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

How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

construction-physics.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 531 posts

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#481

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

dijit wrote: post #375
pjc50 wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That rather implies a society of subsistence farmers is the "most valuable", which is the one thing everyone in every society runs away from as fast as possible when technology prevents economic alternatives.

just because people don’t wanna do it doesn’t mean it’s not important. It’s interesting that we would care about monetary value more than societal value- that kind of leans into my point don’t you think?

IME the people who care about societal value more than monetary value either already have plenty of the latter or aren't going to be the ones doing the work.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#482

Post by energy123 »

greycol wrote: post #478
energy123 wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you insist on only focusing on the negatives of their existence, then sure, eliminating wealthy people sounds like a good idea.

Out of interest what are the positives? Other than cultural, in flagrant displays of excess, I can't think of anything they couldn't accomplish by them existing as poorer business leaders and having competent national wealth funds empowered to lend/give grants. What I'm saying is you may be defending billionaires when you mean to be defending a system you believe is optimal but still has the negative outcome of billi…

That is closer to my intent, yes, not a direct defense of billionaires as an intrinsic good, more a rejection of the idea that removing them via any means automatically leads to a less bad state of affairs. Careful reform that reduces them can be good, but it depends on what exactly that reform entails. Simply scaring them away and experiencing capital flight does not achieve good things.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#483

Post by dh2022 »

kelipso wrote: post #359
varjag wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from you apparently replying to some other comment than mine: Russia honors no treaties or alliances except when it's convenient.

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…

From the book Guns of August, page 106, chapter 10, negotiations re: Turkey’ neutrality in Aug 1914. I will just leave this here:

“On August 13 Foreign Minister Sazonov proposed to France to offer Turkey a solemn guarantee of her territorial integrity and a promise of “great financial advantages at the expense of Germany” in return for her neutrality. He was actually willing to include a promise that Russia would abide by the guarantee “even if we are victorious.”

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#484

Post by eru »

toast0 wrote: post #376
eru wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's always trade-offs. Even local shipping producers can't magic together a ship in a week. Of course, you can also look for some closer-to-home backup friends. My main point is that close allies (both geographically and in terms of relationship) are about as good as having your own local industry. In a few important cases and areas, having production with friends is better than at home. Mostly because it's harde…

> There's always trade-offs. Even local shipping producers can't magic together a ship in a week. No, but depending on your (presumed national security) needs, you might be able to repurpose a ship that was almost done for another client. If you have active local shipbuilders, there should be some capacity there. But, the trick is, how do you do it? The US Jones Act is trying, but US ship building capacity is pretty…

> The US Jones Act is trying, but US ship building capacity is pretty minimal.

Some people might go so far as to put a lot of the blame for the sorry state of affairs _on_ the Jones Act.

(Though to be fair, while the Jones Act alone could probably snuff out American ship building, even without it most ships would probably still be build in South Korea. But you can fairly blame the Jones Act for suppressing US-to-US ocean shipping.)

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#485

Post by eru »

dylan604 wrote: post #363
eru wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's always trade-offs. Even local shipping producers can't magic together a ship in a week. Of course, you can also look for some closer-to-home backup friends. My main point is that close allies (both geographically and in terms of relationship) are about as good as having your own local industry. In a few important cases and areas, having production with friends is better than at home. Mostly because it's harde…

> Of course, you can also look for some closer-to-home backup friends. Nobody likes being a back up friend to only be called on when your primary friend is unavailable, or you want to do something your primary friend wouldn't like. Countries make treaties/trade agreements accordingly

Countries (and corporations) aren't like ordinary people with their pesky social norms: your international 'friends' are mostly happy to be compensated with eg money or other goodies for being your backup friends, even when that would be a social faux pas with human friends.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#486

Post by eru »

coldtea wrote: post #132
eru wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Singapore is an island, too, and we don't need a national-strategic ship building industry. As long as your friends build ships, you are fine. The UK is friends with South Korea, for example.

> Singapore is an island, too, and we don't need a national-strategic ship building industry. That's because it exists on the benevolence and because of the benefits of it existing to several third parties. If/when that balance stops, they could turn it into a failed state in a forthnight. Being this careless by relying on "friends" (in global politics? lol) is ok for a small place like Singapore that can't do anythi…

> If/when that balance stops, they could turn it into a failed state in a forthnight.

You say that as if Singapore has no agency here. And you are under-estimating Singapore's resilience: after all just after independence we were close to the nightmare scenario you are trying to conjure.

> Being this careless by relying on "friends" (in global politics? lol) is ok for a small place like Singapore that can't do anything else anyway. For an ex-empire, it's more suicidal than prudent.

What does it matter that the UK was part of an Empire in the past? Singapore used to be part of the same empire.

And yes, keeping good relations with your allies is extremely important in global politics. This shouldn't be news. Or do you think we should all strive for autarky, like North Korea or 1930s Germany?

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#487

Post by nradov »

jack_tripper wrote: post #415
bad_haircut72 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

>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 This makes absolutely no sense when you spend two seconds to think about the supply and demand. Case in point, college is free in Europe and that has led to the exact problem you fear: oversupply of college grads and devaluation of degrees…

European countries have used free college education as a technique to artificially hold down the youth unemployment rate. Full time students don't count as unemployed. The problem is eventually they graduate and then many still can't find a job, or they end up underemployed in a job that doesn't really require a college degree. At least they don't have huge student debts but this system is tremendously inefficient for the rest of society which has to pay the taxes.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#488

Post by nradov »

variadix wrote: post #448
bad_haircut72 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Government backed loans inflate demand. If banks had to consider the risk of repayment prices would come back to reality.

Colleges should be on the hook for a least a portion of defaulted student loans. That would give them a direct incentive to hold down tuition.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#489

Post by eru »

energy123 wrote: post #246
eru wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Singapore is an island, too, and we don't need a national-strategic ship building industry. As long as your friends build ships, you are fine. The UK is friends with South Korea, for example.

Small island countries shouldn't build their own ships only because they can't due to their size. But they probably should have sovereign manufacturing of asymmetric deterrence tools like anti-ship missiles. Friends aren't good enough, unless you have a mutual defense treaty, they aren't real friends and can't be counted on. Look at Ukraine struggling to get Tomohawks and ATACMS now, or struggling to get tanks and je…

> Friends aren't good enough, unless you have a mutual defense treaty, they aren't real friends and can't be counted on.

No, no, just the opposite: treaties aren't good enough. Try suing your supposed allies when they break your mutual defense treaty.. Broadly speaking (and with only some exceptions), there's no higher authority you can appeal to for enforcement of international treaties.

Mutual defense treaties only work amongst something like friends. A big part of NATO's success is because they take this lesson very serious and designed the whole system around it.

Re: How the UK lost its shipbuilding industry

#490

Post by eru »

throw0101d wrote: post #350
eru wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Singapore is an island, too, and we don't need a national-strategic ship building industry. As long as your friends build ships, you are fine. The UK is friends with South Korea, for example.

> As long as your friends build ships, you are fine. Canada and many other countries collectively thought the US was their friend, which it was, until it wasn't. Friends stopping being friends is a risk that needs to be at least considered.

Yes, that's why it's useful to have some backup friends.
Post reply on HN