They tried Made in the USA – it was too expensive for their customers
525 comments
·July 2, 2025strict9
nooron
I think it is worth mentioning how much more cheap capital is available for manufacturing. Chinese state policy—- monetary, fiscal, and social—- pushes up the savings rate, enormously lowering consumption, while restricting the range of consumer financial products. That puts more savings in state banks and keeps interest rates low.
seanmcdirmid
This has come up at the expense of their own consumption however, and a reliance on exports instead. Thankfully China has been focusing on diversifying their export markets along with increasing internal consumption in the last decade.
nooron
Thank you for raising that point. I would love any recommendations you have to learn more about internal consumption shifts in the last decade.
tantalor
All high school students should be required to complete the Factorio tutorial before graduating.
Workaccount2
Factorio is just a programming game with a manufacturing texture pack.
What we want is wood shop and machine shop classes.
tantalor
Humbly and politely disagree.
Factorio taught me about supply chains, manufacturing bottlenecks, and tooling dependencies. These concerns don't really crop up in day-to-day programming, but they reveal a lot about why we struggle manufacturing anything in USA anymore.
seanmcdirmid
Maybe we should just skip directly to 3D printing? Wood shop probably isn’t the place to start, but there is a starting point for kids somewhere.
supportengineer
As an 8th grader, we had multiple years of wood shop, but that was in the late 1980's.
idrios
Congressmen should be required to complete the Factorio tutorial before taking office
whoisyc
In Factorio you throw iron ore in an electric furnace and it turns into iron plates. In reality you need coal or coke or charcoal to reduce iron to its metal form. Steelmaking is one of the largest single source of CO2 for a reason.
This is just one example among many. The truth is every single facet of industrial production is incredibly complex and there does not exist a single video game that captures all the nuance. Period. Factorio abstracted away all the boring details of industrial production and that is why it is good entertainment. But it’s still just entertainment. To think someone would become knowledge about industrial production because he played Factorio is like thinking someone is a good driver because he played Mario Kart.
sokoloff
Getting kids aware of and interested in a topic is an important step. I mentor a high school robotics team, not because I have an illusion that those students could skip college and walk into a robotics design job, but because it gets them exposed to mechanics, engineering, programming, experimentation, working in a team, competing against nature and other teams, etc. Ultimately, I think it helps them refine their framework for “what do I like [or dislike] doing?”
zelias
Sounds like a good argument for Pyanodon....
beefnugs
Thats the most dangerous thing to turn kids into. They want them dumb and barely powered drill capable.
insane_dreamer
China's biggest advantage wasn't just the ability to scale (which means available labor), but also having entire supply chains in relative proximity, tons of small manufacturers making all the little parts needed, all located in southern China.
Animats
That's a bit less true than it used to be. Shenzhen supposedly used to work that way. When some small factory ran out of capacitors in board assembly, they'd send a runner to Huaqiangbei for another reel. But now ordering has mostly moved online. There's less of a role for all those tiny stalls stocking components.
That just cuts out a layer in the distribution chain. The part you want is probably manufactured not too far away.
The US used to have manufacturing cities where you could get everything you needed in specific industries. There was the New York City garment district for clothes. Mary Quant, inventor of the miniskirt, writes in her autobiography, "Quant by Quant", about her first visit to New York with a native guide. She was getting things set up for manufacturing in days instead of the months it took in the UK.
Detroit had cars, of course. Most of the auto parts suppliers were nearby. Now, the US auto industry is very spread out. "Trenton Makes, the World Takes" is still on a huge sign in Trenton, NJ., but it's more nostalgia then reality. Waterbury, Connecticut had watch manufacturers and other mechanical precision devices.
Those centers of industry are mostly gone. Even Hollywood is in troublel
taeric
Cheap labor is the key in that scaling, though? Human labor is still far more flexible than anything else that we have. And a big part of that flexibility is how cheaply you can turn it off. There is a reason seasonal employment is a thing.
leviathant
I live in Philadelphia. We had a lot of manufacturing here, but most of that vacated the city center in the 1970s and 1980s. I recently was doing some research into urban renewal around my neighborhood, and found a paper about the city's efforts to address a concentrated population of perpetually drunk homeless men, mostly centered in my neighborhood, mostly squatting in abandoned buildings or living in flophouses. The city's approach was effectively to remove them and spread them out - and bulldoze the neighborhood to make way for a federally funded highway, now I-95. A lot of manufacturing businesses just called it quits - the owners had made their money on the backs of cheap labor and hadn't really set up any kind of succession plan, but could retire comfortably. Others moved, mostly out of the city, and by the 90s, that labor was moving overseas.
And that's why I don't really foresee that kind of manufacturing coming back here. In order to survive the race-to-the-bottom pricing that the majority of Americans crave, you need a large labor force that will accept some form of sub-par living conditions. But if you can't earn a living wage, you can't afford to participate in the economy in a way that supports the manufacturing, and then you're back to those mid-century slums.
I'm dramatically oversimplifying things, my main point here is, I didn't really put together how much of early 20th century American manufacturing relied on chronically drunk homeless men.
api
Everything in economics is a paradox because everything is two sided, often with yourself on more than one side.
Selling your labor? You want high wages, unions, worker protection laws, etc.
Buying something? Now you want to cut wages and bust unions, at least if you tend to choose the cheaper item.
mymythisisthis
The Canadian movie Goin' Down the Road (1970), is related to this. It's fictional, but seemed to capture the less rosy aspects of that time.
gnopgnip
There are roughly half as many employed in manufacturing compared to 25 years ago. The declining trend started before this. At the same time American manufacturing output is at an all time high, measured in dollars. Wages are up. There are more jobs for things like mechanical engineers and millrights, fewer in packaging and assembly.
bluefirebrand
> In order to survive the race-to-the-bottom pricing that the majority of Americans crave
I do wonder if this is an inherent "craving" or just tied to the reality that Americans cannot really afford things anymore
The middle class being eaten means that most people have much less discretionary spending, so every single purchase must be a bargain
downrightmike
The anecdote that I heard was about GM, They'd have two guys doing two jobs on the same line, one of them would go off drinking for the day and the other guy just did both jobs half-assed, then they would switch the next day.
mixmastamyk
Were the drunk/hl folks the ones working in the factory? Doesn’t sound practical.
IG_Semmelweiss
No. The "cheap labor" myth needs to die quickly.
China's advantage is, and always will be, that the costs of labor in US are bloated by a huge amount of overhead for every working resident
In 2023, the BLS reported that benefits alone accounted for about 31% of total compensation, with wages and salaries comprising the remaining 69%. [1] This 31% includes direct costs like health insurance, retirement contributions, and paid leave.
Now in addition, consider employer-paid expenses that are not benefits or employee compensation: FICA, FUTA, SUID, SDI, FMLA, etc. That depends on your geography, but it can be up to 25-40% additional costs [2]
The all-in cost is at least 35% or more in additional spend [3]
In addition, none of the above capture indirect costs of compliance/overhead, with varied state and federal schemes.
As you can see, we are at a range of ~35-50% of additional costs for each new hire
Now, importantly, try to imagine the effect of this bloat at a national level: Every US business is effectively carrying deadweight of additional ~35-50% costs on its pricing decisions to its customers. Why? Because the bloat is embedded into every domestic input, like raw materials, services, utilities, you name it. This cost spike may impact a few foreign industries dependent on US inputs, but it certainly explodes over US shores, spiking prices of the inputs that most US producers depend for their final goods and services. Now think of what happens to domestic costs of doing business and operating a physical business in US.
So when your cost of production have additional ~35-50% overhead because of all sort of market-distorting mechanisms, blaming china for "cheap labor" is a convenient scapegoat, when in reality the blame should be on US policy of making our jobs artificially expensive.... to fund the state bloat.
[1] https://www.bluedotcorp.com/blog/2023-trend-the-rising-price...
[2] https://www.sba.gov/blog/how-much-does-employee-cost-you
[3] https://www.footholdamerica.com/blog/what-is-the-real-cost-o...
PaulHoule
Some of it is China’s willingness to make big capital investments. My wife was shocked at the low price of beech mushrooms at Ren’s Market and I found out these are grown in a huge factory in China where they are very proud that they only have to handle the mushrooms with a forklift. Contrast that to those white button Agricus mushrooms each of which is cut out from the mycelium individually with a knife.
The good news is that they’re building one here
When you look at solar panels and lithium batteries their biggest advantage is that they invest in large scale heavily automated factories. For really labor intensive and low value things like those dog beds Chinese labor is already too expensive and production is going to places like Bangladesh.
IG_Semmelweiss
We have plenty of capital here. Far more than China.
The problem is the capital cannot be put to good use here. Either because (1) there's too much uncertainty around project progress (think oil pipelines stuck for decades in permitting limbo), or (2) the ROI doesn't work when you pay insanely high bloated compliance costs of hiring US staff.
