Would you support subsidizing...

[dblack]

...U.S. re-industrialization?

Why or why not?

You need to be more specific.

You've got to keep in mind I'm not as macro-economically savvy as you are...but what I mean is returning industry from China...and other countries.

Subsidizing it thru tax incentives and even grants...and then instituting some forms if protectionism to allow it to grow.

In other words, you would want the government to pick winners and losers. No. I would not be in favour of that.

Except when you are?

 

[dblack]

So you think socialism works then?

That doesn't answer the question. Do you think government should decide how society invests its wealth?

It depends. . . should we have a military?

Jukin' and jivin'.

I don't think government should be subsidizing industry, it shouldn't be dictating the priorities of the economy. Do you?

Do you realize that that's the essence of socialism? I guess not.

My original participation in the thread was comparing certain critical industries with the Agricultural sector.

I am well aware of your political and economic stances, you are pretty dogmatic and extreme in your POV, were it up to you, you would have them get rid of the AG Bill as well too, I have no doubt.

Nothing dogmatic about it. I just want to keep state power and economic power separate. Merging them is a bad idea. And yes, the AG Bill is wrong for the same reasons.

 

[Brain357]

That doesn't answer the question. Do you think government should decide how society invests its wealth?

It depends. . . should we have a military?

You dodged a lot...

No. . . my original contention on that whole matter was, some industries should be subsidized, ONLY BASED ON NATIONAL SECURITY GROUNDS.

This is the only reason we have the AG BILL.

If you believe we should even have a government, or if that is the reason we have a government in the first place, FOR NATIONAL SECURITY, that was my original participation in the thread.

You folks are putting up straw-men. i.e. Socialism, government choosing winners and losers, etc. Stop being so hyperbolic. I just don't think the nation should be at the mercy of just in time production and just in time international supply chains for critical necessities. If you have a better solution for this problem? I am all ears.

I suggest you go back and read my very cautious and measured response to the OP.


If, indeed, we accept the premise, that the job of the government is to stabilize society, that it should find someway to mitigate against the affects of "just in time" production for goods, that we as a society deem as critical to the orderly functioning of society. THAT is all I was trying to putting forward.

". . .Natural and man-made disasters will disrupt the flow of energy, goods and services. The down-stream customers of those goods and services will, in turn, not be able to produce their product or render their service because they were counting on incoming deliveries "just in time" and so have little or no inventory to work with. The disruption to the economic system will cascade to some degree depending on the nature and severity of the original disaster.[46][47] The larger the disaster the worse the effect on just-in-time failures. Electrical power is the ultimate example of just-in-time delivery. A severe geomagnetic storm could disrupt electrical power delivery for hours to years, locally or even globally. Lack of supplies on hand to repair the electrical system would have catastrophic effects.[48]"
Just-in-time manufacturing - Wikipedia

Now, if, on the OTH, you do not believe we should be civilized, or even have a government, or that government should not have a national security role? I can respect that too.

What you are suggesting just doesn’t work. Do we have a shortage of something now? What problem are you trying to fix?

The fact that the AG BILL works, demonstrates empirically, IMO, we can do something.

From this point on? We shall just have to agree to disagree.

Now, I will agree with you, that there are many that absolutely HATE the AG BILL, on that, we can agree. Small farmers, international producers, organic farmers, poor farmers that are overseas, etc.

But, IMO, that AG BILL stabilizes prices for domestic consumers, especially the poor people in this nation.

I guess you haven't been paying attention. Most folks that work in the medical community KNOW there is a shortage of face masks. These were all produced in China. The Chinese government is determining where they will send all of the face-masks that they produce throughout the world.

Doesn't it bother you that China has got handle on this pandemic already, but they have a near monopoly on the production and control of medical supplies?

In essence. the Chinese government gets to decide where the pandemic spreads the quickest. They could also do this if we were in a military confrontation with them.

Not Enough Face Masks Are Made In America To Deal With Coronavirus
Not Enough Face Masks Are Made In America To Deal With Coronavirus

". . .The seeds of that problem, says Bowen, can be traced back 15 years. That's when many mask factories moved overseas, where masks could be made at a fraction of Bowen's costs.

Most notably, he says, Kimberly-Clark, which used to be one of the industry leaders, moved its operations.

"The surgical mask supply went from being 90% U.S.-made to being 95% foreign-made in literally one year," Bowen says.

For years, Bowen tried to get the government to pay attention to this issue. He wrote letters to Presidents Obama and Trump, warning that an epidemic could prompt China to stop exporting its supply, leaving American health care in a bind.

