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

America underestimates the difficulty of bringing manufacturing back

molsonhart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: America underestimates the difficulty of bringing manufacturing back

#941

Post by mcftefr »

mapt wrote: post #228
pjc50 wrote: post #35

> China generates over twice as much electricity per person today as the United States. Why? This appears to be completely wrong? All the stats I can find say that the US has about 4x the per capita electricity generation of China. Other than that it seems to be mostly good points, especially the overall one: you cannot do this overnight. > If you’re building a new factory in the United States, your investment will a…

When I visited China, the expats told me that recreational drug supplychains were strictly compartmentalized. There was the supply of illicit drugs for Westerners (imported by the sons of Nigerian businessmen, the cliche went), the supply of illicit drugs for Chinese people (who only dealt with Chinese people), and then there were the vast array of drugs that are completely legal to get over the counter in China with…

> The Party is not trivial to apply to, the Party is strictly regimented, Party rules are held above and before the civil law, Party members are expected to be informers and have a strict lawful-good orientation from the perspective of the regime.

If only... (source: am Chinese)

Re: America underestimates the difficulty of bringing manufacturing back

#942

Post by citrusybread »

LinuxBender wrote: post #875
throwaway2037 wrote: post #865

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify, I just Googled for: what percent of american adults are on prescription drugs? I got back from "AI Overview": Approximately 64.8% of adults in the United States report taking prescription medication at some point in the past 12 months. This figure is based on data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The key phrase here is "at some point". I guess a huge amount of it is a very short 1-3 we…

I can invoke the powers of Google as well. Let's ask it how many Americans are on blood pressure drugs. "Approximately 51.2% of Americans with hypertension (high blood pressure) are currently taking medication to lower their blood pressure." That is not a temporary thing. Most of those people will be on drugs the rest of their unnatural lives. So when the availability of said drugs is gone, 51.2% of Americans will go…

that's 51.2% of Americans with Hypertension, not 51.2% of Americans at large.

CDC says:

    Percent of people using at least one prescription drug in the past 30 days: 49.9% (2017-March 2020)
    Percent of people using three or more prescription drugs in the past 30 days: 24.7% (2017-March 2020)
    Percent of persons using five or more prescription drugs in the past 30 days: 13.5% (2017-March 2020)
Source: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Published by: Health, United States. Table RxUse and NCHS Data Query System, Prescription Medication Use Tables One or more, Three or more, Five or more.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/drug-use-therapeutic.htm

It is coincidentally close to 51.2%, but not the same statement.

Re: America underestimates the difficulty of bringing manufacturing back

#943

Post by tptacek »

ninetyninenine wrote: post #927
tptacek wrote: post #912

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right: it's a bit racist. It's also faulty reasoning: you went to a high school in Cupertino with a markedly higher population of second-generation Asian-Americans, and went to a high school in an extraordinarily wealthy area; in fact, I think you might be attempting to generalize from the zip code with the highest density of immigrant professionals in the United States. If you want to generalize from China, t…

But I’m also Asian myself and all my relatives and everyone I know from China is the is way. It’s a stereotype. Asian tiger moms. Asians are good at math. Math competitions, test scores. Quantitative metrics everywhere point to a worth ethic that is viciously high. My conclusion of course is derived from quantitative evidence from general populations and iq scores by country. When I mentioned Cupertino I did it only…

There are no such things as "IQ scores by country". If you're thinking about the data behind "IQ and the Wealth of Nations", the Richard Lynn stuff, it's basically fraudulent.

Re: America underestimates the difficulty of bringing manufacturing back

#944

Post by AnthonyMouse »

Retric wrote: post #693
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #687

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody is talking about handing out 200k of training upfront. Why not? > 50k of training over a 40 year career requires salary bumps for retention, but is hardly a major risk. "Pay 50k for training and then pay a salary bump" is more expensive than "just pay a salary bump to the person the competitor was a sucker enough to pay 50k to train", so how does that work?