Even our sky high productivity cannot overcome the large lard deadweight each of us has to carry, on behalf of the elite class
I remember a time when every product sold around the world carried the "MADE IN USA" brand. It included random trinkets.
That would come back quickly, if we all decided we had enough of antiwork laws, enough with all the deadweight, and focused on building instead of regulating.
LocalH
Perhaps the answer is a combination of a significant UBI (paid for by general federal spending, I could think of many worse reasons to accrue national debt) coupled with a much lower minimum wage? Incentivize companies not to treat labor as a cost sink, while still ensuring that people have enough capital to cover their cost of living. I'd wager productivity would also go up (and mental depression would go down) if things weren't quite as dire as they currently are.
yaky
Calling health insurance, retirement and paid leave "bloat" sounds like a satire of a 19th century factory/mine/sweatshop owner. Wow.
IG_Semmelweiss
OK. In that case lets not use "bloat", and instead just call it the biggest subsidy for the middle and upper classes, coming from the backs of the unemployed, lower class
Guess who's uninsured? Its not the META employee with fertility benefits.
Satire is whomever cannot see why Trump would be voted by the working class: whomever thinks the status quo was to the benefit of the lower, blue collar class... while the middle and upper class ride their (untouchable) govt benefits (SSN) to a secure retirement because the elite class has a secure bureaucratic job (while the lower classes struggle to find 1 part time job).
Meanwhile, the chinese eat the lunch of the working class who see their jobs being exported abroad, because no employer wants to pay for subsidies/retirement/salaries of an elite bureaucratic deadweight class (that makes the rules for themselves, and forgets the neediest).
fakedang
The fact that these are not covered by your taxes is even more satirical. Instead they're paying for escapades in the Middle East.
_DeadFred_
It is crazy that the current pro-capitalists are totally fine publicly saying they are psychopaths. But it's OK because money.
KoolKat23
Your job is not artificially expensive.
In China it is naturally cheap, they have humongous super advanced vertical and horizontal supply chains at their doorstep.
Need plentiful, cheap three phase electricity? - check. Need some obscure part at scale and immediately?- check. Need advanced engineering? - check. etc. etc.
It's at the point where for many industries the risk/reward just do not make any sense at all (it'll just be loss making no matter how you spin it, government supports etc).
chii
> naturally cheap
you mean artificially cheap? State subsidized electricity, loans and the ability to hire/fire people flexibly.
specialist
USA's workers directly fund our safety net (such as it is) and public health.
Who pays for all that stuff in China?
chii
The chinese gov't also funds those things - but just not via taxes collected from people's incomes. They collect "profit" off foreign exports, debase the local currency to pay for it.
cyanydeez
gosh, if only someone would think of the small business owners.
kylebenzle
This take and the article get it utterly wrong. The ONLY real headline is, "Americans have gotten so used to free money they can no longer even imagine producing anything and selling it at a reasonable price".
I'm a small farmer and can sell my garlic all day for $1 a bulb. But it's A LOT of work. If I bump the price to $5 less people buy but that doesn't mean I get to give up and say, "oh well, can't produce in America I guess... "
Lol, Americans :(
Spooky23
It's more than that, we've simultaneously allowed for monopolization and rollup of wholesale markets. So in context of the story, the US manufacturer is in a squeeze play between supply cost escalations through the Trump tax regime, and the on the demand side with the big retailers like Kroger and Walmart.
The "made in USA" stuff is bullshit, the policy people DNGAF. The people actually making stuff are screwed. This about about shifting taxation from income and capital gains to consumption.
strict9
I agree with most of that.
But companies have been incentivized to offshore production for decades. In many cases policy decisions have immensely rewarded them for doing so.
The end result is those countries (mainly China) have grown into infinite scaling machines. It probably won't unwind any time soon.
insane_dreamer
And in China retail/consumption is not nearly as consolidated/monopolistic as it is in the US.
jimt1234
Agree, especially with the BS of "Made in the USA". Consumers really don't care; they just want the most bang for their buck. Period.
kevin_thibedeau
I look for it and will pay a fair premium. "Assembled in USA" is hot garbage though.
looofooo0
Turns out China buys Iranian oil, China makes cheap products out of this oil. China builds lots of new cheap coal plants, west fades theirs out but moves part of their production to China.. etc.
ponector
Use of coal in Chinese energy production is not growing, peaked in 2013 according to their stats. They are also building massive solar and nuclear capacity.
But anyway, half of all global coal production is consumed in China. I hope they will manage to get rid of coal in the next 20 years.
looofooo0
Not true, latest peak is 2024 also for CO2 Emissions.
thaack
My family runs a small plastic (injection molding) business in the USA. Second, soon to be third generation.
The only reason it still exists is because the products made are too expensive to ship from a country with cheaper labor as they are pretty large and heavy. And it's quite a niche product/vertical.
The biggest problem that the business faces on a day-to-day basis is employees. It's a very low skill manufacturing job. You pull parts out of the mold. The pay is good for a large midwestern MCOL city, plus full health benefits (employees don't pay a cent). It is downright impossible to find and retain reliable employees. The job sucks. I worked there when I was younger helping out and you do the same thing every minute for 8 hours a day in a hot and loud factory. It's not a career - just a job. I'm not sure how you fix that. The American appetite for a low skill manufacturing job is dead - I'm not sure it's a bad thing either.
Even the high skill stuff has already been taken over by China, their process is far more efficient. When the business needs design/tool & die for a new plastic injection mold costs and speed associated with getting that mold designed and made in America are astronomical compared to the Chinese. The Chinese will get back to you with a design proof in 24 hours at a 1/4 of the cost.
driverdan
If you can't get employees you're not paying enough. What you think you should pay employees is irrelevant, the market defines what "good pay" is. If potential employees have better opportunities you won't be able to hire them unless you make your jobs more appealing than others.
thaack
You would think it would be that black and white, and under normal circumstances I would tend to agree, however pay is well above average for the location and skill especially when you factor in the benefit package.
I really think it comes down to the fact that people have no interest in working in low skill manufacturing. The business loses people to Walmart etc. where they get lower pay and no benefits all the time. There is more variety of work and potential for advancement at a company like Walmart. Even at a larger scale low skill manufacturing plant advancement is sparse.
genocidicbunny
The pay may be above average for that location, but it might still be too low. Back when I had just finished college, my cohort was also judging locations where they would apply to work based on things like the social scene or the climate, in addition to the usual considerations of the kind of work and pay they would be doing. There were plenty that turned down well-paying jobs that were in undesirable locations because they were also seeking to not only establish a career, but a life too.
One of the guys I worked with at my first job was a few years older than me, and he had given up a much better paying job in one of the flyover states for a lower paying one in a higher COL area; His reasoning was that no amount of money could buy him the things he wanted out there, but he did admit that had the pay been significantly higher, he probably would have stuck it out for longer than he did, though again only to save up a bigger nest egg before he moved away from the area.
EasyMark
I dodged a job like this as well. Pay was great, benefits good, however I would have been maintaining legacy perl code and excel sheets (that were functionally databases), doing the same coding day in and out. I did it for a while, while looking for another position to get out of there as quickly as possible.
ponector
No, by paying high salary you are not going to retain smart people on dumb physically challenging job.
And they say they can get employees, as pay is decent for low skilled job.
etskinner
Did you miss where they said "it's downright impossible to find and retain reliable employees"?
HDThoreaun
So you see the problem. Americans wont work these types of jobs at wages that allow businesses to compete with China. Businesses are in a competition. When they raise wages they need to raise prices and they cant do that when competition is knocking at the door.
peterldowns
> The American appetite for a low skill manufacturing job is dead - I'm not sure it's a bad thing either.
It probably isn't a bad thing, as long as we continue to invest in automation and high-skill manufacturing. The Economist wrote about this recently: the fantasy of "low-skill factory jobs for all" is just that, a fantasy: https://archive.is/YoMs1
thaack
Fascinating article.
They have toyed around with automation but the capital required to retrofit for such a small business would be intensive but is coming down.
Interestingly the automation pieces that they have been testing (multi-axis robot arms) have only became cost effective since the Chinese robots entered the market. The Chinese have completely dropped the floor on automation tooling.
beloch
Sounds like the employer has created its own problems.
If an employee is doing an unpleasant, dead-end job with no prospect of advancement, they have to make a value judgment. If there's no prospect of advancement or any kind of wage growth (they're "low skill", so they'll be replaced if someone cheaper comes along), let alone security, then why stick around?
If the working conditions (e.g. heat and noise) are unpleasant, they could be improved. A ramp into other positions could be built to make the "job" an entry point to a "career" (e.g. Costco moves people between many different low skill jobs and then recruits from that pool for management).
thaack
>If an employee is doing an unpleasant, dead-end job with no prospect of advancement, they have to make a value judgment. If there's no prospect of advancement or any kind of wage growth (they're "low skill", so they'll be replaced if someone cheaper comes along), let alone security, then why stick around?
