Live data from Hacker News

How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

construction-physics.com

451–460 of 531 posts

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've wondered about this too. I live in the UK and have been idly daydreaming about my next startup, and it seems like Brexit, and therefore having a small market / uncooperative EU, is such a headwind for some of the things I'd like to do. Seems like many UK startups just pretend to be based in SF. I think rejoin is going to be politically unpopular for a while, as there's no way we could rejoin the EU on anything l…

Rejoin is polling far ahead of Brexit, which is beginning to be acknowledged as a mistake by everyone. Although not everyone agrees on the reasons. The problem is the UK is an oligarchy owned and run by non-dom billionaires. It's essentially a floating labour camp. Virtually all the major industries are foreign-owned, and profits flow out of the country instead of being invested in infrastructure, R&D, and national d…

But that popularity (about 2:1 saying brexit was a mistake) isn't translating to political support, probably because both Labour and Tories supported Brexit.

And while the majority agree we should never have left the EU, and the majority agree we should rejoin, that isn't translating to political support.

Indeed the plurarity of votes is to Mr Brexit himself, who thanks to FPTP is likely to get a majority government in 2029 off 30% of the vote.

Hell 1 in 8 people that voted Farage last year think the UK never should have left Europe. Not that it wasn't the right type of brexit, but that it shouldn't. Yet they voted for Farage, decided that was a mistake, and are continuing to vote for Farage.

I get it. Some people just want the world to burn.

But a similar number think we should rejoin the EU, yet voted Farage last year.

It's no wonder support for democracy is at an all time low.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don’t know that it’s feasible. As the article mentions, the U.K. shipbuilding industry was dependent on cheap, skilled labour. It doesn’t touch upon just how cheap . My ancestors were riveters and boiler fitters in Glasgow from about the 1860s to the 1920s - they lived 30 to a room in tenements, three generations atop on another, and had to start work aged 5 or 6 to prevent the family from falling into destitu…

>My ancestors were riveters and boiler fitters in Glasgow from about the 1860s to the 1920s - they lived 30 to a room in tenements, three generations atop on another, and had to start work aged 5 or 6 to prevent the family from falling into destitution. The economics essentially demanded that you crank out descendants, as only by pooling a number of incomes could you survive. Everybody had horrific injuries of one va…

Actually, much, much worse. Before Glasgow, my family were crofters in the highlands - and by all accounts had a pretty good laird - but then the clearances happened, and everyone was condemned to the dark, satanic mills.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#453
post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um... Russia's doctrine during the Cold War was to turn Poland into a nuclear wasteland to stop Nato advancing through it. At the time, Poland was a part of the USSR. What Russia considers "a buffer zone" is really "inferior peoples we can atomise without having to open a new conflict with a foreign power." To be clear, I use the term "inferior peoples" as seen from the Russian point of view.

You've got it reversed... Soviet doctrine (not Russian) was to use tactical nuclear weapons immediately during their attempt to invade West Germany and march to the Atlantic.

I’ve been looking and you are correct, though I do recall seeing something different, so perhaps what I read was misinterpreting the Seven Days to the Rhine plan.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about the UK, but in the US this is only half true. Degree-requiring jobs still have better social status over trades and low/no skill work, at least from a "what do you want to be when you grow up" point of view. However, many more people than previously are skeptical of the math behind the cost of a college degree. Going into significant debt only to find a field flooded with others, competing with ove…

Theres simply no reason why college is as expensive as it is. The cynic in me says price increases are about setting up class boundaries and pushing people back into the necessary but less desirable factory/trade jobs of previous generations

> Theres simply no reason why college is as expensive as it is.

There is a perfect reason, though I might sympathize if you say there is no excuse. If one wanted to engineer some incredible Rube Goldberg machine to cause prices to spiral out of control beyond all lunacy, one could hardly do better than what we have in the United States right now.

Young people were told that without college/university they were doomed to a life of destitution and misery. They were hounded by teachers, guidance counselors, pundits, politicians, advice columnists, celebrities, journalists, you name it. The propaganda machine was relentless, gigantic, and hilariously un-self-aware. Then grants were minimized and replaced with student loans (unforgivable in bankruptcy, thanks Biden!).

This sets the stage. College administrators knew that everyone could now attend, and that they were guaranteed loans to pay for it, that they were young and foolish and didn't see debt as a millstone around their necks during mandatory swim time, and that they were fickle, fashion-seeking, and indifferent to lack of academic rigor. These universities needed to expand capacity to capture all those loan dollars, they were competing with other universities, and they knew their market. They built resort spa dorms... no longer were these places the dormitories of old, where you packed 6 freshman into a broom closet and made them sleep on floors. They build gorgeous grounds that looks like royal gardens. Expensive new labs and facilities and lecture halls. Why not? The kids would be paying for it (all their lives, thanks to the omnipotently powerful force of compount interest).