He wanted the U.S. government to mandate that hospitals buy more American-made products.

"If every hospital would pay just a few cents more for a mask, there wouldn't be an issue here," he says.

The coronavirus is proving Bowen right. Now, he has the administration's attention.

Last week, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar told the House Appropriations Committee that the country needs 25 times more masks than it currently has stockpiled.. . ." (npr.org)

U.S. Dependence on Pharmaceutical Products From China

America's Monopoly Crisis Hits the Military | The American Conservative

Coronavirus Spurs U.S. Efforts to End China’s Chokehold on Drugs

China pushes all-out production of face masks in virus fight

People line up outside a drugstore in the northeastern Chinese city of Dalian, hoping to buy facemasks on Jan. 31.

I would disagree that the AG bill works. How does it work?

I don’t think we are short of any supplies. There are far more in the country than would be if government tries to control production.

 

[dblack]

It depends. . . should we have a military?

You dodged a lot...

No. . . my original contention on that whole matter was, some industries should be subsidized, ONLY BASED ON NATIONAL SECURITY GROUNDS.

This is the only reason we have the AG BILL.

If you believe we should even have a government, or if that is the reason we have a government in the first place, FOR NATIONAL SECURITY, that was my original participation in the thread.

You folks are putting up straw-men. i.e. Socialism, government choosing winners and losers, etc. Stop being so hyperbolic. I just don't think the nation should be at the mercy of just in time production and just in time international supply chains for critical necessities. If you have a better solution for this problem? I am all ears.

I suggest you go back and read my very cautious and measured response to the OP.


If, indeed, we accept the premise, that the job of the government is to stabilize society, that it should find someway to mitigate against the affects of "just in time" production for goods, that we as a society deem as critical to the orderly functioning of society. THAT is all I was trying to putting forward.

". . .Natural and man-made disasters will disrupt the flow of energy, goods and services. The down-stream customers of those goods and services will, in turn, not be able to produce their product or render their service because they were counting on incoming deliveries "just in time" and so have little or no inventory to work with. The disruption to the economic system will cascade to some degree depending on the nature and severity of the original disaster.[46][47] The larger the disaster the worse the effect on just-in-time failures. Electrical power is the ultimate example of just-in-time delivery. A severe geomagnetic storm could disrupt electrical power delivery for hours to years, locally or even globally. Lack of supplies on hand to repair the electrical system would have catastrophic effects.[48]"
Just-in-time manufacturing - Wikipedia

Now, if, on the OTH, you do not believe we should be civilized, or even have a government, or that government should not have a national security role? I can respect that too.

What you are suggesting just doesn’t work. Do we have a shortage of something now? What problem are you trying to fix?

The fact that the AG BILL works, demonstrates empirically, IMO, we can do something.

From this point on? We shall just have to agree to disagree.

Now, I will agree with you, that there are many that absolutely HATE the AG BILL, on that, we can agree. Small farmers, international producers, organic farmers, poor farmers that are overseas, etc.

But, IMO, that AG BILL stabilizes prices for domestic consumers, especially the poor people in this nation.

I guess you haven't been paying attention. Most folks that work in the medical community KNOW there is a shortage of face masks. These were all produced in China. The Chinese government is determining where they will send all of the face-masks that they produce throughout the world.

Doesn't it bother you that China has got handle on this pandemic already, but they have a near monopoly on the production and control of medical supplies?

In essence. the Chinese government gets to decide where the pandemic spreads the quickest. They could also do this if we were in a military confrontation with them.

Not Enough Face Masks Are Made In America To Deal With Coronavirus
Not Enough Face Masks Are Made In America To Deal With Coronavirus

". . .The seeds of that problem, says Bowen, can be traced back 15 years. That's when many mask factories moved overseas, where masks could be made at a fraction of Bowen's costs.

Most notably, he says, Kimberly-Clark, which used to be one of the industry leaders, moved its operations.

"The surgical mask supply went from being 90% U.S.-made to being 95% foreign-made in literally one year," Bowen says.

For years, Bowen tried to get the government to pay attention to this issue. He wrote letters to Presidents Obama and Trump, warning that an epidemic could prompt China to stop exporting its supply, leaving American health care in a bind.

He wanted the U.S. government to mandate that hospitals buy more American-made products.

"If every hospital would pay just a few cents more for a mask, there wouldn't be an issue here," he says.

The coronavirus is proving Bowen right. Now, he has the administration's attention.

