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.
Developed countries did protect their industries and it was either to appease the masses or because -- in the case of Britain -- all industries were owned by the government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
Now African countries are trying to replicate your ideals, and it has brought them nothing but dependency and suffering.
Because of Western interference and not because Free Trade doesn't work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324
Some of us don't want what you want. Having local suppliers means small businesses.
If, and only if, you have the work-force to do that and you don't.
Just admit you don't understand and we'll move on.
It might help to improve your understanding to grasp the meaning of "skill-set."
Contrary to your fantasy, the 160,486,000 US workers in the work-force do not have the same skill-sets.
Once you admit they do not and could not ever have the same skill-sets, then we can move forward to the next concept, which is what percentage of the 160,486,000 workers have the electronics manufacturing skill-set.
After you figure that out, then you can seek to discover what percentage of those workers who actually do have the electronics manufacturing skill-set actually want to work in electronics manufacturing.
Right? Because we don't force people to work jobs against their will.
Just admit you don't understand and we'll move on.
It might help to improve your understanding to grasp the meaning of "skill-set."
Contrary to your fantasy, the 160,486,000 US workers in the work-force do not have the same skill-sets.
Once you admit they do not and could not ever have the same skill-sets, then we can move forward to the next concept, which is what percentage of the 160,486,000 workers have the electronics manufacturing skill-set.
After you figure that out, then you can seek to discover what percentage of those workers who actually do have the electronics manufacturing skill-set actually want to work in electronics manufacturing.
Right? Because we don't force people to work jobs against their will.
I can only tell you this so many times.
I am not saying we should or even could make everything we consume. Yet you keep arguing.
america is not producing goods. private enterprises are.
if you take away the profit incentive, then maybe you have a chance of bringing production back on shore. but then again, you might take away all motivation to innovate and produce. there's your double edged sword that is capitalism.
And that is the ***** of it all.
Decades ago, when we were manufactured onshore, and many of the companies were private, and the world were buying our items. Both, mahogany row and the worker bee were happy. They could focus on making the best product they could and it would sell. Then as we became more global, and had to compete with companies that were government subsidized , had zero environmental protocols, had zero safety protocols for their workers, and paid the workforce with the equivalent of a bowl of rice. Unfair trade practices, brought those products here. That bottom line got harder to deal with. Mahogany row wasn't happy, then as profits continued to decline, the private company sells to a large conglomerate. Now, they've got to keep a board of investors happy. So, they ship as many jobs as they can to a low cost country, cheapen up the product. And hope for the best. As they cheapen the product, the companies they are now competing with can afford to make a better one...and the next thing you know, another company shuts its doors.
The way I see it, globalism and unfair trade practices are the enemy of the working person.
You would still need an additional 230 Million workers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scarabchuck
This makes no sense. At our peak which was supposedly 1979, there were roughly 20 million people working in manufacturing. Allegedly, we've lost 7.5 million jobs since then.
It is unclear what they consider "manufacturing" , is it just assembly line jobs or all the way up to engineering and design ? If they are just counting plant level jobs, these numbers will be much higher.
This is a decent article, although I don't agree with all of it. It also states that 7 million jobs were lost due to automation. I call complete bull**** on that. I've been in the manufacturing industry , both at the plant level and in Design and Engineering for the last 31 years, my Dad was in the industry for 42 and we have seen no where near this amount of the industry gone due to automation. In my time in the industry I think I've known a handful that lost their jobs due to automation, and that is because they weren't willing to progress with the changes. Yes, I do know some facets of the industry that are no longer, but many of those people continued to work if they progressed with change.
Many of the people I work with in design, were model makers...something no longer around due to CAD. Many of the CNC operators in the clay modeling studios were once clay sculptors. The CNC machine took the majority of those jobs for the larger operations. The fine details are still hand done.
You do not have the work-force to be able to do that.
Please explain this to me ? How are you coming up with 230 million workers ? Now granted. If overnight we had to start manufacturing everything, we couldn't. That poster isn't asking that though. I'm assuming that poster would like to see us back at the 1979/80 level. When we had the highest amount manufacturing workforce.
And again, how do you come up with that 230 million number , when according to this (it's the latest data I was able to find) China's entire manufacturing workforce is 112 million ?
They can keep the lowest of the low, assembly line jobs. Bring back the tool , die , and mold industry. Bring back vehicle assembly. Those jobs alone would be a huge boon to our country, and the workers.
Decades ago, when we were manufactured onshore, and many of the companies were private, and the world were buying our items. Both, mahogany row and the worker bee were happy. They could focus on making the best product they could and it would sell. Then as we became more global, and had to compete with companies that were government subsidized , had zero environmental protocols, had zero safety protocols for their workers, and paid the workforce with the equivalent of a bowl of rice. Unfair trade practices, brought those products here. That bottom line got harder to deal with. Mahogany row wasn't happy, then as profits continued to decline, the private company sells to a large conglomerate. Now, they've got to keep a board of investors happy. So, they ship as many jobs as they can to a low cost country, cheapen up the product. And hope for the best. As they cheapen the product, the companies they are now competing with can afford to make a better one...and the next thing you know, another company shuts its doors.
The way I see it, globalism and unfair trade practices are the enemy of the working person.
That pandora's box is wide open. No flag waving red blooded pick up truck driving apple pie American is gonna pay 3k for a union made iphone. Ain't happening.
Developed countries did protect their industries and it was either to appease the masses or because -- in the case of Britain -- all industries were owned by the government.
Because of Western interference and not because Free Trade doesn't work.
If, and only if, you have the work-force to do that and you don't.
This is completely ignoring history.
All of it.
Every developed country protected their industry, and every country that failed to develop were forced to embrace open markets.
Guard industry, increase knowledge, and increase national sufficiency.
Every successful country did it, every failed one did the opposite. You can wish it out of existence. But it's not true.
Speaking of democracy, the populist was Andrew Jackson. Henry Clay, who openly mocked free trade, was not considered a populist at the time.
Then you say western interference, but that sounds like free markets. Milton Friedman would call you a communist for what you say.
If an investor or company buys land in another country, they get to set the agreement, just like if a company hires an employee.
The reason free markets were used to destroy non-western countries like China or the Ottomans in the 1800s was because it allowed for foreign products to dominate the market and ruin internal know-how.
Read about secondary markets in Africa, consumer goods from Europe/US means their domestic industry doesn't develop (it cannot compete with low prices).
Next you say America cannot have small businesses and local suppliers...
except we had those for two hundred years with a smaller population than today.
That pandora's box is wide open. No flag waving red blooded pick up truck driving apple pie American is gonna pay 3k for a union made iphone. Ain't happening.
Crack open the device you're typing this on and look at where the parts inside are made.
Hypocrite level 11.
So because we don't 100% control every market, every type of product, we should just give up?
You guys always go back to phones and computers like you think you're dropping some radical truth bomb on the world, but you never have any follow up.
What is your point?
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.
