4 ms·

I hear people (media, politicians) talk about bringing manufacturing jobs back to America, but I haven't heard too much well articulated reasons for why. There

by yibg 1y ago

I hear people (media, politicians) talk about bringing manufacturing jobs back to America, but I haven't heard too much well articulated reasons for why. There are issues with national security, reliance on less than friendly nations etc. For instance, we'd want to grow our own food, even if importing would be cheaper. But those surely aren't the majority of manufacturing jobs. Given the choice of increasing the number of high paying, high skills jobs or the number of relatively low skill, dangerous manufacturing jobs, why wouldn't we choose the former?

nradov 1y ago
Global supply chains seem to be gradually breaking down due to a mix of politics, demographics, and armed conflicts. Everyone has become accustomed to the post-WWII system of global free trade but historically it is an aberration and everything will eventually revert to the mean. I wouldn't be surprised if China disintegrates into another civil war within the next few decades. We can't necessarily rely on foreign countries to make stuff for us anymore so if we want to have stuff we might have to make it ourselves.
- anonymars 1y ago
  > China disintegrates into another civil war within the next few decades I'm curious about your reasoning on this. China was not the one at the top of my list of "Major world powers likely to have a civil war sooner than later"
  - lossolo 1y ago
    Agree. At this point, a civil war is more likely in the United States than in China.
  - nradov 1y ago
    China has had major internal violent conflicts many times: in 1967, 1960, 1937, 1916, 1856, and so on. Another civil war probably isn't imminent but based on historical patterns it's entirely possible in our lifetimes. There could be an external shock in terms of a severe disruption in food or energy imports, or an internal power struggle between CCP factions. Xi Jinping isn't immortal and no one can predict what might happen when he leaves power.
    - mainecoder 1y ago
      It is highly unlikely because the government has an explicit goal of bringing harmony, and the people have had such a uniform upbringing that even their discussions of politics is around policy effectiveness, economics of implementation and metrics where as here in the US it is republican vs democrat and the topic is about Transgender issue or something that is not policy but a belief or some intangible thing that does not make a material difference for the majority of people.
      - nradov 1y ago
        Nah. You could have said the same thing about China's government at many other times throughout history — right up until the violence started. Nothing has really changed. How much "harmony" did the people in Tiananmen Square have in 1989?
- yibg 1y ago
  Problem is if we (any country really) tried to build everything ourselves while other countries engages in trade then we are at a major disadvantage. Of course some things are more sensitive and should be made domestically even at lower efficiency / higher cost. But if that’s applied to everything then we are just shooting ourselves in the foot. Plus the opportunity cost of not doing something else that we are more uniquely positioned to excel at.
ap99 1y ago
It's about leverage, which you mentioned. If you have no leverage during a negotiation and your counterpart has can say 'no' without having to give up anything then you're screwed. America doesn't have to be the best manufacturers, but we do need to have the ability to say, "fuck it we'll build it ourselves" when the other side of the table says something we don't like. And anyone living in the fantasy utopia where the whole world agrees on everything and there's peace all the time... read more history.
- lesuorac 1y ago
  But you don't have to build it yourself. If China wants to play hardball then Vietnam can make the goods. This is the great system we had until Trump decided he'd piss off every country. We had a very much you vs the world when doing diplomacy as USA but now it's just you vs USA which is a much weaker position.
  - ap99 1y ago
    There won't always be a Vietnam or an India.
    - lesuorac 1y ago
      Chinas been around for a few thousand years, what's something they can do that nobody else has been able to replicate? There's always a Vietnam. Even now with all the talk about "rare earth minerals". They're not rare, everybody has them, its just nobody else wants to pollute their rivers mining and refining them when China is willing to.
grep_name 1y ago
> Given the choice of increasing the number of high paying, high skills jobs or the number of relatively low skill, dangerous manufacturing jobs, why wouldn't we choose the former? Idk, the trend in manufacturing seems to be towards more and more high skilled work and less dangerous or low-skill work as time marches on. Your post also positions it as a binary choice, where we must either increase IT service jobs / web services or manufacturing, which doesn't seem to be true given the landscape of the job market these days. Personally I would like it if there were a more diverse array of job opportunities in general for people looking to gain and employ skills in machining, fabrication, factory automation, production, etc. "Just learn to code, bro" has been a meme since I was in college, but at this point at 33 every single person I know who is doing even 'kinda ok' has either gotten a tech job or gone into nursing. Exactly 0 of these people actually care about technology or are interested in computers at all, but it feels like the only avenue available anymore for Americans. That doesn't seem good or sustainable. No matter how much of a cash cow the tech industry has been, is it really a virtue to be totally anemic in such a basic function as ability to produce actual, physical goods?