Last week, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar told the House Appropriations Committee that the country needs 25 times more masks than it currently has stockpiled.. . ." (npr.org)

U.S. Dependence on Pharmaceutical Products From China

America's Monopoly Crisis Hits the Military | The American Conservative

Coronavirus Spurs U.S. Efforts to End China’s Chokehold on Drugs

China pushes all-out production of face masks in virus fight

People line up outside a drugstore in the northeastern Chinese city of Dalian, hoping to buy facemasks on Jan. 31.

I would disagree that the AG bill works. How does it work?.

It works as a political tool to manipulate votes.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So you want our government to allow Apple to treat American factory workers like slaves, and have them live in company barracks with suicide nets, and pay them peanuts like they can do in China?

Seems like a strawman...not a serious question.

So here is a non-serious answer...

I'd prefer that Apple made phones here and paid a UAW wage...and protected that wage through tarriffs if necessary.

Few will be able to afford an $8000 iPhone – which is what one will cost in order for Apple to pay workers $60,000 a year and realize the same profit.

 

[MisterBeale]

That doesn't answer the question. Do you think government should decide how society invests its wealth?

It depends. . . should we have a military?

Jukin' and jivin'.

I don't think government should be subsidizing industry, it shouldn't be dictating the priorities of the economy. Do you?

Do you realize that that's the essence of socialism? I guess not.

My original participation in the thread was comparing certain critical industries with the Agricultural sector.

I am well aware of your political and economic stances, you are pretty dogmatic and extreme in your POV, were it up to you, you would have them get rid of the AG Bill as well too, I have no doubt.

Nothing dogmatic about it. I just want to keep state power and economic power separate. Merging them is a bad idea. And yes, the AG Bill is wrong for the same reasons.

I have a hard time arguing with that.

but. . . . then we also need to get rid of the monopoly of the Post Office as well then.

Likewise, Homeland Security is much too big and obtrusive also. . .

 

[Uncensored2008]

...U.S. re-industrialization?

Why or why not?

You need to be more specific.

You've got to keep in mind I'm not as macro-economically savvy as you are...but what I mean is returning industry from China...and other countries.

Subsidizing it thru tax incentives and even grants...and then instituting some forms if protectionism to allow it to grow.

So you want our government to allow Apple to treat American factory workers like slaves, and have them live in company barracks with suicide nets, and pay them peanuts like they can do in China?

What?

Even for you Guno, that was divorced from all reality.

 

[dblack]

That doesn't answer the question. Do you think government should decide how society invests its wealth?

It depends. . . should we have a military?

Jukin' and jivin'.

I don't think government should be subsidizing industry, it shouldn't be dictating the priorities of the economy. Do you?

Do you realize that that's the essence of socialism? I guess not.

My original participation in the thread was comparing certain critical industries with the Agricultural sector.

I am well aware of your political and economic stances, you are pretty dogmatic and extreme in your POV, were it up to you, you would have them get rid of the AG Bill as well too, I have no doubt.

Nothing dogmatic about it. I just want to keep state power and economic power separate. Merging them is a bad idea. And yes, the AG Bill is wrong for the same reasons.

I have a hard time arguing with that.

but. . . . then we also need to get rid of the monopoly of the Post Office as well then.

Well, that is called out specifically in the Constitution. It's the "anything goes" approach to government interference in the economy that bothers me.

Likewise, Homeland Security is much too big and obtrusive also. . .

Don't get me started. My biggest frustration with Democrats (out of many) is that they failed to repeal the PATRIOT ACT.

 

[g5000]

...U.S. re-industrialization?

Why or why not?

That's what SHOULD have happened when we sent all the "easy" stuff to China.. Should have started in the 90s with emphasis on robotics, AI, nanotech, etc... But we did virtually nothing but allow Asia to make EVERYTHING we need besides food...

Subsidizing it NOW -- may NOT be necessary, because the end of "cheap labor" is almost here.. Even CHINA knows that.. So there WILL BE no labor advantage to manufacturing overseas very soon... ESPECIALLY with the demonstration of how dangerous it is to rely on manufacturing 1/2 way around the world...

This is correct. As Russia, India, and China began moving away from centralized economies and toward free market economies, there were suddenly two billion new laborers in the global pool. They created an astronomical drag on global wages.

That's a giant egg to move through the snake, as it were.

As China and India become more and more consumer societies, there will be tremendous upward pressure on wages. And that will have global effects.

 

[lennypartiv]

The OP doesn't realize there was a reason we wanted unions to become extinct.