> is more expensive than Nope. Keeping the same person for 40 years saves far more than 50k of onboarding costs over that timeframe. Employee churn is really expensive but if it’s not coming out of your budget middle management doesn’t care. Companies do all kinds of objectively dumb things due to poor incentives.

> Keeping the same person for 40 years saves far more than 50k of onboarding costs over that timeframe. Employee churn is really expensive but if it’s not coming out of your budget middle management doesn’t care.

How does that change the number from the perspective of the employee?

The problem is not how to get an employee to stay for 40 years. The problem is, the employee who has just received $50k in training will take whichever job pays more, so the employer who paid the $50k has to offer the same salary as the one who didn't. And then who is going to pay the $50k when they could get the employee that someone else paid the money to train, for the same salary?

Re: America underestimates the difficulty of bringing manufacturing back

#945

Post by ninetyninenine »

tptacek wrote: post #943
ninetyninenine wrote: post #927

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I’m also Asian myself and all my relatives and everyone I know from China is the is way. It’s a stereotype. Asian tiger moms. Asians are good at math. Math competitions, test scores. Quantitative metrics everywhere point to a worth ethic that is viciously high. My conclusion of course is derived from quantitative evidence from general populations and iq scores by country. When I mentioned Cupertino I did it only…

There are no such things as "IQ scores by country". If you're thinking about the data behind "IQ and the Wealth of Nations", the Richard Lynn stuff, it's basically fraudulent.

[flagged]

Re: America underestimates the difficulty of bringing manufacturing back

#947

Post by flakespancakes »

mv4 wrote: post #946

Setting geopolitics aside, Russia was able to revive and ramp up domestic manufacturing after the sanctions. So this should be possible in the US.

I think it's a little early to hail Russia's war economy as a success story worth emulating.

Re: America underestimates the difficulty of bringing manufacturing back

#948

Post by tptacek »

ninetyninenine wrote: post #945
tptacek wrote: post #943

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are no such things as "IQ scores by country". If you're thinking about the data behind "IQ and the Wealth of Nations", the Richard Lynn stuff, it's basically fraudulent.

[flagged]

I didn't say anything about the validity of IQ. I said that Richard Lynn's numbers, which this site cites, are fraudulent. "IIT 2024" appears to be results from a website survey.

Respectfully, I think it's you that needs to do a bit more reading. I might be wrong about any of this stuff; I'm not an expert. But I'm pretty sure the first Google search result you find for "IQ by country" isn't going to rebut me effectively.

Re: America underestimates the difficulty of bringing manufacturing back

#950

Post by vel0city »

ta20240528 wrote: post #934
nickff wrote: post #904

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you’re describing is monstrously expensive, and doesn’t actually prevent IP violations, it just allows you to recover some of your losses, which is also expensive, and is unrealistic if the violators are fly-by-night operations.

1) The alternative is for millions of local-currency patents in Lesotho to automatically be valid for two decades in USA, EU, and Japan. 2) An of course it doesn't prevent IP violations - Eurocopter (now Airbus helicopters) had to spend millions to enforce their patents against the thieves* at Bell helicopter. https://www.bananaip.com/intellepedia/bell-helicopter-v-euro... * not my preferred choice of words, but its…

I'm confused by the ending of this article. It seems like two mutually exclusive outcomes happened.

> The court held that the landing gear certified and sold by Bell Helicopter on its Model 429 helicopter, namely the Production Gear, does not infringe the Eurocopter patent. The court invalidated all but one claim of Eurocopter’s patent. Bell Helicopter is, therefore, free to continue all use and sales of its Model 429 helicopter with its existing landing gear.

So it doesn't infringe and they can continue to use the landing gear. But then

> In addition to awarding to Eurocopter damages and punitive damages, the judge also issued an injunction enjoining Bell from manufacturing, using, or selling the infringing landing gear, and also ordered Bell to destroy all infringing landing gears in its possession.

What? I'm clearly missing something here.

Post reply on HN