The kids, on the other hand, barely more than children, didn't choose the best value schools. They chose the prettiest... it's not as if they couldn't afford them. For most people, the fanciest product seems like the highest quality, and who would choose low quality? Nor could universities be the sanity limit here even if they wanted to. If they refused to build out their own little Versailles, they'd just see enrollment drop. And their costs were going up quite a bit too, when you double the size of the institution, you need more than double the staff. When the buildings are fancier than yesteryear, full of computer labs and high tech, you need more than just janitors. Entire bureaucracies were spun up just to deal with it all.

But a curious thing happened, with every university and college competing for those dollars, none really got ahead near as much as they wanted to or expected to. So they just doubled down, and tried to make their schools more attractive to prospective students. The state school in my city still strives to reach an enrollment of 50,000 last I heard (this would put it more than double its late 1980s enrollment, I think).

In summary, we have a gigantic slush fund of money that means no one has to be price-conscious, perverse incentives prodding those who administrate to jack their own expenses/costs to astronomical levels, and a society that still insists and even demands that everyone be college-bound despite the ambiguous evidence that it is good-value. Until one (or ideally all) of those things changes, there's no way for college to be any less expensive than it is.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? Nitrogen fertilizer is mostly derived from fossil fuels and has been since the 1900s food boom. Aren't phosphates mainly shipped from islands that build up huge stocks of bird poop? The inputs are all fossil fuel intensive.

Nitrogen fertilizer is synthesized from hydrogen and nitrogen. The hydrogen is currently derived from fossil fuels, but there is no requirement that it be so. Saying "ammonia is produced from fossil fuels, and so must always be" is like saying "cars run on fossil fuels, and so always must". A non sequitur. Phosphates are derived from large phosphate deposits in various places, such as Florida. Phosphorus will ultimat…

This can't be replaced at a volume that can feed the world nor in a way the world can afford. Lots of things can be done in alternative ways if you remove half the requirements (in this case volume and affordability).

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#456

Former UK manufacturing engineer here (1980s onwards). The manufacturing industry in the UK at that time suffered from three serious problems: - Low productivity workforce. There was a huge pool of skilled, low wage, workers that had little incentive (or will) to up-skill. There were few apprenticeship schemes or other education programs to train them for the modern world. - Poor quality management. "Working in trade…

> - Poor quality management. [...] So the best and the brightest were not interested in manufacturing.

There's also the challenge of the Baumol effect.

When hiring engineers in the UK, manufacturing companies are competing for smart, numerate graduates against the likes of Google and Facebook and HSBC and Barclays.

But when selling products, manufacturing companies are competing against the likes of Foxconn - so they can't just raise prices to raise salaries.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#457
post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for sharing :) I have very little context but it's interesting that, presumably, the lower profit industry was replaced with the higher profit one. And on top of that the higher profit one is probably of less value to society.

The highest value thing you can do in this life is produce food. The second highest value thing you can do is produce machines that help produce food (or other raw materials). The least value thing you can do is the services that are needed to support the production of machines that produce food. This is an uncomfortable thing to read for someone (such as myself) working in tech, in fact that's where the "sectors" co…

> The highest value thing you can do in this life is produce food.

This highly depends on the actual productivity. Producing food by subsistence farming barely feeds you and your children. Making something that improves food production, from ploughs to better seeds to fertilizers, has a significantly larger impact, even if you're not directly producing something edible.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#458
post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am replying to you comment. You are doing the exact same thing again. Saying “Russia honors no treaties or alliances except when it's convenient” is just so you can feel better about whatever. It’s just not how reality and geopolitics work…

I am replying to you comment. Please. Your reply had nothing to do with the context of my comment. I in fact gave you a benefit of doubt that you're not just a very quantized LLM. As to the trustworthiness let's tally: - Khasavyurt Accords. Breached by Russia. - New START Treaty. Breached by Russia. - Armenian request under allied auspices of CSTO: not honored by Russia. - Russia-Ukraine Friendship Treaty, Budapest M…

You could come up with nitpicky stuff like this for any country. Sure, make yourself feel better about calling people bots and calling Putin crazy, but you’re just living in your own reality at this point.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#460
post #2

The best time to try and fix this is 20 or 30 years ago, but absent a time machine, the next best time is now. Either you feel this kind of construction process is national-strategic and you ignore the cost over imports, or not. If you don't regard this as a core competency which should be kept in the national register, then sure, buy the ships from other places. But, don't come whining when the national-strategic in…

For a country that is an Island you'd think that the question of whether or not it is 'national-strategic' would have been answered in the affirmative.

The decisive battle of WWII, as far as the defence of Britain was concerned, was fought in the air. Invading an island nation without air superiority is a non-starter.

I actually doubt the value of modern navies for anything other than gunboat diplomacy, or coastal patrols these days. I think they’re too vulnerable to things like cruise missiles and drones.

Post reply on HN