 

[g5000]

You've got to keep in mind I'm not as macro-economically savvy as you are...but what I mean is returning industry from China...and other countries.

Subsidizing it thru tax incentives and even grants...and then instituting some forms if protectionism to allow it to grow.

Economically that is very unlikely to work. The USSR was a very closed economy, it failed miserably...

The people of the USSR were DIRT FUCKING POOR so there were no consumers ya dummy.

It's a completely false comparison.

A much better comparison is to compare it with the AG BILL. That is a subsidized industry.

Or the energy industry. That is another industry we subsidize for national security.

Venezuela does a lot is subsidizing, you like the results?

Venezuela's problems have nothing to do with that.

Venezuela's problems have to do with that fact that the entire globalist ruling elite has banned them from buying and selling on the world market.

Actually, Venezuela's economy is entirely dependent on the price of oil. When oil fell through the floor, so did Venezuela.

There was no "globalist elite" stopping them from anything. They shot themselves in the face by making their entire economy rest on a single commodity.

 

[g5000]

Allow me to familiarize all of you with what is known as the Smiley Curve of Production:

This represents where value is added, i.e., where the profits are made, in the production cycle.

As you can see, the big money is in design phase and the distribution phase.

The design phase is the engineering phase. The invention phase. This is where innovation happens, and innovation happens as the result of higher education.

That is where we are seriously flagging, folks. You know who is kicking ass in this part of the Smiley Curve?

India.

The other end of the Smiley Curve is distribution. The Apple Store. The sales part of the picture.

It doesn't take a lot of brains to sell shit, and this is where most of our weight is thrown around these days. Service industry bullshit. That's where we are making our money.

But it isn't the idiot low skilled workforce making that money. It's the owners of the company. You want to make money for yourself, you need to be on the other end of the curve, and that requires an education.

There are factories cranking out laptops by the millions, and at the end of the assembly line they glue on corporate logos. And the logo makes all the difference in how much each laptop will sell for. Pretty crazy.

All because of the Smiley Curve.

But you know what? If someone else starts inventing the new shit, do you think they are going to sell it through US outlets, or will they sell through their own outlets and bring all that cash home?

Yeah. So think about that.

Now look at the middle of the curve. There's no money in manufacturing. That's why a lot of shit is made in China by slaves these days. The margins are just too narrow.

But America is still manufacturing more stuff than it ever has. It really is. People who tell you America doesn't make things any more are FULL OF SHIT.

It just takes a lot less PEOPLE to make all that STUFF. The wonders of automation.


Look at the curve. Think about it. A lot.

I do. All the time.

We are going to get whacked because we are slacking off on the Design side of the curve. The innovation and invention side. That's the genesis of everything which is ever created, folks.

So you better start believing we need a LOT more higher education in America.

A lot more.

I think you fell for a Smiley graph joke.... Any COMPANY that loses touch with it's manufacturing issues and costs is DOOMED... Personally seen it happen when my clients went to China... DESIGNERS never get their hands dirty fixing manufacturing problems that THEY created... Repair people don't have tight coupling to the FACTORY for the hard problems.. Getting modifications into the overseas factory to correct sales issues are more complicated and error prone...

I've watched several of my clients STRUGGLE with these issues.. And I've had WEEKS of frustrating Midnight team calls to the factories in Asia..

Graph was probably part of a MBA thesis that VALUES MBAs... Or an outright attempt to TROLL their colleagues in manufacturing...

We had the same lack of respect for SUPPLY CHAINS and manufacturing when all our electronics went to JAPAN in the 60s/70s... And what you learn is --- that after a year or two -- ALL of your product expertise is IN the factory and NONE of it is available in Dallas Texas headquarters...

They who MANUFACTURE it -- understand your product BETTER than you do...

The model has worked very well for Apple.

 

[g5000]

Just FWIW...I travel to hundreds of factories a year...and the automation is no where near the level the laymanwould expect.

...U.S. re-industrialization?

Why or why not?

No. I would not.

First off, I'm a little baffled by this romance about the industrial era. Steel mill jobs suck dude. You want more people to have sucky jobs? Why?

Risk of being killed. Hot and sweltering all day long. Fumes and chemicals. Covered in soot morning, noon, and night.

This is what we want more of?

Why?

Now I am not opposed to these jobs. But nor am I in favor of them. Better to have more engineering jobs.

In general though, I am utterly opposed to any subsidies for any economic growth at all.

