131–140 of 314 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that just due to people retiring? https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS11300060
No, the labor force metrics only include people of working age.
Interesting how they haven't repeated in this article earlier claims that the Chinese purchase of the steelworks was a strategic move to slowly destroy the blast furnaces by letting them cool under pretext of low demand.
See also Chinese companies buying UK private schools and closing them down Original: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/07/02/chinese-company-... https://archive.is/dRQsB#selection-2155.4-2155.79 Choice quote from the article Mike Parker, the school’s director of marketing, wrote on LinkedIn: “Whatever you read, this isn’t a VAT story. It isn’t a ‘falling rolls, unstoppable decline’ story. The truth is deeper and…
> In March, the National Audit Office released a report noting that the Scunthorpe steelworks was costing the government about £1.3m a day. No, BBC, the government doesn't have money. It costs the net taxpayer that much a day.
Richest countries have a lot of government owned companies. USA is just an anomaly because of Chicago school of economy.
This is a common myth spreaded by free market freaks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The food example, is the exact reason for large farming subsidies in the European Union. These were implemented as a founding initiative, due to the experience of food shortages during the second world war. A great number of things could be considered critical. Due to the nature of when access could be cut off, the main thing countries likely worry about being able to access, is things humans need to stay alive, and…
Farming subsidies are one of the most criticized parts of the EU. My comment isn't in support of it. But even so, subsidy is quite different from compulsory purchase. The question is: why is steel special. Not in a no-action-vs-some-action way, but why so aggressive? Ironically I think it's the same for both steel and farmers: they provide votes.
Royal Navy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's imagine a hypothetical symmetrical war between two modern countries. One can disable the other's satellites and maintain their own fleet. The other can't get access to any third parties' satellites. You aren't going to send your steel navy out when one side can see you from space and you can't, almost regardless of the numbers. Your big army of steel tanks is useless against a bunch of drones directed by distri…
In a defensive war, a steel navy sitting in spitting distance of your shores and an army of steel tanks will still do a lot to keep the enemy at bay. And you can swap the tank turrets for Gatling guns on some of your newly produced tanks to help against drones You wouldn't be able to win the war in your scenario, but you could still do a lot to make sure the other side isn't winning either.
Check out Russia's Black Sea fleet to learn the fate of your navy sitting by your shores.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the labor force metrics only include people of working age.
Then why does my link specifically have a "25-54 Yrs" qualification, and has a totally different shape compared to the first link? The difference between the two is stark, 21.8 percentage points. Do you really think there's that many people willing to work between 18-25 and 54+?
And willing to work long hours at the minimum-wage rates required for US-based manufacturing ....
P.S. 18-25 and 54+ ... its actually 16–25 and 54+ I don't think you'll find many 16–18 year olds biting your arm off for a job in manufacturing either...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? There is a large war going on right now and the key material is chips. Drone don't use a lot of steel, neither do missiles or modern airplanes. Yes you need artillery and particularly shells. But you are so much more limited by the capacity of your munition factories that how much steel you have would not be an issue. One of the main things you would need for a new munitions factory is trained workers. The Wo…
It's a myth that battleships didn't matter in WWII. They ended up being critically important in the Pacific Theater for carrier escort and amphibious fire support. They didn't stop mattering until the widespread deployment of guided missiles and other precision munitions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? There is a large war going on right now and the key material is chips. Drone don't use a lot of steel, neither do missiles or modern airplanes. Yes you need artillery and particularly shells. But you are so much more limited by the capacity of your munition factories that how much steel you have would not be an issue. One of the main things you would need for a new munitions factory is trained workers. The Wo…
You can't occupy territory with drones (yet). You will need people and moving people in a drone-infested environment will mean protecting them with armoured vehicles. Yes, these vehicles will need enhancements and other new tech to counter drones, but armoured vehicles aren't going away (MAYBE the tank's days are numbered, though). If you are really interested in this, I highly recommend subscribing to war on the roc…
I am not saying drones are everything. My point is, where is the war in which steel is critical ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then why does my link specifically have a "25-54 Yrs" qualification, and has a totally different shape compared to the first link? The difference between the two is stark, 21.8 percentage points. Do you really think there's that many people willing to work between 18-25 and 54+?
> Do you really think there's that many people willing to work between 18-25 and 54+? And willing to work long hours at the minimum-wage rates required for US-based manufacturing .... P.S. 18-25 and 54+ ... its actually 16–25 and 54+ I don't think you'll find many 16–18 year olds biting your arm off for a job in manufacturing either...
This reminded me of an article in The Economist published last year, April 2025: "Zombie politics: how Dead Man dominates British politics"[1] Two prescient paragraphs related to today's news: If British politicians worship voters who are no longer among the living, it is natural that they do the same to a version of the British economy that has long departed. “There are people in this country who love to talk down o…
But, the issue is about capacity. Steel and metals generally are a core part of the UK economy. Yes we could just buy it all in from outside, but when geopoltics intervenes it leaves us high and dry (see natural gas, chemical production, wire making, transformer making, etc etc)
If we end up in a war, which seems fairly reasonable, then we need to have access to a manufacturing, not only prototypes, but large scale manufacturing. we need not only the machines, but the people, experience and pipelines to keep that working.