Apple plans to spend $1B to support advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple plans to spend $1B to support advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S

#171

Post by curious_fella » Thu, May 04, 2017, 7:24 PM UTC

tn135 wrote: post #147

ryanmarsh wrote: post #9

> Cook told "60 Minutes” in 2015. “I mean, you can take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in a room that we’re currently sitting in. In China, you would have to have multiple football fields.” In that interview he also said that the jobs weren't coming back. This is one of the most powerful statements uttered on American labor and employment trends in recent memory. I have shared thi…

> Financial interests convinced liberals and conservatives alike that globalism was a good thing (for altruistic or selfish reasons respectively). Instead it just gave Capital access to cheap labor and totally fucked the American worker. Lump of Labour fallacy. The way both Liberals and Conservatives speak as if USA is marred with some wide scale unemployment. It is as if Americans would love to have sweatshops where…

People are not coming from around the world for middle class jobs like auto-manufacturer or steel worker. Jobs like these used to be the heart of the middle class, and they certainly weren't under sweatshop conditions (unions made sure of that).

Re: Apple plans to spend $1B to support advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S

#172

Post by kevin_thibedeau » Thu, May 04, 2017, 7:26 PM UTC

bduerst wrote: post #168

nerfhammer wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People seem to want people to have jobs that are easy to visualize... people seem worried about the number of factory workers in a way in which they do not worry about number of architects.

It's because American's romanticize manufacturing for some reason. They love the idea of someone doing back-breaking labor on a factory floor line, but hate the idea of someone working retail in air conditioning.

Those romanticized factory jobs were by and large protected by unions and offered better pay and pensions than any other blue collar occupation.

Re: Apple plans to spend $1B to support advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S

#173

Post by coldtea » Thu, May 04, 2017, 7:28 PM UTC

nerfhammer wrote: post #164

tn135 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Financial interests convinced liberals and conservatives alike that globalism was a good thing (for altruistic or selfish reasons respectively). Instead it just gave Capital access to cheap labor and totally fucked the American worker. Lump of Labour fallacy. The way both Liberals and Conservatives speak as if USA is marred with some wide scale unemployment. It is as if Americans would love to have sweatshops where…

People seem to want people to have jobs that are easy to visualize... people seem worried about the number of factory workers in a way in which they do not worry about number of architects.

>people seem worried about the number of factory workers in a way in which they do not worry about number of architects.

That's because millions of people were factory workers living a cozy life back until a few decades ago and now they (and their kids and communities) are struggling to make ends meet.

Millions of people weren't architects.

Not much "glamorizing of factory jobs" is needed to explain their complains. Plain desperation will do.

Re: Apple plans to spend $1B to support advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S

#174

Post by cracell » Thu, May 04, 2017, 7:28 PM UTC

ryanmarsh wrote: post #9

> Cook told "60 Minutes” in 2015. “I mean, you can take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in a room that we’re currently sitting in. In China, you would have to have multiple football fields.” In that interview he also said that the jobs weren't coming back. This is one of the most powerful statements uttered on American labor and employment trends in recent memory. I have shared thi…

But Cook is wrong in saying "the jobs aren't coming back".

The situation has been rapidly changing because of automation.

Imagine if a clothing company could have new product responding to trends available in a week. Nintendo is currently having difficulty keeping up with the demand for Nintendo Switches, imagine if they could rapidly produce more near their intended markets. Automated small batch production could even make things like ordering the exact same shirt you bought 10 years ago affordable.

Doesn't mean the economics work all the way through. But my point is things change and the advantages of manufacturing overseas in the past are not the same as the advantages today. And that will keep changing.

The future is hard to predict. Anyone that says something will never change is wrong because on a long enough timespan literally everything changes.

Re: Apple plans to spend $1B to support advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S

#175

Post by lawnchair_larry » Thu, May 04, 2017, 7:29 PM UTC

tn135 wrote: post #147

ryanmarsh wrote: post #9

> Cook told "60 Minutes” in 2015. “I mean, you can take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in a room that we’re currently sitting in. In China, you would have to have multiple football fields.” In that interview he also said that the jobs weren't coming back. This is one of the most powerful statements uttered on American labor and employment trends in recent memory. I have shared thi…

> Financial interests convinced liberals and conservatives alike that globalism was a good thing (for altruistic or selfish reasons respectively). Instead it just gave Capital access to cheap labor and totally fucked the American worker. Lump of Labour fallacy. The way both Liberals and Conservatives speak as if USA is marred with some wide scale unemployment. It is as if Americans would love to have sweatshops where…

Easy for you to say. You sound like you have no idea what life is like for the people affected by this. This is their economy too. If you write them off as collateral damage and provide no alternative, don't be surprised when people like Trump get voted in.

Re: Apple plans to spend $1B to support advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S

#176

Post by bduerst » Thu, May 04, 2017, 7:30 PM UTC

notlefthanded wrote: post #142

thevtm wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Manufacture IPhones in US to sell in the US. Manufacture IPhones in China to sell to the rest of the world. I bet that whats Apple is going to do.