Exactly my point, and that's what they are doing.
There is no prospect of advancement possible. It's a small operation with 15 or so total employees. Under normal circumstances I would agree on a much larger scale.
abe_m
The majority of people are not suitable for management, and do not advance in "careers". Most people just work the same job over and over, until the retire or die.
But the cost of everything has got out of hand. Why bother going to work if you're going to be basically homeless anyway? Housing+food+health care has detached significantly from wages and the costs of other goods.
bdcravens
> because the products made are too expensive to ship from a country with cheaper labor
This particular issue could be solved by producing in Mexico and trucking your product into the US.
gnopgnip
You fix that by automating the repetitive tasks. So one employee can oversee several machines and primarily handle edge cases. A lot of tooling that was impossible or outrageously expensive before is affordable now. I support some food manufactures that use machine vision based industrial automation and QC.
cadamsdotcom
If you’re having trouble retaining employees because they’re bored of pulling parts out of a mold - have any of them considered having a crack at automating that specific bit of the job with say (and yes this is going to sound naive) a programmable robot?
Could be something they try out of hours.
slyall
There will be versions of the machine that automate more of the process. But they will cost money and require maintenance too look after and adjust.
I used to work a similar job[1] at a plastics factory. We had about 12 machines in the area I worked. Some machines automated remove stuff from the mold, some removing the excess, some putting though the leak tester. Each stage of automation was an additional thing that had to be configured and adjusted.
Often we'd only make an item for a shift or two. At one point the company bought a new machine (the size of a 2 car garage) that automated some more bits. The machine took 18 months of adjusting before it worked reliably.
[1] Blowmold, ranging from 750ml bottles, 5-20 litre jerry cans, sections of culvert pipe.
cadamsdotcom
> The machine took 18 months of adjusting before it worked reliably
That doesn’t tell the story of the overall ROI. After 18 months of shakiness were those folks able to go do other work? Did the work pay for itself on a 5 year timeline? 10 years? Achieving reliability is huge - did the company spin that for PR?
Izikiel43
> you do the same thing every minute for 8 hours a day in a hot and loud factory
Sounds like a robot should do it.
farceSpherule
The work on your line might "suck" but it is a good paying job with free benefits and requires no college degree, special trade school, or certification.
There are plenty of poorly qualified, undereducated Americans who can fill these low skill jobs.
There is nothing to fix. It is a job. It pays money. Not everyone has the ability to excel in a "career." They simply need a job.
And, no one can compete with China. All companies operating in China, regardless of ownership (state-owned, private, or foreign-owned), are subject to the same political influence. If the government tells a company to do something, the company does it. China also manipulates its currency as a means to drive its predominantly export-oriented economy.
thaack
Then tell me where these poorly qualified, undereducated Americans who can fill these low skill jobs are?
The business's biggest success with finding employees was getting in the good graces of the local probation officers who refer ex-cons to us, and that comes with its own set of problems.
Other than paying a premium for temps at a temp agency that's been the only way as of the last 5-10 years to get employees in the door. Normal applications are crickets.
SoftTalker
Raise the pay. I get that at a small scale that might not be possible, but if it isn't that just means they don't have a viable business, at least in their current location.
farceSpherule
If you are paying people $7.25 an hour, then perhaps you deserve to go out of business.
Line work in the conditions you describe should be paying $16 to $26 per hour, with an average of about $18 per hour.
GlibMonkeyDeath
So, if retailers are resisting raising prices, who will pay the increased costs? Domestically sourced goods can be no more than 55% more expensive (otherwise the imported goods would be cheaper), but we can be sure that locally sourced goods will be priced as close to the full 55% as possible (and as the article points out, some locally manufactured items are probably never going to be less than the overseas cost, even including the tariff tax.)
Now take a look at Walmart's margins https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/WMT/walmart/profit.... Their gross margin is ~25%, with a net around 2%. Even if Walmart decides to eat the tariff cost out of patriotic duty, anywhere near a ~50% hit to supply chain costs would put them out of business. Heck, even a few percent would require a huge business restructuring, if it were even possible.
So prices are going to be higher - it's a given. In the short-medium term, the tariff tax is simply a large regressive transfer of tax obligation onto consumers.
ToucanLoucan
[flagged]
lumost
At some point Americans became convinced that the process of organizing hundreds of billions of dollars in infrastructure and millions of people on the task of manufacturing products was “easy.”
50 years on, and fthe generation that knew how to manufacture is gone - their children never built up the same skills at the same scale. Their children’s children didn't bother to learn the STEM and Craft skills required to work at scale.
Restoring manufacture will be a generation away outside of “dark factories”
seanmcdirmid
Americans focused on other things: software, product development, high tech higher value stuff and so on. Our success there might not have been possible without the rise in manufacturing in China to actually make the things designed in the USA, we definitely didn’t have the population to do both, even if we did have the money.
But now we are in a hard spot because China has been focusing on STEM while we’ve been importing a lot of our STEM needs (from places like India and China). China is now in a position to do both, and they have the population, skills, and resources to do both.
toomuchtodo
I liken this to hanging off a cliff by multiple ropes/leads. Certainly, you can cut a few of them and still not fall, but eventually you'll cut enough rope that you'll plummet to your death. Americans need to feel the pain of poor policy, otherwise nothing will change, and there's almost no rope left to cut.
Spooky23
It's gone. It's the downside of the American vision of capitalism. We collectively flex in front of the mirror and tell ourselves that we are awesome, put light the room by setting the furniture on fire.
Reality is, as people have been pointing out for as long as I've been on this earth, the relentless focus on quarterly and current year fiscal has made the United States less competitive strategically.
I remember years ago a supplier came in to address an issue we had with defective parts in their intermediate supply chain. The VP dude was casually throwing out how all of their new parts get copied in days by their manufacturing partners, who share them with competitors, etc. In our case, a supplier was running a fraudulent third shift to make parts and threw in under-spec units as well. They seemed fine with it.
ToucanLoucan
> Their children’s children didn't bother to learn the STEM and Craft skills required to work at scale.
I mean it's less nobody learned and more the demand was gone. American companies sent manufacturing overseas because back then, it was cheaper, and America is unique among nations in that we can just print money^1 to buy things. The only manufacturing that's still solidly American is products that are too fragile/large for sea shipping at scale (we make a lot of cars in North America, but a lot of that's gone to Canada and Mexico) and anything related to the defense industry. And even then, those companies (like Boeing) are now being eaten from the inside by the same business parasites that ate everything else.
These problems all have solutions but we have to stop giving private businesses a free pass to do anything and everything to starve the government of tax revenue while stripmining the citizenry for every penny they can.
1: Not without risks and problems, but still, no other country on Earth can do this.
DragonStrength
That narrative is BS. Kids stopped going into CS in America because of the Dotcom bust. The number didn't recover until 2014. Driven in large part by the Great Recession encouraging more kids to go into STEM -- certainly my Land Grant school in the Deep South could barely keep up with the surge. Kids that did STEM recently? Worst entry-level job market we've maybe ever seen. But the kids who did a different major and likely have better short term prospects are the problem?
But that narrative certainly shifts any blame away from the winners in recent years and onto "flyover state" Americans. And now the same folks who told kids to learn to code want them learning woodshop? Come on.
tempodox
Nah, the following generation will have all of that, and more, done by “AI”. No need to learn anything anymore, except giving voice commands to a computer. /s
rluhar
Great post - I recommend reading "Apple in China" to get a great insight into the how the Chinese manufacturing industry (and economy) has developed over the last 30 years.
ToucanLoucan
I have! It's a great book. I don't work in that field at all but I find industrial infrastructure and manufacturing business endlessly fascinating. I wish I worked in it tbh because then I'd have an excuse to visit Shenzhen. It's on my bucket list.
nine_k
Another advantage a Chinese factory may have is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/996_working_hour_system
insane_dreamer
996 was more a white collar phenomenon than a blue collar one.
insane_dreamer
> China literally half a century of heavy investment on the part of it's government in that infrastructure and in it's citizens, and we can't even make bike paths here anymore
This is the part that the vast majority of people don't realize. China's manufacturing advantage did not just happen spontaneously and organically.
psunavy03
> Boomers screaming and shitting themselves to death about socialism.
At some point this stops becoming an actual thing, and just becomes an internet boogeyman.
ToucanLoucan
As someone who regularly participates in local politics I assure you, this is incredibly still a thing. Every last measure receives vehement criticism from the older cohort of our city because they're certain it will mean a tax increase. We have to explain over, and over, and over again that the projects we're voting on were budgeted in over a year ago, and that money is already allocated.
Most accept this. Some stay mad but just quietly vote no (and are usually outvoted). A minority say if we have money for this then we should be cutting taxes.
