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?