All Forum Posts by: Alan F.

Well known. In 1992 Ross Perot warned of the "giant sucking sound" of jobs disappearing in the US if NAFTA was signed.

Now compare the loss of those jobs to the money consumers saved and tell us whether NAFTA was better or worse over all.

Besides some effects on jobs created by competition, what metric are you using to suggest NAFTA has been overall bad? GDP in the US surged after NAFTA. Thats new business and old business becoming more successful. People tend to scream that china is stealing the manufacturing jobs which NAFTA obviously doesn't cover.

I often hear that tariffs will bring all the jobs back and it reminds me of the Piano. Once the largest industry and virtually died when the radio came in. I'm sure there were people screaming about re-opening piano factories but the world moved on. Theres no company in the world opening a new factory today, or planing a new factory today that won't be 90% robots/technology/AI. They will not be employing a substantial amount of humans.

As for housing and rents, extra costs added to labor and materials will slow construction and affordability lowering supply coming online, this will likely push both up in the mid-term, not down.

Consumer spending is included with GDP

Wouldn't it be a good thing if the next generation of semi cons, bio tech, robotics, surgical robots et al was built here in the states?

The ancillary companies, employees etc could earn a living. Believe it or not the jobs aren't really that complicated. If folks another countries can do it, why not Americans?

So similar to the CHIPS act? Incentives vs tariffs. And still, factories would be built to be efficient from the get. Highly robotic with revenue going to the top and only few highly skilled labor with substancial tax breaks going to the corporations. So if you can afford to buy shares of the companies, GREAT! But it doesn't substantially help labor jobs. The infrastructure in asia is massive and has been built for decades on low labor, and just because America would be taking jobs away from china for instance, does not mean jobs are created in any meaningful way in America.

The CHIPS act is a subsidy and actually helped increase inflation, no I'm more in favor of not incentivizing companies to off shore.

I do agree that the genie can't wholly be put back in the bottle, but at least some of the manufacturing done back here.

Automation does not eliminate as many jobs as you portray, I've automated alot of facilities.

yes I'm awaew of the pacific rims role in tech manufacturing, I've worked overseas also.

to wit, j believe the largest emerging manufacturing hub will probably be India.

As with many things in life I I believe it's not either/or but rather somewhere in the middle.

FWIW I also believe Bessents policies play a role in rooting out the inflationary environment.

India becoming more of a threat past an emerging market will make Russia and China immediately go on the offense in trade war. Netherlands would remain only trading partner that wouldn't change up on them.

Yes, they can be a viable hub but it'll need to be more than just them.

For anyone that fights America bringing back jobs--we need to control our own supply chain because we need to be self sufficient. Covid exposed our lack of capabilities. If you disagree with that, then not sure what more to say.

I don't disagree at all, I'm a huge advocate of American manufacturing, tech manufacturing has been mu livelihood n passion for decades. I'm concerned if another administration goes against, and the world will need more than us. I think India has the emerging labor force in terms of volume. I think they're still a ways out, but who knows. I think America also needs manufacturing for National security, our support systems needed in event of war are weak.

1 Vote

Denver, Colorado

Quote from @John Clark:

Quote from @Alan F.:

Quote from @Greg Miller:

Quote from @John Clark:

Quote from @Alan F.:

https://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_nafta01_impac...

An EPI article from 2001

As for housing and rents, extra costs added to labor and materials will slow construction and affordability lowering supply coming online, this will likely push both up in the mid-term, not down.

Consumer spending is included with GDP

Wouldn't it be a good thing if the next generation of semi cons, bio tech, robotics, surgical robots et al was built here in the states?

The ancillary companies, employees etc could earn a living. Believe it or not the jobs aren't really that complicated. If folks another countries can do it, why not Americans?

"If folks another countries can do it, why not Americans?"

-------------------------------------------------------------

We can; just not at the price we want to pay. If we bring factories over here, they will be highly mechanized and few jobs will be produced. The factories that MAGA wants -- running 3 1,000 man shifts 24/7/365, will never come back. Since I am not one to cater to those too lazy to pay attention or develop skills in high school, I don't have a problem with the factories staying overseas. If we need specific manufacturing capacity here (ship building for the Navy, etc), then we can subsidize it. Raw materials like steel and refined copper? Import it and stockpile it and hold it for times of war. General metal bending for high school dropouts? Nope.

Okay

FWIW the high school drop outs out here on the floor do programming in Karel, are well versed at chemical handling and write ISO procedures. Maybe training is component in all of this? I'm not sure if captivating people based on their level of state run schools is relevant

2 Votes