Like it's stereotypical I grant you but stereotypes aren't made up in an office somewhere, Severance style. An unfortunate number of the old among us want nothing going to anyone who isn't them, and I fully accept, an amount of that is coming from people who are living on a fixed income, and I have empathy for that. A lot of it is also just coming from people who have sour grapes about only having a 17 foot boat instead of the 19 foot one they wanted, and see our parks and beautification projects as the reason they couldn't have it. Not only is it often BS, it's just anti-social. Like I'm sorry you're apparently too out of shape to enjoy a bike trail, but we have a whole ton of other people who aren't, and putting every measure of improving our city on a menu for you to select which ones you're comfortable paying for is simply not practical.
My entire life my taxes have gone to pay for things that don't benefit me. It's just part of living in a society.
freeone3000
Maybe in another 20 years. We were putting in an elevated light rail system above the highway, but no, it got blocked everywhere outside of the downtown core because “it looked ugly”. Nevermind that it was over a highway.
1970-01-01
I think Walmart is too big to fail at this point. If the gold standard for brick and mortar 'low prices' needs some restructuring, then it's time for the house of straw economy to finally see the big bad wolf and go running for the hills.
toomuchtodo
Walmart will just raise prices and their customers will eat the increased prices through reduced purchasing power or going without, while complaining but doing nothing else (because they have no leverage to do otherwise).
https://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-price-increases-item... | https://archive.today/4Kcqf
macartain
or those same customers may elect the next, even-more-extreme, ill-informed idiotic wingnut that comes along with a pat theory about bringing industry back on-shore in 4 years by tossing out foreigners/applying ludicrous tariffs/whatever... increased prices affect politics - which affects everything.
aeonik
SmarterEveryday is trying this right now too.
He details all the challenges, and it's a pretty good watch.
The grill brush they made is a bit on the expensive side, but I bought one.
dgb23
What immediately sprung out to me is that Amazon isn't held accountable for selling goods that directly violate patent laws, which should protect small business and reward innovation.
The current US administration claims to be concerned about domestic manufacturing and so on, but hasn't even mentioned this issue at all.
AmVess
I was going to manufacture a line of useful products here in the USA, but decided against it. I'd release the product, then a month later counterfeits would be on Amazon for 10% of the price.
As a small operation, there are 0 affordable resources at my disposal to fight IP theft.
bluGill
Right, as a small operation patents are rarely worth your bother. You might eventually win in court with a patent, but by then your company is bankrupt. Just make the thing, and hope that you can develop a good name and reputation for quality that keeps you afloat, even if you only are 1% of the market, that can be a lot of money. Avoid selling on Amazon where you are more likely to be noticed by cloners, at least until you already have a business.
0cf8612b2e1e
I thought Walmart was infamous for making a house brand of competitor products.
nottorp
The US textile industry was built on ignoring UK patents though :)
loudmax
The 19th century US cotton industry was built on far worse crimes than patent infringement.
kubectl_h
Similarly: though William Jarvis wasn't the first American to import Merino sheep, he was the most successful because he was able to utilize an ongoing war in Spain to circumvent around the Merino export ban in the early 1800s and get a ton of them over here, too. He was even a diplomat to Spain and probably knew better, but did it anyway.
warkdarrior
So one past illegal activity allows future illegal activities?
throw0101d
> What immediately sprung out to me is that Amazon isn't held accountable for selling goods that directly violate patent laws, which should protect small business and reward innovation.
(IANAL) This may fall under a DCMA-like concept where sites are not responsible for 'user content'. The 'user' in question is the vendor and their 'profile' of sellable items is the content. Similar to how eBay is not (?) responsible for the items put up for sale.
(Not saying this is (morally) right, just describing the situation. I would really like to see some accountability as well.)
kevin_thibedeau
Which is funny because he could drive a stake through Bezos' heart with some sweet FTC rule making.
MangoToupe
As far as I can tell, consumers have never benefited from patents, and they seem blatantly anti-competitive. Perhaps if only "small business" (whatever that actually denotes) were allowed to hold them it might make sense, but we all know that's not even remotely how patents are wielded today.
Personally I strongly prefer knockoffs. Same quality, but cheaper.
EasyMark
well innovation is where it helps consumer. Innovating new products over time, patents give them some runway to make a profit assuming one can defend those patents. why innovate the next iphone equivalent if someone is just going to steal your idea and make it in china for 1/4 the price
throw0101d
> si=TP1ez9tIEkpEu1Xf
PSA: the si parameter, along with pp, are for tracking purposes. Consider trimming them when doing a copy-paste if possible.
tootie
I watched this and my cynical takeaway was he was trying to make an appeal to emotion. Why buy from China when we can support the good people of Alabama? Their elected senator just called me a rat. Why should I support Alabama over China? They both seem like foreign adversaries to me. At least China is making a sincere effort to reduce their carbon emissions.
glasss
I thought it was a good video, but similarly I had an issue with how he discussed the loss of the skilled trades and professions in the US. He did a good job highlighting that these jobs are rare, don't pay well and are important, but he made it seem like we all just accidentally stopped investing in local manufacturing, or that we just let those skills erode. Leaders at these manufacturing companies moved things over seas, laid off the skilled workers, busted up unions, and overall sold off this skill set in order to sell cheaper products and make more money for themselves.
throw0101d
> Why buy from China when we can support the good people of Alabama? Their elected senator just called me a rat. Why should I support Alabama over China?
He just happens to be in Alabama, but the principle applies to someone in Massachusetts or Hawaii as well.
davidee
Same. Got one as a gift for someone.
There was a book making the rounds recently that also details some of the discussion around skills being the thing the west exported: https://appleinchina.com/
The author readily admits in a podcast that while Apple plays a big part in the story it's a clickbait title because no one would buy a book titled something along the lines of "supply chains and China."
Decent (if superficial) interview here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAj9zB4vaZc
jmchuster
The interview he does on the Odd Lots podcast is a lot more in-depth, and I found it a great listen:
hnaccount_rng
It's an interesting video, on the other hand it's also 80$ a piece. And I'm pretty sure they do not recoup R&D with those prices on reasonable compensation rates...
Lu2025
Corporate R&D is a tax write off per section 174.
hnaccount_rng
Not sure if that does help you though. A business that only exists because it doesn't have to pay taxes kind of shouldn't exist in the first place. At least not as a business
Izikiel43
> is a tax write off per section 174.
Was. I'm not sure if the new bill restores it.
numbsafari
How does it compare to a wet rag with tongs?
pirates
One of the main issues they raise is that the bristles on common brushes can be left behind and are difficult to pick out of food, so the wet rag probably exceeds expectations in that way.
beeforpork
Since I read about bristles in food after cleaning the grill, I've always been checking for remnants after brushing. I never found any. And I wonder: how are those remnants supposed to get into your food? They are metal, so don't they just fall down into the grill, if any break off? Maybe glued into old fat and other gunk? But you want that gone, too, right? Also, don't you use a rag to clean off other dirt, and wouldn't that make sure that bristles are gone?
Is this a myth or actually a problem? Some commenters do call it fear-mongering here, so what is it?
I also think I never read anything about this except in US media, so does this not happen in other countries? Different brushes? Different cleaning habits?
potato3732842
Grill brush bristles in your food are the "they went on a vacation and brought back flesh eating bacteria" of the culinary world. The fear-mongering greatly exceeds the danger.
Edit: There are approximately 130 ER visits per year[1] on account of grill brushes. Mowing your lawn (something else people do on about the same frequency in the summer) is far more likely get you, as are god knows how many other things.
[1] https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/ama-press-releases/ama...
Balgair
Or scrunched up tin foil at ~$2 / 100 ft.
Look, I love Destin, watch all his stuff recommend it all the time.
But I'm never going to buy this product, it's just too expensive for what it does compared to the alternatives.
And I know he knows that. He's clearly at least 'not stupid'.
So something isn't squaring with this.
BobaFloutist
Some people care about how reasonable a price seems even if they can easily afford something, because it's important to them to feel like they're getting a good deal or at least not getting taken advantage of. They're happy to accept some level of inconvenience or discomfort if the savings are big enough, even if they don't particularly need the money
Some people care more about getting exactly the right thing, even if the value proposition is weaker. They'll pay significantly more for apparently trivial differences, because they don't want to buy something they're not happy with; they're spending money anyway and why put up with something they don't want if they can afford something they do want?
Neither of these people are strictly unreasonable.
ben_w
> So something isn't squaring with this.
Lots of smart people get hooked onto extremely specific solutions that aren't even improvements.
I saw it in software development with many things (VIPER and SwiftUI both reduce development velocity compared to MVC and old-school Interface Builder); I've seen it with Musk trying to do tunnels even when roads would be cheaper and safer; there's also (infamously) Juicero; and in the UK in the 80s there was the Sinclair C5.
That said, is this really an example of that?