by yibg 1y ago

nradov 1y ago

Global supply chains seem to be gradually breaking down due to a mix of politics, demographics, and armed conflicts. Everyone has become accustomed to the post-WWII system of global free trade but historically it is an aberration and everything will eventually revert to the mean. I wouldn't be surprised if China disintegrates into another civil war within the next few decades. We can't necessarily rely on foreign countries to make stuff for us anymore so if we want to have stuff we might have to make it ourselves.

anonymars 1y ago
> China disintegrates into another civil war within the next few decades I'm curious about your reasoning on this. China was not the one at the top of my list of "Major world powers likely to have a civil war sooner than later"
- lossolo 1y ago
  Agree. At this point, a civil war is more likely in the United States than in China.
- nradov 1y ago
  China has had major internal violent conflicts many times: in 1967, 1960, 1937, 1916, 1856, and so on. Another civil war probably isn't imminent but based on historical patterns it's entirely possible in our lifetimes. There could be an external shock in terms of a severe disruption in food or energy imports, or an internal power struggle between CCP factions. Xi Jinping isn't immortal and no one can predict what might happen when he leaves power.
  - mainecoder 1y ago
    It is highly unlikely because the government has an explicit goal of bringing harmony, and the people have had such a uniform upbringing that even their discussions of politics is around policy effectiveness, economics of implementation and metrics where as here in the US it is republican vs democrat and the topic is about Transgender issue or something that is not policy but a belief or some intangible thing that does not make a material difference for the majority of people.
    - nradov 1y ago
      Nah. You could have said the same thing about China's government at many other times throughout history — right up until the violence started. Nothing has really changed. How much "harmony" did the people in Tiananmen Square have in 1989?
yibg 1y ago
Problem is if we (any country really) tried to build everything ourselves while other countries engages in trade then we are at a major disadvantage. Of course some things are more sensitive and should be made domestically even at lower efficiency / higher cost. But if that’s applied to everything then we are just shooting ourselves in the foot. Plus the opportunity cost of not doing something else that we are more uniquely positioned to excel at.

ap99 1y ago

It's about leverage, which you mentioned. If you have no leverage during a negotiation and your counterpart has can say 'no' without having to give up anything then you're screwed. America doesn't have to be the best manufacturers, but we do need to have the ability to say, "fuck it we'll build it ourselves" when the other side of the table says something we don't like. And anyone living in the fantasy utopia where the whole world agrees on everything and there's peace all the time... read more history.

lesuorac 1y ago
But you don't have to build it yourself. If China wants to play hardball then Vietnam can make the goods. This is the great system we had until Trump decided he'd piss off every country. We had a very much you vs the world when doing diplomacy as USA but now it's just you vs USA which is a much weaker position.
- ap99 1y ago
  There won't always be a Vietnam or an India.
  - lesuorac 1y ago
    Chinas been around for a few thousand years, what's something they can do that nobody else has been able to replicate? There's always a Vietnam. Even now with all the talk about "rare earth minerals". They're not rare, everybody has them, its just nobody else wants to pollute their rivers mining and refining them when China is willing to.

grep_name 1y ago

> Given the choice of increasing the number of high paying, high skills jobs or the number of relatively low skill, dangerous manufacturing jobs, why wouldn't we choose the former? Idk, the trend in manufacturing seems to be towards more and more high skilled work and less dangerous or low-skill work as time marches on. Your post also positions it as a binary choice, where we must either increase IT service jobs / web services or manufacturing, which doesn't seem to be true given the landscape of the job market these days. Personally I would like it if there were a more diverse array of job opportunities in general for people looking to gain and employ skills in machining, fabrication, factory automation, production, etc. "Just learn to code, bro" has been a meme since I was in college, but at this point at 33 every single person I know who is doing even 'kinda ok' has either gotten a tech job or gone into nursing. Exactly 0 of these people actually care about technology or are interested in computers at all, but it feels like the only avenue available anymore for Americans. That doesn't seem good or sustainable. No matter how much of a cash cow the tech industry has been, is it really a virtue to be totally anemic in such a basic function as ability to produce actual, physical goods?