ADVERTISEMENT

Train Wreck. Clown Show.

Good questions. Outside of propaganda, there are indeed good non-economic reasons to want to encourage manufacturing back (e.g. national security interest where you want to retain ability to do something quickly in case you ever need it for wars). agriculture has gone from 95% employment to 5% employment, and didn't disappear. In fact, our agricultural output kept increasing, despite the industry employing less people..
There are ways to be strategically reshoring some manufacturing, again ECON 101, find your areas of comparative advantage and double down on it. For US, it likely looks like niche industries where automation, using less labor, high quality output allows us to put out products that are competitive in a global market. Heck if you look at manufacturing as a percentage of the economy, (both in workers employed, and total output), it has been slowly increasing a bit since lows of early naughts. But we are never going back to the 50s and 60s.

The inevitable future for manufacturing is like agriculture, it never completely disappears, we are able to produce more with less in niche areas, and then use that trade with others for low-value things that are just not worth producing here.
My question was, why are those manufacturers planning to build/expand in the US.

Might avoiding tariffs have something to do with it?

Anyone capable of making sense of the deal cut today

I don't understand the so-called House settlement. If someone can explain it to me, I would appreciate it. I was chatting with Eric Bosse and knew this was changing the game. But revenue sharing is more for your athletes in Football and Basketball than say swimming. There are no scholarships only roster size 15 for basketball. How much an athlete earns will be based mainly on TV contracts. B10 expected to pay 22 million per year. And NIL must be based on fair market value anything over $600 your revenue sharing maybe reduced. June anyone in the transfer Portal is out for next year. I was told this is why Cluff was an easy get. If someone can fill in the details. I'm hearing this gives the B10 a huge advantage over all other schools, does it?

Flory Bidunga, former Indiana Mr. Basketball, 5 Star, from Kokomo

But, with the Purdue's recent departures, does this open to the door to his recruitment? IU offers playing time but I would think the young man would want to be a part of something that would likely put Purdue preseason #1 with the addition of Oscar and Flory.
I think Zach (playing time) was a concern for Purdue back then. I think with Cluff that the playing time available is not there. Jacobsen wants minutes...Burgess wants minutes...Trey wants minutes...Cluff wants minutes. would have loved having him before now even with his offensive skills being behind others. Braden would make him score a lot of points... ;) Although maybe his best friend in high school is on the Purdue bench, I doubt it carries much weight today

Flory Bidunga, former Indiana Mr. Basketball, 5 Star, from Kokomo

But, with the Purdue's recent departures, does this open to the door to his recruitment? IU offers playing time but I would think the young man would want to be a part of something that would likely put Purdue preseason #1 with the addition of Oscar and Flory.


I would pay money to see Smith on the court with 4 Bigs.

Wild.

Train Wreck. Clown Show.

Then why is there a long and growing list of companies planning to build/expand in the US instead of in Mexico or other low-wage countries? Do they not understand that they are working against their own best interests? Should they be listening to you and DG for advice?
Good questions. Outside of propaganda, there are indeed good non-economic reasons to want to encourage manufacturing back (e.g. national security interest where you want to retain ability to do something quickly in case you ever need it for wars). agriculture has gone from 95% employment to 5% employment, and didn't disappear. In fact, our agricultural output kept increasing, despite the industry employing less people..
There are ways to be strategically reshoring some manufacturing, again ECON 101, find your areas of comparative advantage and double down on it. For US, it likely looks like niche industries where automation, using less labor, high quality output allows us to put out products that are competitive in a global market. Heck if you look at manufacturing as a percentage of the economy, (both in workers employed, and total output), it has been slowly increasing a bit since lows of early naughts. But we are never going back to the 50s and 60s.

The inevitable future for manufacturing is like agriculture, it never completely disappears, we are able to produce more with less in niche areas, and then use that trade with others for low-value things that are just not worth producing here.
  • Like
Reactions: Do Dah Day

Flory Bidunga, former Indiana Mr. Basketball, 5 Star, from Kokomo

But, with the Purdue's recent departures, does this open to the door to his recruitment? IU offers playing time but I would think the young man would want to be a part of something that would likely put Purdue preseason #1 with the addition of Oscar and Flory.
Also, Purdue is 'home turf.' This kid is from the Congo but arrived via Kokomo. Let's his HS coach in the loop so that he can explain the glide path to the NBA.