Myself, I barely use my electric barbecue, so I don't know the best way to clean things (it's not yet become dirty enough to bother cleaning). But I have seen the brushes he's complaining about, and I have not previously considered using tinfoil, so it's not a completely crazy idea that people might want a better brush.
jjice
I was about to link the same thing - excellent video. It was very insightful and a bit scary to see just how hard it was to get seemingly simple manufacturing done in the US now.
rayiner
As recently as the 1980s, 70% of domestic clothing was made in the U.S., including by brands like Gap and JC Penny. Did Americans have an impoverished standard of living in the 1980s? Is the cheap, disposable, foreign made “fast fashion” we have today better?
dpcx
If you watch [this Climate Town video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CkgCYPe68Q), then absolutely not, the disposable fast fashion we have today is not better. It's cheaper, but it's not higher quality, it requires trans-continental shipping, and it absolutely gets thrown away in ridiculous amounts.
Overall, it's worse in just about every metric other than "I can get this fun shirt online at 2am for $6."
FuriouslyAdrift
And helped spread microsplastics to every corner of the Earth
insane_dreamer
> Did Americans have an impoverished standard of living in the 1980s?
Absolutely not.
What we have today is the ability to buy/own tons more "stuff", much of which is cheap junk. That does _not_ translate into better quality of life.
cm2012
Yes, if you forced 2025 americans to live like americans did in the 1980s there would be mass riots. Quality of life has gone up signicantly in many ways.
null
burningChrome
> Did Americans have an impoverished standard of living in the 1980s (compared to now)?
Nope.
I had plenty of hand me downs, but the majority of stuff I owned lasted for years and years, and I beat TF out of my clothes; so getting three or four years out of a pair of jeans was an achievement. I remember being constantly upset with my parents because when I would ask to get something new, they would tell me I had to wear out the stuff I already had first.
So at the time, paying more for a pair of Levi's or Nike's were worth it because they were built to last for years, not months like they are now. I was in college during the late 90's and even then I had three pairs of shoes that lasted my entire 4 years in college.
Back then stuff was durable and was meant to last for years. The "fast fashion" and "disposable fashion" trends essentially ended monopolies that brands had because kids weren't wearing stuff for more than a few months before discarding it or having it fall apart so they can wear the latest thing.
tootie
The textile industry in the US was synonymous with worker abuse and sweatshop conditions. The Triangle Shirtwaist fire is the canonical example. Heavily dependent on immigrant labor.
rayiner
Well into the 1990s, we made shirts and canned soup in Oregon, a place that had very few immigrants at the time. My wife's dad's family came here before the American revolution and he worked at a Heinz soup plant until NAFTA.
lysace
That fire was in 1911.
tptacek
This is an answerable question: the median American household allocates 2-3% less of its household income to clothing in 2025 than it did in the 1980s. That's about $2000, for the median household.
abe_m
But now both adults need to work to afford a detached house, and the labour participation rate of middle aged men is at an all time low. So, the answer is probably no. I'm sure lots of people would pay and extra $2k for clothing if housing, food, health care, and cars were at similar ratio to wages from the 1980s.
tptacek
The housing cost thing is generally a canard (houses cost more, but people live in much larger houses than they did before --- cost burden changed, but so did preferences) but that's completely besides the point of whether people in the US do or don't benefit from more efficient clothing production. The jobs supporting inefficient clothing production were not holding up the economy.
soco
Today it's also the desire of the customers, as pushed by social media, to follow a fashion changing almost every month. You didn't buy in the 80s stuff to be obsoleted in a few months. And because most of the people cannot afford every few months a new wardrobe made of (halfway) quality items, today's taste requires fast fashion garbage. So here we are, and we can get back to sanity only when we get rid of the influencer-led economy, good luck with that.
protimewaster
I'm amazed how much of the internet economy has turned out to be advertising. People complain about ads when they watch TV, but they'll go out of their way to spend hours watching ads on social media. And lots of kids dream about being an influencer, basically an advertiser, for their work.
Cthulhu_
One reason why I have no interest in going to facebook anymore is that the vast majority of people's social media activity on there nowadays is advertising... something. People showing their latest purchases, vacations, experiences, etc, all basically showing something they spent money on.
Lu2025
> the desire of the customers, as pushed by social media, to follow a fashion changing almost every month
A lot of it is top down, pushed onto customers by the industry. It's very hard to find timeless classics these days, we are given trendy bits that change every year to speed up obsolescence so they purposely look kitschy.
carlosjobim
The desire of costumers is to go well beyond psychotic measures in order to save the tiniest amount of money on a purchase, rather than purchase domestic or locally produced for a bit more expensive. And that applies almost worldwide, not only to Americans.
sokoloff
Plenty of people would buy domestic goods if they were “a bit more expensive”. I’d say 5% on a large ticket item or 15-20% on a small item would be “a bit”.
Rarely is “made in the USA” just a bit more expensive in my experience.
Barrin92
>Did Americans have an impoverished standard of living in the 1980s?
Yes. Ask some of your older relatives who remember that time how often they got hand-me-downs or patched old clothes up and compare it to the wardrobe of an average income American today.
dfxm12
This is not evidence for what you are saying. Handing down stuff, including clothes doesn't equate to poverty, sometimes the opposite. Better clothes also last longer. Check out the Sam Vimes theory of socioeconomic unfairness. To take this a little literally, for much of my young adulthood, I wore my dad's old snow boots, not because I was poor, but because they were too well made, even at an old age, not to use.
Choosing to buy more, cheaper, clothes is as much an example of consumerism, as anything else.
ndriscoll
That's not impoverished; it's just not wasteful. Half my kids' clothes are from Once Upon A Child, and most of my younger one's are hand-me-downs from the older one. For that matter, I'm wearing 20 year old gym shorts right now.
pyth0
Could this be due to how low quality many clothes are nowadays and they are simply not lasting long enough to become hand-me-downs?
Workaccount2
The fault is firmly with the consumer. People are addicted to cheap shit and consuming like crazy.
We had cheap clothes 10 years ago, then Shein and their ilk showed up with even cheaper clothes, and people flocked to them in droves.
And you can still buy good quality clothes, $120 shirts and $150 pants of good quality are readily available. But who wouldn't want to have 10 shirts and 5 pants instead?
Lu2025
This is correct. On average I go through a pair of jeans and a pair of hiking pants a year. 30 years ago I wore my dad's jeans quite a bit as a teenager, I remember even passing a driving test in them.
Cthulhu_
Perhaps, but if clothes are cheap, income is disposable and fashion is fast, why bother?
Other than jeans, shoes, socks and underwear, I haven't worn through or grown out of anything in forever, nothing to pass on really.
That said, the textile collection and resale industry is huge; stuff gets sorted, parts go to secondhand shops and charity, part gets baled up and exported, parts get recycled, etc. Same with electronics, it ends up in low-wage countries in Africa and south-Asia where there's thousands of people processing it.
fn-mote
What? It’s the 80s not the 50s. Hand me downs might have been a cultural thing, but “average” people weren’t wearing them out of necessity.
I think you’re conflating a culture that did not see everything as disposable with a lack of wealth.
The hard stats since I looked them up:
Median income increases by 1/3 in inflation adjusted (“real”) dollars from late 80s until 2020. The country is definitely more wealthy.
rayiner
Hand-me-downs are great. My youngest has some hand-me-downs he got from his older brother who got them from my neighbor’s son. Your kids don’t need new clothes.
hammock
There is a mattress company called Tuft and Needle. They started right at the early beginning of the mattress-in-a-box trend, but offered a unique product. For the first six months of operation, they made a Japanese-inspired cotton mattress filled with wool batting and was made in the USA. Before I had a chance to order one though, they had already pivoted away from that unique product (that doesn’t exist even today) and were dropshipping the same generic PU foam mattresses made in China as everyone else, with very little change to their website even. I was sad
justonceokay
T&N has such a great product but it was one of those things that failed because the innovation/disruption had no market.
I personally believe that the Japanese futon mat is the healthiest way to sleep, and after you get used to it even extra-firm mattresses are soupy and uncomfortable. Downside though is that it is very difficult to be comfortable on if you are significantly overweight, and it’s a pretty hard sell for couples unless they are both bought into the idea beforehand.
From my personal experience of sleeping on one for the last decade, not having a bed with a mattress on it is beyond the pale. I have a nice townhome that is well decorated. But when people see my bed, they assume I have a health issue, some kind of homelessness trauma, I’m a weeb (definitely not), or that I’m too poor to own a bed. They assume that they could never be comfortable on it, as a pillowy mattress on a high frame is associated in people’s minds with high luxury, angels with harps, royalty, and sexual intrigue. Sleeping on a mat on the floor is associated with camping, homelessness, destitution, and failure.
To each their own I guess
mymythisisthis
I think not only has manufacturing gone away, as well as the supply chain, but also choice. The moment you want something slightly different than what is sold in the typical big box stores, it's either non-existent, or costs a fortune.
