Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Decline of the U.S. Machine-Tool Industry and Prospects for Recovery (1994)

rand.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 523 posts

Re: The Decline of the U.S. Machine-Tool Industry and Prospects for Recovery (1994)

#381

Post by aj7 »

no_wizard wrote: post #167
slicktux wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a pretty hyperbolic paragraph only to imply that we as a nation would loose out on innovation by doing so; nowhere do we want to isolate as a country. Look at all the jobless Americans in once thriving industrial cities. Generations left without pensions or skills all because we outsource our workers to other countries. That’s one of the many problems that need to be solved and by manufacturing here in the US…

>nowhere do we want to isolate as a country. Look at all the jobless Americans in once thriving industrial cities. Generations left without pensions or skills all because we outsource our workers to other countries. And we didn't pay for re-skilling, re-training, re-education. We didn't give them welfare benefits to hold over while they learned these new things. We did near nothing, and expected these areas simply to…

The tariffs will kill our industry. That’s my prediction. They will raise the cost of our inputs significantly, reducing demand, and giving China breathing room to catch up.

Re: The Decline of the U.S. Machine-Tool Industry and Prospects for Recovery (1994)

#382

Post by aj7 »

Aloisius wrote: post #208
slicktux wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a pretty hyperbolic paragraph only to imply that we as a nation would loose out on innovation by doing so; nowhere do we want to isolate as a country. Look at all the jobless Americans in once thriving industrial cities. Generations left without pensions or skills all because we outsource our workers to other countries. That’s one of the many problems that need to be solved and by manufacturing here in the US…

We manufacture more today than at any time in history. We just do it with a whole lot fewer people. Have jobs been lost to outsourcing? Sure. But far more jobs have been lost to automation and the elimination of obsolete industries. While companies might have avoided investing in automation through the use of cheap labor in other countries, there is little doubt that will change if they re-shore.

Correct.

Re: The Decline of the U.S. Machine-Tool Industry and Prospects for Recovery (1994)

#383

Post by aj7 »

amluto wrote: post #258
Aloisius wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We manufacture more today than at any time in history. We just do it with a whole lot fewer people. Have jobs been lost to outsourcing? Sure. But far more jobs have been lost to automation and the elimination of obsolete industries. While companies might have avoided investing in automation through the use of cheap labor in other countries, there is little doubt that will change if they re-shore.

Counterpoint: as far as I know, 30 years ago, a small US company could invent a consumer good and credibly manufacture it here in small to moderate quantities. Today, not so much. If you want an economical contract manufacturer to help you manufacture your product using modern tooling and access to the engineers who know how to set up those tools, as far as I know, you mostly need to look outside the US.

Yes, absolutely. Our skill is in design, management, and marketing, and distribution. Making stuff is today’s farming.

Re: The Decline of the U.S. Machine-Tool Industry and Prospects for Recovery (1994)

#384

Post by jay_kyburz »

mmooss wrote: post #362
jay_kyburz wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you build a house from scratch, you created 100K of stuff. If you buy a house for 100K then sit on your ass for a year, you are no richer than before.

You should look into real estate investment performance.

Houses depreciate. It's the land that makes you rich. :)

Re: The Decline of the U.S. Machine-Tool Industry and Prospects for Recovery (1994)

#385

Post by pyrale »

Izkata wrote: post #298
consumer451 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an extremely good point, which hits really close to home. I wonder if Putin would have still invaded Ukraine, knowing the extent of sanctions that would hit them. He might have been lulled into thinking that the EU would not care, given the existence of people like Gerhard Schröder and his ilk. edit: I am not sure that the reason for the Russian-German energy alliance was an attempt at pacification. It seems m…

Before WWI there was a similar belief in Europe, that the growing economic interdependence would prevent wars from breaking out. Instead once there was a spark, those relationships kept pulling more and more countries into the conflict and turned it into the "Great War".

> Instead once there was a spark, those relationships kept pulling more and more countries into the conflict

This is a bad take on the cause of alliances. large wartime coalitions had been a thing since the consolidation of power into monarchies in Europe: the 7-year war had involved all of Europe's significant actors, as did the napoleonic wars, the war for the spanish succession, the 30-year war, etc. This was much earlier than the development of cross-border trade.

In an imperialist era, diplomacy was the way to coordinate European nations' colonial efforts without repeating that kind of conflict. It was only temporary, though, since expansionist policies can't last forever peacefully.

The reason WW1 felt so different from previous wars was technological development. That aspect was already present in earlier wars, WW1 was just the first major European conflict in a long time.

Re: The Decline of the U.S. Machine-Tool Industry and Prospects for Recovery (1994)

#386

Post by aj7 »

robomartin wrote: post #275
jmward01 wrote: post #142

I keep seeing people advocating that the idea that we should build everything, and every piece or everything, here is a good one. Why? Is this just an isolationist dream? The reductive, absurd, extreme of this is why don't individual people go out and build all their own stuff like cars and houses. Let's all go out and learn how to mine and refine metal ore so we can get started on building the family sedan! There is…

> I keep seeing people advocating that the idea that we should build everything, and every piece or everything, here is a good one. Why? Is this just an isolationist dream? No. There needs to be balance. We are way past the balance point, by far. When I say "we" I mean the US and Europe. We have the same problems, and I believe Europe is in far greater danger to be absolutely decimated in the next two to five decades…

This only stops when China equalizes. The real shame is our country is not such a nice place to live, when we enter our phase as a less-advanced country. We always had brilliant immigrants and democratic ideals to keep the ball rolling. What now?

