4 ms·

I live in Philadelphia. We had a lot of manufacturing here, but most of that vacated the city center in the 1970s and 1980s. I recently was doing some research

I live in Philadelphia. We had a lot of manufacturing here, but most of that vacated the city center in the 1970s and 1980s. I recently was doing some research into urban renewal around my neighborhood, and found a paper about the city's efforts to address a concentrated population of perpetually drunk homeless men, mostly centered in my neighborhood, mostly squatting in abandoned buildings or living in flophouses. The city's approach was effectively to remove them and spread them out - and bulldoze the neighborhood to make way for a federally funded highway, now I-95. A lot of manufacturing businesses just called it quits - the owners had made their money on the backs of cheap labor and hadn't really set up any kind of succession plan, but could retire comfortably. Others moved, mostly out of the city, and by the 90s, that labor was moving overseas. And that's why I don't really foresee that kind of manufacturing coming back here. In order to survive the race-to-the-bottom pricing that the majority of Americans crave, you need a large labor force that will accept some form of sub-par living conditions. But if you can't earn a living wage, you can't afford to participate in the economy in a way that supports the manufacturing, and then you're back to those mid-century slums. I'm dramatically oversimplifying things, my main point here is, I didn't really put together how much of early 20th century American manufacturing relied on chronically drunk homeless men.

mixmastamyk 1y ago
Were the drunk/hl folks the ones working in the factory? Doesn’t sound practical.
- taeric 1y ago
  The assertion is that during times of high work, you have far fewer of them drinking. Pair that with low cost worker tenements and you are able to scale up manual tasks much more rapidly than what you see in most US locations nowadays.
- dsr_ 1y ago
  From the 1500s through 1930 or so, in any place you could see working men, you could see drunk ones. From 1930 through 1970, it was less common but just as tolerated. MADD did what Prohibition could not.
  - fragmede 1y ago
    selt driving cars ftw?
  - mixmastamyk 1y ago
    I'm familiar with that for say, digging a ditch, or the n-martini lunch. Less so with "perpetually drunk and homeless" factory workers operating potentially dangerous machinery.
    - zafka 1y ago
      I worked a summer job at a factory that made box cars. 10x10 or larger sheets of 1/4 inch plate steel lifted on stacks with chain hoists, box cars tacked together, then put on a large rotisserie, so it could be turned as all the seams were welded. Anyhow, At lunch we all went out for shots and beers, and perhaps a doobie or two. While I did not see it, people did get squished. I survived my summer, but I did pickup a nicotine habit that lasted 20 years.
    - sokoloff 1y ago
      I interned at Daimler-Benz and assembly line workers had company-employed drink trolleys which would take your order early in the shift for what partially subsidized drinks/snacks you wanted delivered for your breaks during your shift. A tone would sound in the factory and workers would converge on the break area near them and pick up what they’d ordered earlier that day. On the menu was beer and plenty of workers would have multiple beers over the course of their shift. These weren’t what you picture when someone says “perpetually drunk and homeless”, but I think a lot of Mercedes were assembled by workers with a perpetual low-level of alcohol on-board.
bluefirebrand 1y ago
> In order to survive the race-to-the-bottom pricing that the majority of Americans crave I do wonder if this is an inherent "craving" or just tied to the reality that Americans cannot really afford things anymore The middle class being eaten means that most people have much less discretionary spending, so every single purchase must be a bargain
- taeric 1y ago
  It is less a craving and more just a general response to availability? It isn't that people have a craving to spend less on things. But, if something is readily available for less, why would you pay more? Indeed, would you expect people to pay more for your goods, if someone else has equivalent goods for cheaper? Why?
  - bluefirebrand 1y ago
    > someone else has equivalent goods for cheaper They are never actually equivalent goods though They are cheaper goods
    - taeric 1y ago
      Maybe? Clothing is a big counter to your claim here. As is anything that can be reliably machined. Yes, there is "cheap" clothing. No, the more expensive clothing isn't necessarily better. A bog standard t-shirt is a bog standard t-shirt. With a minimum of quality control, and anything on top of that is not adding to the utility of it. The machining revolution really hurts a lot of the idea that labor in is indicative of quality.
      - fragmede 1y ago
        Not necessarily, but it's total shit when you buy a t-shirt and it unravels after only wearing it a few times. That QC doesn't always happen is what's the problem, so buying the cheapest isn't wise.
api 1y ago
Everything in economics is a paradox because everything is two sided, often with yourself on more than one side. Selling your labor? You want high wages, unions, worker protection laws, etc. Buying something? Now you want to cut wages and bust unions, at least if you tend to choose the cheaper item.
- sokoloff 1y ago
  When a consumer is buying labor embodied in a product, they don’t care whether that labor are unionized or what their wage per hour/day is. They do care what the wage per unit produced is, which is why we see a lot of US manufacturing moving towards higher levels of automation to let the embodied labor per finished unit be lower and thus competitive in the market.
downrightmike 1y ago
The anecdote that I heard was about GM, They'd have two guys doing two jobs on the same line, one of them would go off drinking for the day and the other guy just did both jobs half-assed, then they would switch the next day.
mymythisisthis 1y ago
The Canadian movie Goin' Down the Road (1970), is related to this. It's fictional, but seemed to capture the less rosy aspects of that time.
gnopgnip 1y ago
There are roughly half as many employed in manufacturing compared to 25 years ago. The declining trend started before this. At the same time American manufacturing output is at an all time high, measured in dollars. Wages are up. There are more jobs for things like mechanical engineers and millrights, fewer in packaging and assembly.