FuriouslyAdrift
AFAIK Nolah mattresses are made in Arizona
y-c-o-m-b
We bought one and it lasted almost exactly 10 years. When it came time to replace it, I was also sad to discover that it was a short-lived item and they moved on to something else. We ended up going with Sleep Number because that was the firmest mattress I could find delivered to me in a reasonable amount of time.
ArtemZ
Have you looked at Avocado mattresses? They state they make them in California.
hammock
I have. Definitely one of the better options out there. I recently got a mygreenmattress which are latex and made in Chicago. Still would like a wool one.
Everyone already knows this but the mattress industry is absurdly opaque and most reviews are fake
PaulHoule
Textile manufacturing is the absolute bottom of the barrel. The town I grew up in (Manchester, NH) had the largest textile plant at the beginning of WWI but it was out of business by 1933. The industry moved first to the American South and by the time they'd paid the loans of the factories it moved again overseas.
bluGill
Textiles are something that we cannot automate with current technology. We know how to automate plastics and metals. You can buy off the shelf injection molding machines (3d printers too, but they are rarely used in production). You can buy off the shelf machines to cut and form metals. Even things like steel mills are automated with custom equipment. But sewing two pieces of cloth together is beyond current automation, and thus there is a lot of manual labor.
In the US (and Europe) manual labor is expensive, so to make something you need a lot of automation. Once it is automated the next step is enough volume to pay for the automation (which needs expensive engineers).
Of course maybe this will change. Basic textiles were one of the first things we automated 300+ years ago, but we are only able to go from a bunch of cotton to a bolt of fabric today. As I write this making a shirt (or dog bed as this story) seems beyond what we can automate. Maybe a little investment will fix that, maybe not. I'm not an automation engineer so I can't tell you how solvable the problems are.
PaulHoule
Robots that can fold towels are an active research area
https://www.npr.org/2022/10/22/1130552239/robot-folding-laun...
Cthulhu_
Robots that can fold anything might be useful in an industrial cleaning or textile manufacturing setting, but it would compete with humans who can do that in seconds. For towels, there's specialized machines (and have been for years): https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=towel+folding+m...
bluGill
There are a lot of active research areas. So far progress hasn't been happening. I don't know if it is because the problem is unsolvable (likely), or we are not investing enough into it to solve them (also likely).
cratermoon
towel folding doesn't seem like a step towards automating clothing, any more than building a tall ladder is a step towards ladders tall enough to reach the moon. Anyway https://ruthtillman.com/post/all-clothing-is-handmade/
tpm
> Of course maybe this will change.
It's possibly already changing? 3D-knitting (of shoe uppers is what I have noticed) can make some sewing redundant. How far that can be taken remains to be seen.
ah there are already sweaters made using this technology it seems: https://www.oliver-charles.com/pages/3d-knitting
missedthecue
Textile manufacturing is basically just a derivative of electricity and labor costs. There isn't much more too it, and per sq meter, it's extremely cheap to ship product around the world.
Textile mills in Bangladesh are able to pay $0.025 US cents per kwh, and factory laborers can be employed for about $150 a month. From their main port to the US west coast, when sent by container ship, costs about $0.10 per sq m. There is no universe where anyone else can compete. It's not within America's comparative advantage anymore.
DebtDeflation
It's wild to me how this movement wants to bring back all of the lowest paid, least value add, lowest skill jobs back but is totally ok with shipping highly paid, highest value add, highest skill jobs off to India. I understand that it's all a grift, the marks only care about the former jobs, and those jobs are never actually coming back, but still.
xiphias2
There are countries besides USA and China. It was just terrible geopolitics decision for US to depend on 1 country for imports instead of keeping the power balance between countries of the world.
donatj
The problem has become less about cheap labor and more about general know how. China simply leads the world in manufacturing know how.
bluGill
While true, that know-how is misleading. There is a lot of know-how in the US - the US makes more than every before, which means the know-how is still here! It is just focused on the things we already make and do well on, so often you can't get at it.
Workaccount2
>There is a lot of know-how in the US
As someone who works in US manufacturing, let me qualify that by saying "There is a lot of know-how in senior citizens in the US". I really cannot overstate how me, a guy in his late 30's, is consistently the youngest engineer by decades when doing site visits.
franktankbank
> the US makes more than every before
How true is this? Is this financial sleight-of-hand? We assemble the parts after the hard part was already done?
ForestCritter
And slave labour. Nobody cares that their cheap products are the fruit of slave labour.
a4isms
Louis CK deserves credit for calling this out in a brilliant bit:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rl-1jc1oDRk
(Yes, this video is framed and has Italian subtitles, but all the others I found do weird things with panning and clipping to evade censorship filters, and I believe that his body language is an important part of the delivery.)
farceSpherule
This is because they are the largest thieves of intellectual property on the planet. They steal everything because they cannot do it themselves.
convolvatron
that _may_ have been true 20 years ago, but at this point they are driving
_heimdall
I have to assume it wasn't a concerted effort to depend mostly on China for imports. Companies are each making the best financial decision for themselves and China turned out to be the more competitive option most of the them.
piker
I've always understood China's currency manipulation to play an initial role in making it an attractive source of commodity products.
hearsathought
China was an attractive source for the same reason vietnam and india are today. Large, young, disciplined, literate and organized population with low wages and an accomodating political elite.
All currencies are manipulated. It's a meaningless statement.
ImHereToVote
Why can't a sovereign state control their fiscal policy? Who should decide what the value of the Renminbi should be if not the PBC?
hayst4ck
What we see is exactly what Uber and Lyft effectively did. China subsidized manufacturing at the cost of their citizens, but in doing so destroyed much of the competition, giving them a monopoly like position in industrial manufacturing cemented by a mastery of economies of scale, which can now be used to exert global power.
Any country which did not abuse their citizens or subsidize their businesses became noncompetitive.
And why would you use old school taxis when uber/lyft were offering $5 rides in a 7x7mile area, and how could old taxi companies compete when they are forced to compete with people not bound by market forces?
dotancohen
Right, that's the difference between a centralised economy and a free market. These thin-vieled calls for a centralised, planned economy (people of my generation had another word for it) are getting more common and in more places.
harimau777
Advocating for a centralised economy isn't actually common on the left. Most people advocate for Nordic inspired democratic socialism or social democracy. A fair number advocate for various forms of anarchism (e.g. worker owned collectives).
Advocates for a Soviet style centralised economy exist, but they aren't common.
the__alchemist
You have missed something: It's not feasible to compete with China on price and availability, compared to any other country. Challenge: Try designing something, and figuring out how to get the parts. Or, try to have a custom circuit board made. You will find the difficulty goes way up for countries that aren't China.
If that isn't enough, imagine you are choosing Hard mode by sourcing non-China, and your competition chose Easy mode.
voidUpdate
Custom PCBs can be gotten from Aisler, based in the Netherlands
sokoloff
I haven’t quoted Aisler, but I did talk to three or four US-based PCB/PCBA houses for a hobby project I was working on that ended up selling around 100 units. The US houses were 20-50x JLC/PCBWay at prototype volume and 10-25x at low volume.
Their proto assembly turn times were only a day better. Unless something has to be done in the US for some specific reason (export controls or contractual reasons), I don’t see how to justify doing it on-shore.
progbits
I live in EU and like the idea, both as support for local economy and lower environment impact from shipping.
I've tried aisler instead of jlc/pcbway twice and I regret both orders. For more money I got the boards later, of worse quality and with bad customer support experience when one of my orders was lost.
Sorry but they simply are not anywhere close to the chinese options.
all2
Or OshPark out of Oregon, USA. If you need kiting and assembly of the board there are plenty of board houses on the West Coast that will do it for you.
dgb23
Is it geopolitics that is at fault here or rather corporations?
I think Coca Cola might be a counter example if we look at how they procure their sugar.
verdverm
The thinking at the time was that China would turn into a democracy by liberalizing the economy.
mathiaspoint
Mexico has been cheaper for a while now. My understanding is that shipping from China was subsidized somehow and that's a big part of why it's still cheaper overall.
freddie_mercury
"White House spokesperson Kush Desai said the Trump administration remains committed to reviving U.S. manufacturing"
Irrelevant since the point is to grow US manufacturing, not manufacturing in "countries besides USA and China".
werdnapk
Isn't this how capitalism works? What the USA claims to be the best at?
giantg2
I get that this is an example, but I'd like to see other examples. An expensive niche dog bed, niche beverage, etc doesn't seem very representative of the economy. If it is, that's concerning.
horsawlarway
I guess a counterview here:
These are the sorts of things small companies can actually make and be successful making.
Are they representative of the economy as a whole? Maybe not - the majority of that spend is going to go towards housing (~35%), transportation (~17%), basic food (~13%), and (somewhat surprisingly) insurance/pensions (~12.5%). Those are all incredibly competitive.
High barrier to entry, legally challenging (lots of bureaucratic red tape and hoops), already dominated by large companies with economy of scale in their favor.
