> I hate to be so cynical these days....but if this is true, that would mean a lot of
But since we’re being cynical, is importing stuff just to keep the port workers busy a good idea?
But since we’re being cynical, is importing stuff just to keep the port workers busy a good idea?
Sure, if we were in a downturn it would slow but not come to a standstill.
From this article "Even during the COVID nonsense, the supply chain did not experience THIS kind of sudden shut down."
Sure but you were being cynical and presented port workers not having having thing to unload as a major issue to worry about. In the whole scheme it seemed like not the first problem to solve.
I love it! If that's the case, then it's easily solved, just ship empty cardboard boxes back and forth to/from Hawaii. The workers can diligently load and unload them, and then load them right back. The truck drivers can do a few loops around Los Angeles even to keep up their training.
That that kind of happened during a phase of the Soviet Union's economic development. The economic success of a branch was measured by the amount of resources consumed and the allocated work done. So they had started building large couches and started running empty trains back and forth to consume wood or fuel and add up "miles driven" to their ledger. We can do the same /s
By all means, retrain the blacksmiths in the early 1900s… but this isn't that sort of situation. We'll need the port workers again.
Well I agree with that phrasing however the OP said it as:
> to be so cynical [...] that would mean a lot of dockworkers/longshoreman are out of jobs or not working right?
That leads to a different interpretation and sounds like something else than what you said (which I agree with).
Well we don’t import things to just do that.