mixmastamyk 1y ago

Were the drunk/hl folks the ones working in the factory? Doesn’t sound practical.

taeric 1y ago
The assertion is that during times of high work, you have far fewer of them drinking. Pair that with low cost worker tenements and you are able to scale up manual tasks much more rapidly than what you see in most US locations nowadays.
dsr_ 1y ago
From the 1500s through 1930 or so, in any place you could see working men, you could see drunk ones. From 1930 through 1970, it was less common but just as tolerated. MADD did what Prohibition could not.
- fragmede 1y ago
  selt driving cars ftw?
- mixmastamyk 1y ago
  I'm familiar with that for say, digging a ditch, or the n-martini lunch. Less so with "perpetually drunk and homeless" factory workers operating potentially dangerous machinery.
  - zafka 1y ago
    I worked a summer job at a factory that made box cars. 10x10 or larger sheets of 1/4 inch plate steel lifted on stacks with chain hoists, box cars tacked together, then put on a large rotisserie, so it could be turned as all the seams were welded. Anyhow, At lunch we all went out for shots and beers, and perhaps a doobie or two. While I did not see it, people did get squished. I survived my summer, but I did pickup a nicotine habit that lasted 20 years.
  - sokoloff 1y ago
    I interned at Daimler-Benz and assembly line workers had company-employed drink trolleys which would take your order early in the shift for what partially subsidized drinks/snacks you wanted delivered for your breaks during your shift. A tone would sound in the factory and workers would converge on the break area near them and pick up what they’d ordered earlier that day. On the menu was beer and plenty of workers would have multiple beers over the course of their shift. These weren’t what you picture when someone says “perpetually drunk and homeless”, but I think a lot of Mercedes were assembled by workers with a perpetual low-level of alcohol on-board.

bluefirebrand 1y ago

> In order to survive the race-to-the-bottom pricing that the majority of Americans crave I do wonder if this is an inherent "craving" or just tied to the reality that Americans cannot really afford things anymore The middle class being eaten means that most people have much less discretionary spending, so every single purchase must be a bargain

taeric 1y ago
It is less a craving and more just a general response to availability? It isn't that people have a craving to spend less on things. But, if something is readily available for less, why would you pay more? Indeed, would you expect people to pay more for your goods, if someone else has equivalent goods for cheaper? Why?
- bluefirebrand 1y ago
  > someone else has equivalent goods for cheaper They are never actually equivalent goods though They are cheaper goods
  - taeric 1y ago
    Maybe? Clothing is a big counter to your claim here. As is anything that can be reliably machined. Yes, there is "cheap" clothing. No, the more expensive clothing isn't necessarily better. A bog standard t-shirt is a bog standard t-shirt. With a minimum of quality control, and anything on top of that is not adding to the utility of it. The machining revolution really hurts a lot of the idea that labor in is indicative of quality.
    - fragmede 1y ago
      Not necessarily, but it's total shit when you buy a t-shirt and it unravels after only wearing it a few times. That QC doesn't always happen is what's the problem, so buying the cheapest isn't wise.

api 1y ago

Everything in economics is a paradox because everything is two sided, often with yourself on more than one side. Selling your labor? You want high wages, unions, worker protection laws, etc. Buying something? Now you want to cut wages and bust unions, at least if you tend to choose the cheaper item.

sokoloff 1y ago
When a consumer is buying labor embodied in a product, they don’t care whether that labor are unionized or what their wage per hour/day is. They do care what the wage per unit produced is, which is why we see a lot of US manufacturing moving towards higher levels of automation to let the embodied labor per finished unit be lower and thus competitive in the market.

downrightmike 1y ago

The anecdote that I heard was about GM, They'd have two guys doing two jobs on the same line, one of them would go off drinking for the day and the other guy just did both jobs half-assed, then they would switch the next day.

mymythisisthis 1y ago

The Canadian movie Goin' Down the Road (1970), is related to this. It's fictional, but seemed to capture the less rosy aspects of that time.

gnopgnip 1y ago

There are roughly half as many employed in manufacturing compared to 25 years ago. The declining trend started before this. At the same time American manufacturing output is at an all time high, measured in dollars. Wages are up. There are more jobs for things like mechanical engineers and millrights, fewer in packaging and assembly.