So that essentially leaves niche, high margin, products as the ONLY products a small company can competitively make.
So it you want to be a small company selling a physical item... this is the market you tend to play within. You make an expensive niche/luxury product with a limited appeal but higher margins.
We already get plenty of news about how the large corporations say they are going to respond (prices will go up).
bluGill
And on the third hand, those are things that you cannot buy off the shelf machines to automate. Sewing is an active area of research, but it still needs as much labor as in 1930. Beverage packing is automated but a lot of it is custom machines so you need a lot of up front money. (though it appears their limits were containers - al is made in the US so I'm surprised they cannot order the alloy they need).
giantg2
It's probably material cost and not the actual manufacturing. The aluminum smelting industry in the US has been in decline (and for other metals too). It was also only 4 cents per can, a 1% increase in end unit price. But how it it affecting the products that can be made with off the shelf machines? How about in sectors other than consumer discretionary, like consumer staples?
giantg2
I'm just saying, every single example is a consumer discretionary item. Maybe they could pick some examples from other sectors. We already know consumer discretionary spending is a weak sector and will get weaker with tariffs.
mrweasel
That's my thinking as well, these are items where if they cross a certain price point consumers can easily opt to just not get them. They aren't even really luxury items, they are unnecessary luxury items.
A better example I've seen is machinery, like construction equipment. Some contractor on YouTube points out that a Chinese skid steer is every bit as capable as a US made, but that 25 - 33% of the price. If he had to buy US made equipment he wouldn't have a business.
SoftTalker
Yes but they are bullshit products. Dog beds? A dog is happy with an old blanket. "Stress-reducing carbonated beverages" no comment. A $65 paper day planner?
These are things that nobody needs. They are the poster children for mindless consumerism, feasible only because they are made in overseas sweatshops.
jayd16
It's so frustrating that policies to subsidized growth in a targeted way (paid for by our progressive tax system) are ignored and we're stuck with these wide impact regressive policies. As described they're poor policy, and as implemented they're simply a tool for shake downs.
fnordpiglet
I’m guessing most people these days don’t remember when everything moved to China to begin with. People blamed it on globalization but the trend existed long before that because Americans didn’t produce a quality product. “Made in the USA” became synonymous with poor quality and high prices after the corporate mavens of the 1980’s hollowed out manufacturing for quality along with the factory workers pension plans. It’s not like America didn’t do it to itself - globalization just allowed specialization to set in and efficiency to dominate. Chinese manufacturing struck a middle ground between very high quality in Germany and Japan and very low quality in America then scaled it up and out to ensure a total vertical integration. For segments of the supply chain that were inefficient the state assumed the losses to ensure an ever increasing capture of the end to end ability to produce in an entirely integrated regional manufacturing center. I think instead of getting our panties in a wad and wishing for the 1950’s to return - which weren’t that great to begin with despite our rose colored glasses - we need to lean into our strengths and specialized role. The question though of what are people to do who are “displaced” by globalization, automation, and now AI has never been answered and leaves us where we are today. I don’t have the answer either. But it’s become more destabilizing than I imagined as I saw things unfolding.
OgsyedIE
One of the biggest shocks to the competitiveness of American labor is cost disease. Because they share a currency with high value-add services clusters like the Bay Area their prices are dragged upwards by the productivity gains of unrelated sectors, in an analogous mechanism to gentrification.
rahimnathwani
Cost disease isn't driven by a shared currency, but by a common labor market.
When hyper-productive sectors, say, tech in the Bay Area, start paying top dollar, everyone else in the same talent pool eventually needs to follow suit.
Even industries with stagnant labour productivity, like K-12 education, have to hike their wages to attract and retain staff. They can't offset these higher costs with efficiency gains, and that's where the "disease" kicks in.
If you think this is caused by a common currency, consider labour costs in developing countries which use the US dollar. Do those costs go up when labour productivity in the Bay Area goes up?
Workaccount2
You are both right.
A valuable dollar kills exports and high paying sectors brain-drain lower paying ones.
aleph_minus_one
Not everybody has the capabilities that are necessary for the tech industry. So do your industrial production somewhere else in the USA where additionally the cost of living is low.
franktankbank
What are our strengths/specializations in your opinion?
My main concern as a millennial, who rightly put didn't witness this transformation, is that by continuing down a path of fewer and fewer specializations we get pinched off completely.
gsf_emergency_2
Reposted because
1)you might have been too young to have read it (1992)
2)outsourcing and trade balance was in the full quote
>When it gets down to it — talking trade balances here — once we've brain-drained all our technology into other countries, once things have evened out, they're making cars in Bolivia and microwave ovens in Tadzhikistan and selling them here — once our edge in natural resources has been made irrelevant by giant Hong Kong ships and dirigibles that can ship North Dakota all the way to New Zealand for a nickel — once the Invisible Hand has taken away all those historical inequities and smeared them out into a broad global layer of what a Pakistani brickmaker would consider to be prosperity — y'know what? There's only four things we do better than anyone else:
music
movies
microcode (software)
high-speed pizza delivery
--Snow Crash,1992
franktankbank
Sorry, I'm not sure the relevance of a fiction from 30+ years ago. I know I sound like a dick but seriously why should I care about it?
Esophagus4
Fortunately, there are still plenty: financial services / capital markets, tech, biotech / pharma, media / entertainment, e-commerce, higher ed.
Obviously, there are lots of players in those categories, but the U.S. is at or near top of the pack there. We just happen to be optimizing for the wrong thing right now.
I heard a columnist say, incredulously, “China wants our financial services industry, and we want their manufacturing industry”
franktankbank
> China wants our financial services industry, and we want their manufacturing industry
Which one is easier to nab?
wiredfool
Music, movies, microcode and high speed pizza delivery.
dotancohen
Don't forget spaceflight. The US (well, SpaceX) dominates in both manned and unmanned cost to orbit and time to orbit.
dylan604
You say movies while a sibling comment mentioned media. However, more and more movies are not shot in the USA. Productions have been moving out of Hollywood for a really long time, and some of it is in other states, but more and more are leaving the US altogether. This is why Trump shot off that late night tweet/truth about placing tariffs on movies made outside the US. The only thing the US still has on movies is the mystique of Hollywood. The ability to shoot a film is not unique to the US at all
like_any_other
> What are our strengths/specializations in your opinion?
Not static. The parent post reminds us that "Made in USA" meant low quality. But so did "Made in China". These things change, but if the national-level policy is "let the market figure it out" (the polar opposite of China's approach), they don't change for the better.
AnimalMuppet
And before that, "Made in Japan" meant cheap junk, even within my lifetime.
skeezyboy
>is that by continuing down a path of fewer and fewer specializations we get pinched off completely. you exist on americas economic downslope, sadly. an ever declining standard of living in a post manufacturing economy. china and everyone after can just copy your progress and basically be America in its boom days
PaulHoule
Let’s see.. higher ed, which Trump is trying to eliminate.
franktankbank
Come on Paul. I hope that's not the one and only. Without raw experience how useful is the higher ed?
potato3732842
The institution that created all the people who told us that globalization would make us all richer and the world freer when it seems to have done the opposite on a timeline just barely longer than the careers of those people while that industry goes on to severely lighten the pockets of every subsequent generation?
From where I'm sitting it looks like the bully finally made his way around to picking on someone who had it coming.
HK-NC
How bad was the American stuff?? "Made in china" has always meant garbage in my country.
bluGill
All over the map. There were a lot of high quality brands that in the 1980s reduced quality trying to compete on price, and those earned a bad reputation over time. There are a lot of brands that remain the same high quality (or more likely better) that they had all along that are still going strong - however those brands do not try to compete on price and now are very expensive.
Another thing foreign makers did was be more flexible to needs. Some great brands refused to reduce quality, but they were so focused on quality at low prices that they were not responsible to needs. They started making things in batches which reduced costs but if you want a different model you had to wait for that batch. If you have to order something a year in advance while Taiwan can get it to you in a couple months (including shipping via boat!) for some that mattered.
Foreign manufactures often did innovate more as well. Sometimes features on the foreign product were enough better (for some definition of better) as to be important for your needs.
Note that for every example above you can find a company in the US that has been doing exactly that "bad thing" and they have survived against foreign competition. Every product is different, with different needs. The real failure is always not recognizing correctly what is the correct path for you. Often there is more than one "correct path" mixed in with the bad, but you can only choose one. Sometimes a competitor choosing one path fills the niche of that path and if you choose the same both of you will fail.
lemoncookiechip
>“Made in the USA” became synonymous with poor quality and high prices.
This. It's like everyone collectively forgot. If that time period had the internet meme culture of today, “Made in the USA” would've become one the same way "Made in China" did.
Capitalism wreaked havoc on quality goods, while prices skyrocketed. Then when given the chance, they all packed up shop of their own free will to create even cheaper goods while politicians did nothing to stop it, and in-fact incentivized it.
