It amazes me how the US allowed itself to be nearly deindustrialized after manufacturing effectively won them WWII and global dominance. Now the US can't even make ventilators or face masks
It amazes me how the US allowed itself to be nearly deindustrialized after manufacturing effectively won them WWII and global dominance. Now the US can't even make ventilators or face masks
Sure, our share of global manufacturing is smaller, but that's hardly surprising when many more countries up their manufacturing game. A more interesting metric would be US percentage of total worldwide manufacturing as a function of sophistication: I'd rather be building complex medical instruments than toasters.
Why? In what way is it better to have a handful of elite workers creating a handful of units sold to a handful of consumers instead of having many ordinary workers producing many units for many consumers?
And in modern developed economies, those margins are insufficient to support a decent salary.
But I guess it's really a question about post-scarcity economics, and whether they're possible?
I’m more optimistic. Not really sure I have much to base my optimism on, but oh well.
Edit: fixed a word
What happens? Well I suppose the economy collapses and the proletariat rise up and usurp power, or something fantastical.
What’ll more likely happen is we’ll further automate repetitive low skill tasks, and / or start making more durable goods, or otherwise ingenuity our way forward.
> > Answer for what happens when
> That hasn't happened yet!1!!
Time isn't that complicated a concept.
Or, you know, they'll send it to the lowest-cost labor supplier they can find to build by hand and that won't be in the US!
So, stick to your complex medical instruments. Or, if you switch to toasters, please don't build the same shitty crap as everyone else.
You mean compared to a time when most developed countries' production capacity was significantly limited because they had been bombed out in WW2 and developing countries were a long way away from being competitive?
The fact that I can't get competitive production quotes in the USA for most products, like electric motors, injection molded plastic parts, printed circuit boards, stamped metal parts, castings, etc, suggests that the US is also not particularly efficient at making those parts. There was a time when the cheapest place to go for such things in production volumes was actually the US.
The people I know that are running manufacturing aren’t exactly hurting for business. Now is just not the time to lock in high quantities of low-cost stuff.
This article is about TSMC raising prices for what little capacity they have unallocated. We can all agree that they are probably the best in the world at what they do, yet there is no way you will get “competitive production quotes” from them for commodity chips. Jim Bob’s Plastic and Stuff out in Fort Wayne is no different. Now, Jim Bob is probably going to cut you a deal way sooner than TSMC is, but I know of a certain mega-big car company that shut down an engine plant for a week because Jim Bob said last years prices aren’t this years prices - and you probably aren’t as big as mega-big car company.
https://qz.com/1269172/the-epic-mistake-about-manufacturing-...
tl;dr if you focus on Intel's monopoly money-printer years, multiply it by a hedonic adjustment due to Moore's law, and mix it in with the rest of manufacturing it's enough to hide de-industrialization in your statistics.
Claiming Trump was really right, is usually sign of a writer trying to get people to read a bunch of opinions that don't match reality presented as "bold independent" stance
> Worse than the Great Depression: America’s manufacturing jobs implosion
So they're straight up going to max bullshit mode?
And they say if we ignore one of the most productive manufacturing sectors (computing) the data looks worse, Is that at all surprising?
Not really, it's usually the least profitable part of the supply chain.
That American businesses would gladly hand over their profits to poorer countries is irrational at face value.
TSMC is more than a manufacturer, they are a provider of very sophisticated in-demand tech for which the manufacturing process itself - is high tech, high stakes, high barriers to entry.
They are a little bit like Boeing in that the 'making' part is really hard. Less so like Flextronics.
Depending on how countries react to this, we could very well be in the opposite situation in 3 years, where we have a vast glut of chips and parts of every kind.
TSMC is not going to charge their customers 'prevailing market value' i.e. they could spot price at 5x their current prices, because it'd be gauging and the supply change would react long term to that 'bad behaviour' by TSMC. Big supply chain relationships are longer term so those things matter.
Because of the huge players involved with enough cash do influence (i.e. Auto, Apple, Samgsung) maybe we're in for a strategic alignment beyond just a fab shop in Texas.
One big caveat to all of this is that though manufacturing itself is low profit, a lot of things around that can become profitable. Making moulds, adjusting designs, managing supply chains, optimizing designs etc. - all of this becomes 'know how' that moves over to the manufacturing side and if they are smart about it, they'll leverage it.
Also, manufacturers can possibly develop some market power which they can try to flex as well.
Hopefully we see a shift to more high quality intelligent manufacturing in the Western world by leveraging tech, robots etc. and convincing consumers to pay higher prices for some things.
>>Now the US can't even make ventilators or face masks
The US led the world in the speed of its vaccination rollout. As for manufacturing, its world-leading biopharmaceutical infrastructure allowed it to produce the most shots of the most effective covid19 vaccines, of any country in the world.
Work is work, money is money. There's nothing fundamentally more important about manufacturing then other types of jobs. The US still has tons of manufacturing but unsurprisingly its on the backs of much fewer jobs, many of which require more education and specialization then manufacturing economy of old used to supply
the idea that manufacturing is the only work that matters is especially bizarre on a social media website for tech workers.
microsoft or oracle or any number of other software products absolutely deliver value to customers just as much as a machine stamping out parts, those companies couldn't work without that software just like they can't work without an assembly line or a delivery truck or whatever.
You can get by without services, you can’t get by without manufacturing.
There are no tech workers without computers.
these lucrative manufacturers invested heavily into specialist machinery and are reaping the benefits.
Seriously though, 3M would like a word.
These managed funds are driven by quarterly earnings people expect to see...
This intern drives public companies to focus on quarterly earnings
Privately held companies almost never look at quarterly earnings, they look at a 5 year picture... It is mainly public companies majority owned institutional investors (401k's, pensions, etc) that focus on quarterly earnings
So once again what people blame capitalism for, is in reality government putting their hands on the scales and tipping the market in ways that have unintended consequences
Service economies work great in places where food and housing are free, so money is only needed to buy luxury goods. They only work poorly in the US because capitalists have leverage over service workers.