When you grow something in the free-market, you end up with a more robust economy. Because inherently a free-market growth is not dependent on anything but the market.

When you have government driven growth, you end up with an economy dependent on the government.

A perfect example of this, was the windmill industry in the UK. So the UK had huge subsidies for wind power. This naturally resulted in a large growth to the industry.

Then the UK government simply didn't have the money for continued subsidies, and they cut them. The result was a sudden and dramatic crash in the industry.

In the short term, subsidizing industry would create growth. But eventually the government will have to cut those subsidies, and that will result in a crash.

I understand your point. And if free markets operated in a vacuum I would agree...but there is more involved that the free hand of the market.

Auto manufacturing 40 years ago. You can see at least a dozen humans in the photo working on four cars:

Auto manufacturing today. Spot the two humans in this photo. What are they doing?

 

[g5000]

http://conexus.cberdata.org/files/MfgReality.pdf

Almost 88 percent of job losses in manufacturing in recent years can be attributable to productivity growth, and the long-term changes to manufacturing employment are mostly linked to the productivity of American factories.

Not China.

 

[g5000]

That doesn't answer the question. Do you think government should decide how society invests its wealth?

It depends. . . should we have a military?

You dodged a lot...

No. . . my original contention on that whole matter was, some industries should be subsidized, ONLY BASED ON NATIONAL SECURITY GROUNDS.

This is the only reason we have the AG BILL.

If you believe we should even have a government, or if that is the reason we have a government in the first place, FOR NATIONAL SECURITY, that was my original participation in the thread.

You folks are putting up straw-men. i.e. Socialism, government choosing winners and losers, etc. Stop being so hyperbolic. I just don't think the nation should be at the mercy of just in time production and just in time international supply chains for critical necessities. If you have a better solution for this problem? I am all ears.

I suggest you go back and read my very cautious and measured response to the OP.


If, indeed, we accept the premise, that the job of the government is to stabilize society, that it should find someway to mitigate against the affects of "just in time" production for goods, that we as a society deem as critical to the orderly functioning of society. THAT is all I was trying to putting forward.

". . .Natural and man-made disasters will disrupt the flow of energy, goods and services. The down-stream customers of those goods and services will, in turn, not be able to produce their product or render their service because they were counting on incoming deliveries "just in time" and so have little or no inventory to work with. The disruption to the economic system will cascade to some degree depending on the nature and severity of the original disaster.[46][47] The larger the disaster the worse the effect on just-in-time failures. Electrical power is the ultimate example of just-in-time delivery. A severe geomagnetic storm could disrupt electrical power delivery for hours to years, locally or even globally. Lack of supplies on hand to repair the electrical system would have catastrophic effects.[48]"
Just-in-time manufacturing - Wikipedia

Now, if, on the OTH, you do not believe we should be civilized, or even have a government, or that government should not have a national security role? I can respect that too.

What you are suggesting just doesn’t work. Do we have a shortage of something now? What problem are you trying to fix?

The fact that the AG BILL works, demonstrates empirically, IMO, we can do something.

From this point on? We shall just have to agree to disagree.

Now, I will agree with you, that there are many that absolutely HATE the AG BILL, on that, we can agree. Small farmers, international producers, organic farmers, poor farmers that are overseas, etc.

But, IMO, that AG BILL stabilizes prices for domestic consumers, especially the poor people in this nation.

I guess you haven't been paying attention. Most folks that work in the medical community KNOW there is a shortage of face masks. These were all produced in China. The Chinese government is determining where they will send all of the face-masks that they produce throughout the world.

Doesn't it bother you that China has got handle on this pandemic already, but they have a near monopoly on the production and control of medical supplies?

In essence. the Chinese government gets to decide where the pandemic spreads the quickest. They could also do this if we were in a military confrontation with them.

Not Enough Face Masks Are Made In America To Deal With Coronavirus
Not Enough Face Masks Are Made In America To Deal With Coronavirus

". . .The seeds of that problem, says Bowen, can be traced back 15 years. That's when many mask factories moved overseas, where masks could be made at a fraction of Bowen's costs.

Most notably, he says, Kimberly-Clark, which used to be one of the industry leaders, moved its operations.

"The surgical mask supply went from being 90% U.S.-made to being 95% foreign-made in literally one year," Bowen says.

For years, Bowen tried to get the government to pay attention to this issue. He wrote letters to Presidents Obama and Trump, warning that an epidemic could prompt China to stop exporting its supply, leaving American health care in a bind.