Now we blame those countries for "taking away" manufacturing, when it was the greedy capitalistic US company CEOs, shareholders and US politicians who did it, while those countries simply capitalized on the opportunity and built themselves up.
dylan604
The biggest push of “Made in the USA” that I remember was from Walmart back in the 80s. They were fighting the stigma of selling Chinese goods. So the cheap/poorly made products with that label was fitting. Eventually, even Wallyworld gave up on it and just leaned into the Chinese made products while they offered lower prices because they knew in the end customers only cared about price. The “Made in USA” became a meme back then with people joke the “Made in USA” labels were made in China.
The point is, people say they don’t like Chinese made goods with one side of their mouth while the other side is saying they don’t really care at all as they continue shopping and purchasing these Chinese goods. Walmart and Amazon really laid the groundwork to the point that the SHEIN and Temus of the world happened. Consumers just don’t care about any other than price
superultra
It’s not just too expensive. We need to seriously ask ourselves do we want too, at all, even?
My dad worked in a steel mill all his life so that me and my siblings didn’t have to. We’re he and the other guys at the plant proud of their work? Absolutely. Does nearly everyone wish their kids would do something else? Absolutely.
Industrialism has ipso facto become the soup du jour for thr agrarian myth. The reality is that it’s long, hard, relentless, menial labor. It’s also terrible for just living in general. My dad basically turned the lights off on a steel plant. That was 20 years ago and the land it was on will be unusable for even landfills for another 100 years. It was on a river and the river still smells like chemicals, and fish routinely die when passing through that area due to chemical runoff from the land.
So, I’m sorry, why do we want that here (let alone anywhere)?
I’m not saying that I don’t complain about my work from home job or that there aren’t negative effects but good luck weighing me getting carpal tunnel or taking anxiety meds to the stuff that industrial labor does to your body and our living environments.
deltarholamda
>We’re he and the other guys at the plant proud of their work? Absolutely. Does nearly everyone wish their kids would do something else? Absolutely.
Most office work is not terribly satisfying. It turns out that work is work. And while working in AC with a coffee maker is "better" than sweating it out over a crucible, the drudgery is the same.
I spent some time with a large group of teenagers at a summer camp where the kids do a lot of the work, including activity scheduling and such. I worked in the cafeteria kitchen, which was hot, hard work. But the kids that were doing the administration kept coming over to offer to help: mop, sweep, serve food, whatever. I tried to take a mop bucket away from one of them, and she said "I've been staring at spreadsheets all day, I want to do something."
It's not 1850 anymore; we don't have to have industry be dehumanizing quasi-slave labor. If we decide to, we can make things in America again without Triangle Shirtwaist-style horrors.
superultra
You’re not wrong on most of your points - and I’m not denying the value of hard work. And I’m also well aware of the drudgery of office work.
That said, have you worked in the kind of factory that will come back? I did a summer stint at my dad’s steel mill as a 19 year old. I’m proud of that summer but that work took a lot of me. When other friends were out doing things, I was too exhausted to hang out. The money wasn’t great either. And that’s a microcosm of most of those older worker’s lives. Many drank heavily. I’m not bemoaning them at all or their work.
I’m just saying that the early 2000s wasn’t the 1850s either.
I don’t deny there’s a better life than office work but let’s not gloss over the kind of hard - as in, really hard - labor that industrialization requires.
deltarholamda
Absolutely it's hard work, and dangerous too. In the case of steel, in the early 2000s they would be competing more or less heads-up with foreign steelmakers--mostly Chinese--and that puts a kind of pressure on working conditions.
Most people wouldn't mind hard work if it's rewarded with home and family. It's the idea that we have to work in a sweatshop and live alone in a fifth floor walkup that makes people pause. To avoid that situation isn't easy, there are a ton of factors involved, but it is possible. In the end, a country that doesn't make things is a country beholden to others.
fragmede
Let's not gloss over the other part of it too though. Not everyone is smart enough to be a doctor or a lawyer, or even a nurse or a paralegal, and those people need jobs too. It shouldn't be backbreaking soul crushing work, but they do need jobs.
blendergeek
One of my hopes is that we can use our environmental and safety regime to do the industrial stuff in a more humane manner. Outsourcing everything to "somewhere else" only moved the externalities to another country. But people still get hurt.
superultra
Totally agree but is more environmentally friendly and more humane part of the current political rhetoric?
And absolutely outsourcing to somewhere else hurts somewhere else. But let’s be realistic: the kind of drastic change that would require no one getting hurt is not in the American discourse.
abe_m
Have you been to a current US factory? All the big-company ones I've been to have safety and environmental compliance departments focused on zero-injuries and zero-environmental incidents.
Looking at what was done in the early to mid-1900's isn't a good guide to the current state of things. We've learned a bunch since then.
xienze
> So, I’m sorry, why do we want that here (let alone anywhere)?
To the second question, not everything in the modern world is going to be clean and green. If you want things like steel, plastic, computers, etc. there's gonna be some dirty manufacturing involved. No way around it.
To the first, ideally every country wants some amount of self-sufficiency, or at the very least, some amount of redundancy. Remember how badly the world's pants got pulled down during Covid?
And finally -- frankly, not everyone is capable of more than unskilled or semi-skilled labor. Supply-chain redundancy with a side-effect of employing people who might otherwise have very little in the way of employment prospects? That's a good thing!
lazide
Why was the steel mill producing a lot of chemical pollution?
Steel makes a lot of mill scale and slag, but those are generally inert. It’s a physically dirty process, but not a chemically dirty one, unless I’m missing something?
And certainly nothing I’m aware of there would make it unsuitable for even landfill.
superultra
I looked up the EPA report for the brownsite. It listed arsenic, barium, multiple chromium compounds, 2,4-dimethylphenol ethylbenzen lead, 4-methyl-2-pentanone, methlyene chloride, naphthalene, toluene, and xylene at hazardous levels. It also mentions steel, zinc, and nickel dust and fumes.
I do know that I drove by the old site a few years ago, and you can see the outlines of not just the buildings but the machinery because the dirt is a different color, and there's either no or very little grass or just stubborn weeds growing in those areas.
lazide
Thanks, that was very informative.
Workaccount2
A lot of steel is coated with grease or oil to avoid rusting. Just by nature of working with it you also need solvents to remove it. The degreasers of the past were magically powerful and environmentally catastrophic. Never mind all the oil/grease used.
bluGill
Steel is alloyed with a lot of things, some of them toxic (lead comes to mind). If any of that spills.
rightbyte
I think some additives to the steel can be really poisonous? Chrome?
I guess you get a lot of heavy metal slag?
null
RickJWagner
AI is going to reduce the number of white collar jobs available.
Manufacturing may be a lot more important to future job seekers.
carlosjobim
> The reality is that it’s long, hard, relentless, menial labor.
Which is perfectly fine to do for some time if the salary is great. Which it should be, considering the high productivity output from those kind of jobs.
Steel mill workers of your dad's generation had a much higher living standard and much more money than service or office workers of today's young generation.
Young people are supposed to work hard and build up their wealth so that they can change to a less taxing job when it's time to make a family. Not waste their time in academic institutions for 20 years and then work for a low salary.
orsorna
> had a much higher living standard and much more money than service or office workers
I don't see how you could say this with a straight face. We know at this point that factory jobs inflict physical damage to the body, a priceless artifact that no wage could replenish. I find it difficult to address your last paragraph as it's just not based in reality. Anecdotally, many people I know who take an hourly wage at factories never shift elsewhere. There is no waiting, and often they will start their families younger than their salarymen equivalent, 30 years ago or now. Perhaps they failed by your standards?
carlosjobim
Not unexpected that people would react strongly against any mention of physical labour on this forum – and immediately take a hostile attitude.
I've done my fair share of these kind of jobs in my life and my body is great. You can do it for some years while you are young. Yes – if you do the same job your entire life you will destroy your body. Especially if you do not take care to listen to it and adapt how you work and how you exercise.
Young people should work hard and be paid well, that's how a healthy economy functions. Not by having manufacturing based on foreign slave labour.
Anecdotally, I know many people who started on the ground floor and then moved on to management or sales with experience. Or switched jobs and careers. People switch jobs all the time, staying at the same post for life is mostly a thing of the past.
It will always be like this until scale ramps up and costs come down as infrastructure ramps up. China's advantage is always communicated as cheap labor but it's also the ability to almost infinitely scale production lines in a short period of time. America has mostly lost the muscle memory and tooling to do this. And that ability to scale matters with materials costs.
There are incentives that would benefit domestic producers and companies but those take time and don't make good soundbites for politicians.
The blunt tariff sledgehammer that was dropped isn't going to do it. Small experiments like the one in the article will try and mostly fail. Meanwhile producers will find loopholes and workarounds to tariffs. And the margins and viability of domestic designers and businesses will continue to weaken.
Consumers will increasingly eat the cost and lose the convenience.