Re: The Decline of the U.S. Machine-Tool Industry and Prospects for Recovery (1994)

#387

Post by aj7 »

Animats wrote: post #297

And that's 30 years ago. It's worse now. The US isn't producing much manufacturing machinery. Machine tools last a long time, many decades. Replacement of worn-out machine tools does happen, but slowly. Because of this, the market for new machine tools is mostly driven by the growth rate of manufacturing, not the total level of manufacturing activity. If manufacturing is flat or in decline, new machine tool sales bec…

Yes. We have a low end industry, but China has the ability to kill it. Haas is already importing from China. And at their current list prices, their machines, with known problems, are not that competitive with imported products costing 30% more, but using higher tolerances and heavier components.

Re: The Decline of the U.S. Machine-Tool Industry and Prospects for Recovery (1994)

#388

Post by mopsi »

didericis wrote: post #264
munksbeer wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and you are correct that the tariffs will cause more independent production. That’s part of the intention. Europe specifically is underproductive and the hope is that these tariffs and the change of tone for defense agreements will bolster Europes domestic industrial and defensive capabilities. > I’m simply explaining the logic behind it I really disagree most strongly that this is the logic behind it. You genuinel…

The message is absolutely America first, and the motivation to boost the middle class through reindustrialization is a huge factor. The desire to eventually back out of defense commitments in Europe is not in contradiction to that. The political will to commit troops and to defend Ukraine simply isn’t there, especially not while Taiwan is looming. Wanting Europe to reindustrialize and handle it’s own defense allows A…

> The political will to commit troops and to defend Ukraine simply isn’t there, especially not while Taiwan is looming. Wanting Europe to reindustrialize and handle it’s own defense allows America to focus more domestically and on potential wars more aligned with American interests (disruption of chip manufacturing affects America much more than Russian occupation of Ukraine).

This seems like a coping narrative. The unwillingness to stand by commitments, groveling before Putin without receiving anything in return, threatening long-standing allies with annexation, and now the utterly moronic trade war (which is not based on any economic plan but apparently on chatbot output) are all weakening the US politically, economically and militarily, and giving countries like China a window of opportunity to act against it.

China has no strong allies, and its long-term goal has therefore been to isolate the US from its own allies in order to level the playing field. With each passing day, the US under Trump can indeed expect less and less support from its allies in the event of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Despite all the hollow rhetoric against China, Trump is setting the stage for the invasion.

Had the US played its cards better, it could have had a booming economy, motivated allies across the globe, and tens of thousands of highly experienced soldiers from Ukraine's battlefields willing to return the favor in the war with China. Ideally, that would've led to China shelving the invasion plans. Instead, we see an embarrasing clown show, which serves as an open invitation to invade Taiwan.

Re: The Decline of the U.S. Machine-Tool Industry and Prospects for Recovery (1994)

#389

Post by michaelt »

snowwrestler wrote: post #302
hudon wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the gist is: When you can manufacture ships, you can also manufacture warships. When you can manufacture warships, you can protect your economy. or: If all you sell are financial services, and a pandemic hits and you need to protect your people, where will you find masks? We don't need to build literally everything ourselves, that's a reductionist argument, we just need to become a lot more productive than we are now…

The U.S. already manufactures warships, though, and we’re already by far the best at it. Not only do we already protect our economy, we protect pretty much all shipping on the high seas by all economies on the globe. The John F Kennedy—built in the U.S.!—is in sea trials this year to become the 12th nuclear aircraft carrier in the U.S. fleet. No other nation has more than two carriers. The U.S. has more aircraft carr…

Practically speaking, I agree.

But theoretically speaking, the time when a strong manufacturing industry is needed is if you get into a lengthy WW2 style conflict, where both sides burn through their stockpiles of tanks/shells/missiles/whatever.

Then whoever can deliver tanks to the battlefield fastest has the numerical advantage. In 1942 the allies had retooled their car/locomotive/tractor manufacturing plants to make tanks and they were literally producing 9x as many tanks as the axis powers. Which is obviously a very good thing, militarily.

So there is historical precedent for the idea that a strong domestic car/locomotive/tractor industry being very helpful in wartime.

Of course, the question you've got to ask is: Will we ever see another WW2 style conflict? Because in a nuclear conflict there's no time to retool and manufacturing plants, and in lower-intensity conflicts like Vietnam/Iraq/Afghanistan there was no desire to.

Re: The Decline of the U.S. Machine-Tool Industry and Prospects for Recovery (1994)

#390

Post by FirmwareBurner »

margalabargala wrote: post #82
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone can be a SW engineer. Same how not everyone can be a doctor. Or a lawyer. For a lot of people, bolting bumpers to Fords is as good as it gets in terms of job prospects.

Firstly, the number of people who cannot be a software engineer is not actually very large. There are a lot of really shitty software engineers out there. Unlike being a doctor or a lawyer, you don't have to pass a test that requires actually knowing material, you simply have to be able to convince someone to give you a job banging on a keyboard, which does not necessarily require one to have technical skills. Not ev…

>There are a lot of really shitty software engineers out there.

That doesn't mean you'll get hired as one. Especially in the current market. There's a lot of shitty politicians out there, that doesn't mean anyone can just become a politician.

>Competent machinists require an extremely similar set of problem-solving skills as competent software engineers.

Every job has some critical thinking aspects to it, even landscaping and construction workers, crane operators, truck drivers, etc that doesn't mean everyone wants to code, or can be a productive programmer.

I have plenty of friends form technical university, mostly mechanical engineers, who did everything they could to avoid getting into SW development because they just don't like it and they weren't good at it.

Post reply on HN