That didn't work too well with blackberry in Argentina. It's kind of an extreme case, but there are parallels that can be drawn.

Here's a good podcast on how terrible it was:

http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2017/02/17/515850029/episo...

Even with the tariff incentives, the demand within the country wasn't enough to cover the economies of scale to keep manufacturing costs effective.

Re: Apple plans to spend $1B to support advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S

#177

Post by sp332 » Thu, May 04, 2017, 7:30 PM UTC

david-cako wrote: post #34

ryanmarsh wrote: post #9

> Cook told "60 Minutes” in 2015. “I mean, you can take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in a room that we’re currently sitting in. In China, you would have to have multiple football fields.” In that interview he also said that the jobs weren't coming back. This is one of the most powerful statements uttered on American labor and employment trends in recent memory. I have shared thi…

What's the answer? Protectionism? That's the thing I don't get, so many people will advocate "fewer regulations", yet are perfectly content with prohibitive tariffs from the place that allows people living in section 8 to afford iPhones. You're 100% right, but i just don't see a good answer other than coming to terms with the fact that cheap labour overseas and automation WILL back us into UBI in the very near future…

The money is flowing to where labor is cheap, but that is causing middle classes to rise in those places. And that means in the medium term, labor is going to stop being so cheap there. Eventually things will look a lot more even across markets that are connected. I propose taxing companies that are moving to use global labor, based on the difference between "local" and "overseas" wages. The money would go to financially buffer displaced local workers until things become more equal.

Re: Apple plans to spend $1B to support advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S

#178

Post by flamedoge » Thu, May 04, 2017, 7:31 PM UTC

specialp wrote: post #82

ice109 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what exactly is the problem with this? a 50% pay cut is still a fantastic wage (globally relative). what exactly is wrong with the standard of living going up in other places while ours gets a little worse? also if the tech sector really loses half of it earning power the markets that cater to those people will simply deflate. globalization /is/ good in the long run because it brings supply/demand markets to an equil…

It's not good that comments like this against the group think are voted down. I certainly do not want my wages to go down, and I am not sure yet that globalization is good in the long run. When equilibrium is reached, in a world with infinite resources and space we would all benefit this is true. But in our current situation there will be more demand for limited natural resources if everyone is living at the same sta…

Wages rarely go down, they just replace you. I'm mixed about wages going down. It generally points to cost of computing and developing going down, so it may discourage holding traditional jobs down and encourage people to do more creative things because computing is cheaper.

Re: Apple plans to spend $1B to support advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S

#179

Post by mtempm » Thu, May 04, 2017, 7:32 PM UTC

silverbax88 wrote: post #141

thevtm wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Polution and slave labour in China. Unemployment in the US. Globalism sounds great.

Globalism is, and will continue to, happen no matter what the US does. The US needs to figure out how to make it work for the long term. Protectionism won't work. You might as well be a cooper or haberdasher trying to pass laws to keep people using barrels and hats. People keep trying to either spin globalism as evil or good, but it's neither. It's just something that was going to happen no matter what. The US does n…

Protectionism has proven to work well in some cases in history.

You are also misunderstanding by conflating globalism with free trade. The two are related, but not the same. You can be for free trade of goods and services, but not for unelected central powers (i.e. an EU, a central bank).

Mainstream academic economists are typically free trade, but we have no science to test this theory so just br careful about drinking too much of the kool aid. LarGe corps, banks, and US gov generally want globalism. Keep in mind why they want that (profit and power). We still have a lot of people suffering in 2017 and no longer a good excuse for it (i.e. resources scarcity cant explain malnutrition anymore).

Re: Apple plans to spend $1B to support advanced manufacturing jobs in the U.S

#180

Post by cracell » Thu, May 04, 2017, 7:32 PM UTC

david-cako wrote: post #34

ryanmarsh wrote: post #9

> Cook told "60 Minutes” in 2015. “I mean, you can take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in a room that we’re currently sitting in. In China, you would have to have multiple football fields.” In that interview he also said that the jobs weren't coming back. This is one of the most powerful statements uttered on American labor and employment trends in recent memory. I have shared thi…

What's the answer? Protectionism? That's the thing I don't get, so many people will advocate "fewer regulations", yet are perfectly content with prohibitive tariffs from the place that allows people living in section 8 to afford iPhones. You're 100% right, but i just don't see a good answer other than coming to terms with the fact that cheap labour overseas and automation WILL back us into UBI in the very near future…

Not sure if it qualifies as protectionism. But I'd love to see us enforce our own safety and environmental regulations for all imports.

Something like all manufacturers would be required to be certified and routinely inspected by 3rd party companies that have been approved by the government to do said certifying and inspecting. Would need to have unscheduled inspections and heavy fines against the involved companies to work but we could do it if we wanted.