2024, Mexico was the biggest exporter to US. United States was the biggest exporter to Europe. US was the largest export destination of Japan. 5.) Trump's 60%-100% tariff on China will accelerate the exodus of manufacturing

advael 2y ago
Again, I really don't feel qualified to weigh in on most of these matters, though I will say that I generally do prefer direct citations if you'd like me to take the epistemic credibility of a claim more seriously than any other thing someone on the internet said (in other words, saying "go look it up" provides no more additional credibility than simply making the statement, and is thus kind of pointless, and in fact you take a not insignificant epistemic credibility hit for my purposes by suggesting that asking an LLM for factual information should be taken as a reliable source) That said, it's interesting to see how the supply shocks of a global pandemic can shift these kinds of relationships. It doesn't surprise me that Mexico, being a huge source of food for the US, is the largest exporter to it. What I do wonder is how much exports pertain to manufacturing relationships. Like in the case of Mexico -> US, I think we wouldn't count e.g. stuff we buy for the produce section to be manufactured goods, but that would still count toward import/export numbers. Does this apply to other things too? Do things like IP count?
- kayewiggin 2y ago
  Very comprehensive list of how China has lost export power to US over the years. Remember that US has the largest consumer market in the world, more than double the second place, EU. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_consumer_markets https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_consumer_marke... https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenroberts/2024/06/25/us-imports-from-china-plunging-mexico-near-shoring-not-big-winner/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenroberts/2024/06/25/us-import... - Chinese imports into the United States are down 19.78% from April of 2018 — when Trump first started imposing tariffs — to today, or $31.88 billion. - Cell phones: Big winner is India. China has gone from a market share of 63.59% in 2018 to a still strong 42.14%. That’s a decline of 33.73%. - Computers: Big winners are Taiwan, Vietnam. China has gone from a market share from 53.45% in the first four months of 2018 to 28.11%, a decline of 47.40%. - Furniture: Big winner is Vietnam. China, meanwhile, accounted for 23.55% this year, down from 48.54% in 2018, a decline of 51.49% compared to a gain of 88.67% for Vietnam. - TVs and monitors: Big winner is Vietnam. Mexico overtook China as the import leader in this category just before the pandemic and has remained on top. It gained market share from China, which fell from 53.68% in 2018, when it was No. 1, to 33.64%, a 37.32% decline. - Digital storage devices: Big winners are Korea, Vietnam. China accounted for 39.50% of those imports in 2018, more than double that of any other nation. In 2024, its percentage is 4.23% and it ranks No. 9. - Digital cameras: Yep, Vietnam again. China, meanwhile, has seen its share go from a majority, at 50.09%, to 17.57%, a decline of 64.92%.

maxglute 2y ago

Gross production is sales $$$, it's not actual output of widgets. I imagine if measure gross production by some units of stuff made, PRC would be far ahead.

baxtr 2y ago
Maybe true. But how do you get quality into the equation. Is all the garbage on temu/shein also part of the gross production KPI? I couldn’t care less about these cheap plastic widgets.
- maxglute 2y ago
  Some don't, but many do. Does a 600k NVIDIA AI rack provide as much value as 600k worth of commodity solar panels, or 10,000 entry level mopeds? Most of the world (developing) benefits more from commodity widgets.
  - baxtr 2y ago
    Fair. But isn’t that exactly what money is there for? You can objectively compare the value (to the world in this case) of two very different set of items.
deepsun 2y ago
Yes, but $$$ is the currently the most accurate metric of "units of stuff" by their usefulness. At least there's no other widely used metric. So $$$ is the most correct way to measure the output.
- maxglute 2y ago
  I think it's just the simplest (also default*) way of measuring, which doesn't mean it most correct or accurate. If PRC makes 5 cars @10k for every 1 US car @50k , and each PRC car is 80% as good, which metric do you use to measure gross manufacturing. Most people would say the guy that makes 5 cars. They might say the guy that makes 1 car if the 5 car guy's cars were 10% as good. What if its 3 cars that is just as good as 1 car charged at 3x. Across the board you have made in America stuff that's a little to a lot better (or worse) than PRC stuff, but cost 2-5x more. * by default I mean, these metrics/calculations are downstream of national accounting methods, i.e. most of world standardized on UN SNA which measures "value" as in $$$ vs something like (deprecated) soviet material production system (MPS) that measures physical material widgets produced. One proxy metric is PRC container throughput of her ports last year was ~300 million TEU vs US is about ~60 million TEU (with slightly higher ratio of empty containers).

mcmcmc 2y ago

As with anything it’s useful in context, but it does discount the labor force advantage China has in pure population numbers.

Hilift 2y ago

Some manufacturing is down. Look at the state of sophisticated shipbuilding. The US Navy has stated numerous times that the US essentially has minimal capacity. Maintenance and construction are years behind schedule. It isn't about funding. 40% of attack submarines aren't fit for service or deployable. The new Columbia class submarine will use a new steam turbine. Northrup Grumman was selected for the manufacture of the steam turbine in 2014. It isn't ready yet. Sophisticated manufacturing is in crisis in the US. It's the reason that the US bigfooted France in the AUKUS submarine deal. To revive a failing industry. These are interesting tests due to there are restrictions on sourcing of parts and personnel for a project. https://news.usni.org/2024/04/10/late-turbines-have-major-impact-on-columbia-sub-delivery-schedule-says-secnav https://news.usni.org/2024/04/10/late-turbines-have-major-im... https://news.usni.org/2024/04/10/late-turbines-have-major-impact-on-columbia-sub-delivery-schedule-says-secnav https://news.usni.org/2024/04/10/late-turbines-have-major-im...

manishader 2y ago
There is also the USS Zumwalt type problem. We spent $22.5 billion to get two active. Imagine what $22.5 billion USD buys in Chinese manufacturing capacity.
- slaw 2y ago
  $22.5 billion would be 2 million Teslas Y, but from BYD.