Train Wreck. Clown Show.

They are not problems for libs like you, but for those who lose their jobs because of unfair trade practices they are a real problem - not that you would find that concerning.
You will never find me arguing it is not a problem for those who lost their jobs and way of life. That is true. It is a problem for them. And for to long, their complaints were not taken seriously enough.
That's why I pointed to the agriculture example, in moving from agriculture to manufacturing, many people lost their jobs too. I doubt the solution was like lets go back to days of "everyone is a farmer"

Yes free trade collectively makes us all better. Goods become massively cheaper, just about anything that isn't services that require direct US labor became much much cheaper. But you are right there are people adversely affected.

The textbook solution is not tarriff eveybody and protect local manufacturing. The textbook solution is tax the winners and use that money to re-train and subsidize affected people. But well politically, that's a challenge, some people have convinced the rest of everyone esle that taxing winners is wrong.

Train Wreck. Clown Show.

agricultural -> industrial -> services is a 1 way paradigm as productivity and standard of living improves. Nation after nation see this happen.

And there's a reason why. as technology improves, we keep replacing things with more effective technology until all we are left with are things we do for each other that technology can't replaces (i.e. services).

in 1800 over 90% of Americans were involved in Agricultural sector
In 1900, that number had dropped to ~65%
and by 2000, it was under 5%,
yet we were producing more food than ever before with fewer workers.

I have never seen a country transition backwards from services to industrial/agriculture without a serious drop in standards of living. There's no way to go back industry/manufacturing being a big employer without all of us being worse of economically. But Trumps tarrifs sure will get us started.

Hold on to your seat everyone.
Then why is there a long and growing list of companies planning to build/expand in the US instead of in Mexico or other low-wage countries? Do they not understand that they are working against their own best interests? Should they be listening to you and DG for advice?

Train Wreck. Clown Show.

only someone who doesn't understand basics of economics frets about trade deficits. Like national debt in your own currency, they are both artificial problems meant to rile up people for political reasons. They are not real problems.
They are not problems for libs like you, but for those who lose their jobs because of unfair trade practices they are a real problem - not that you would find that concerning.
  • Like
Reactions: SKYDOG

Train Wreck. Clown Show.

Oh Thank Goodness! The national debt isn't a real problem! It's an imaginary problem, like Sasquatch, Big Foot and the bogeyman. Let's keep on borrowing and spending!
national debt is not a real problem. Republican voters may not know it. But their leaders do. You haven't noticed that every Republican President since Reagan (except GHW Bush) intentionally blows up the debts. Every single one of them.

  • Reagan came and trippled our debts.
  • GWB met a surplus, immediately passed a massive tax cuts that led to deficits and added to debt, and then left us with GFC and massive deficits
  • Trump came and immediately passed a tax cuts that made things worse, and then on the way out in the name of dealing with COVID ran massive massive deficits (by the way that was the right economic call)
  • Trump II is immediately angling for more tax cuts that will add 5T to debts.

national economics is not indivual economics. the national debt is mostly a political issue not an economic one. And if you watch the actions of politicians that yell about it it the most, you wil notice their actions are not in line with actually getting the debt down. They are more in line with spending the money they way they prefer.

Train Wreck. Clown Show.

Like national debt in your own currency, they are both artificial problems meant to rile up people for political reasons. They are not real problems.
Oh Thank Goodness! The national debt isn't a real problem! It's an imaginary problem, like Sasquatch, Big Foot and the bogeyman. Let's keep on borrowing and spending!

Train Wreck. Clown Show.

agricultural -> industrial -> services is a 1 way paradigm as productivity and standard of living improves. Nation after nation see this happen.

And there's a reason why. as technology improves, we keep replacing things with more effective technology until all we are left with are things we do for each other that technology can't replaces (i.e. services).

in 1800 over 90% of Americans were involved in Agricultural sector
In 1900, that number had dropped to ~65%
and by 2000, it was under 5%,
yet we were producing more food than ever before with fewer workers.

I have never seen a country transition backwards from services to industrial/agriculture without a serious drop in standards of living. There's no way to go back industry/manufacturing being a big employer without all of us being worse of economically. But Trumps tarrifs sure will get us started.

Hold on to your seat everyone.
ADVERTISEMENT

Filter

ADVERTISEMENT