Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course the USA could increase the percentage of manufacturing in its economy. It's a matter of tax incentives, tax penalties, and trade policy.
There would be benefits and disadvantages.
But there's no question it can be done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose
And IMO should be done if the product is part of or helps with our National Security
Agreed. It's one thing to have free trade with countries that have governments and environmental regulations similar to our own. It's quite another when the countries in question have authoritarian governments, few rights for workers, and lousy environmental regulations. We're doing to much of the latter right now.
The long-term goal should be to eliminate sweatshops and pollution, not merely relocate it overseas.
The problem's even worse than that. With the swift development of AI, increasingly machines even THINK better than we do. It's not just people of average or below average intelligence who are at risk of being displaced - and the number of new jobs created is usually less than the number lost.
I think that's the first needed step. Eventually it will lead to Universal Basic Income. (And why not? If the purpose of automation and AI is to decrease the amount of work we humans must do, why shouldn't everyone share in the productivity gains AI is making possible?)
Part of the problem is a job is more than just the pay it brings in. It means contributing something as well as the pride in completing a task and (hopefully) being respected for it. I'm not sure that a universal basic income accomplishes that.
And I don't have the complete answer but simplistic answers like 'retrain them for the new era jobs' or 'they should find something else to do' are not the answer
I think that's the first needed step. Eventually it will lead to Universal Basic Income.
(And why not? ...why shouldn't everyone share in the productivity gains AI is making possible?)
Because this subgroup of "everyone" that we're dancing around haven't contributed equitably.
I'm more than willing, even eager to give their kids a shot at it all, but the extant adults who for whatever reason (-another thread pls)
haven't managed to get educated or trained enough to have contributed up to now really don't warrant yet another wave of benefits
that can only pretend that someday they might contribute equitably.
We'll still have to support them in some manner but we need to get them out of the employment statistics which I believe is the only way
that MANY of those remaining can ever expect the market value of their time to rise enough to actually be self supporting.
Allow those that actually ARE working and producing to be worth being paid enough.
Get the deadwood out of the equation.
Last edited by MrRational; 08-17-2020 at 11:29 AM..
Again, this fails the math test. There are not very many $80.9K jobs out there. And $34.6K is hardly different from $30K that's less than $400 extra a month, so at worst $30K is recently outdated... and not even by much. Furthermore if you take every person earning $34.6K and train them up to a PhD Engineer do you even realize how many people that is who are now competing for a $80.9K job? Count it up. They will bring down the wages of those Professional jobs because too many qualified applicants. It has happened many times before. Even physicians (see: radiologists), with their limited student acceptance rate for medical school and then Match Day, have seen their wages drop. Why? Because more competition for said jobs.
Let's not have facts get in the way of your fantasy world, eh?
So you are wrong yet I am living in fantasy? What an idiotic statement. You are basically saying that the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics is incorrect - try proving it. Also the difference between $34.6 vs $30K is over 15% and $400 a month is about $2.50 an hour - not inconsequential. Those earning average of $80.9K includes many accountants, engineers, bankers, etc - no PhD or medical degree required, again convoluting of facts to match your fantasies. The harder someone is to replace, the more they are worth, service workers that can be replaced in a couple of hours are worth much less than someone that has years of training and experience. Make yourself worth more rather than try to bring the rest down, then your salary will increase.
BTW - I have an engineering degree (2 actually) and worked with many others with similar degrees, all earning well over $80K and many well over $120K.
I believe people pushing for manufacturing would be pleased with a resurgence of ANY kind of blue collar jobs. This includes trades, which I don't think have been touched on yet in this thread.
If someone got laid off from a factory making $20/hour and was called back by a power company hiring apprentices to become linemen, I can't see there being dissatisfaction. What you're "not" making as an apprentice is made up by the number of hours you are working in a week, combined with the pay schedule which usually dictates that anyone advancing to the next level MUST be paid a certain wage.
Now, if you're not a union outfit I can't help you. The per-contract progression is supposed to be 4 or 5 years if someone is hired w/o previous experience as a journeyman lineman. At the end of your 48 or 60 months you WILL make top pay and everyone with more tenure than that makes the same. Your paycheck is determined by how much overtime you are willing to work.
And IMO should be done if the product is part of or helps with our National Security
What's becoming increasingly apparent is that if you add in the externalities of defense spending and pollution, offshoring becomes less attractive. Others have touched on pollution, but if our critical supply chains are limited to a continental scale (North America) compared to a world wide one, we can shift our entire military outlook to a more defensive one than one of global control. We don't have to plan war games with the intent of invading China, we just have to prep for the event of China invading us, which is much much easier and requires less manpower and machines.
You just described Trump -- dictator wannabe, anti-union, and just opened up the Arctic wildlife reserve for drilling.
This is economics forum - take you BS over to the politics threads.
BTW - might quit listening to the Union Hacks - Trump has strongly supported trying to bring manufacturing back and Biden is much more a dictator wannabe with some of his day one plans.
Last edited by ddeemo; 08-17-2020 at 10:04 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