He wanted the U.S. government to mandate that hospitals buy more American-made products.

"If every hospital would pay just a few cents more for a mask, there wouldn't be an issue here," he says.

The coronavirus is proving Bowen right. Now, he has the administration's attention.

Last week, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar told the House Appropriations Committee that the country needs 25 times more masks than it currently has stockpiled.. . ." (npr.org)

U.S. Dependence on Pharmaceutical Products From China

America's Monopoly Crisis Hits the Military | The American Conservative

Coronavirus Spurs U.S. Efforts to End China’s Chokehold on Drugs

China pushes all-out production of face masks in virus fight

People line up outside a drugstore in the northeastern Chinese city of Dalian, hoping to buy facemasks on Jan. 31.

Our mask shortage is because of piss poor prior planning, not "because China".

 

[g5000]

Just FWIW...I travel to hundreds of factories a year...and the automation is no where near the level the laymanwould expect.

Have you been to an Amazon fulfillment center?

That's the future.

 

[g5000]

We have to look forward, not backward.

For instance, have you thought of the ramifications of self-driving cars and the impact on the economy and the way we live?


In the future, people who know how to drive a car will be as rare as people who know how to ride a horse.

Currently, a horseless carriage is used only a couple hours a day. Highly inefficient.

In the future, most people will not own a car. They will have a subscription to a car service, like we have cell phone subscriptions now. So a driverless car can be put to work 23 out of 24 hours a day.

That kind of efficiency will mean far less cars are needed on the road. Less cars = less manufacturing of cars. Less mechanics. No more Uber drivers, taxi drivers, truck drivers.

Houses will no longer have a garage attached. No driveway. That will affect construction jobs. Houses will be able to be packed together even more tightly.

So where will the money be? Like I keep saying, service. The people who own the driverless cars will be rolling in it.

Buy their stock. Make sure your kid is prepared for a job there.

 

[Missourian]

Just FWIW...I travel to hundreds of factories a year...and the automation is no where near the level the laymanwould expect.

Have you been to an Amazon fulfillment center?

That's the future.

I have been to MANY Amazon fulfillment centers. The literally hundreds of employees do significantly more than the robots do.

 

[Missourian]

Just FWIW...I travel to hundreds of factories a year...and the automation is no where near the level the laymanwould expect.

...U.S. re-industrialization?

Why or why not?

No. I would not.

First off, I'm a little baffled by this romance about the industrial era. Steel mill jobs suck dude. You want more people to have sucky jobs? Why?

Risk of being killed. Hot and sweltering all day long. Fumes and chemicals. Covered in soot morning, noon, and night.

This is what we want more of?

Why?

Now I am not opposed to these jobs. But nor am I in favor of them. Better to have more engineering jobs.

In general though, I am utterly opposed to any subsidies for any economic growth at all.

When you grow something in the free-market, you end up with a more robust economy. Because inherently a free-market growth is not dependent on anything but the market.

When you have government driven growth, you end up with an economy dependent on the government.

A perfect example of this, was the windmill industry in the UK. So the UK had huge subsidies for wind power. This naturally resulted in a large growth to the industry.

Then the UK government simply didn't have the money for continued subsidies, and they cut them. The result was a sudden and dramatic crash in the industry.

In the short term, subsidizing industry would create growth. But eventually the government will have to cut those subsidies, and that will result in a crash.

I understand your point. And if free markets operated in a vacuum I would agree...but there is more involved that the free hand of the market.

Auto manufacturing 40 years ago. You can see at least a dozen humans in the photo working on four cars:

Auto manufacturing today. Spot the two humans in this photo. What are they doing?

The reality doesn't look like that at all...at least in the US at Claycomo...or in Atlanta.

 

[Missourian]

We have to look forward, not backward.

For instance, have you thought of the ramifications of self-driving cars and the impact on the economy and the way we live?


In the future, people who know how to drive a car will be as rare as people who know how to ride a horse.

Currently, a horseless carriage is used only a couple hours a day. Highly inefficient.

In the future, most people will not own a car. They will have a subscription to a car service, like we have cell phone subscriptions now. So a driverless car can be put to work 23 out of 24 hours a day.

That kind of efficiency will mean far less cars are needed on the road. Less cars = less manufacturing of cars. Less mechanics. No more Uber drivers, taxi drivers, truck drivers.

Houses will no longer have a garage attached. No driveway. That will affect construction jobs. Houses will be able to be packed together even more tightly.

So where will the money be? Like I keep saying, service. The people who own the driverless cars will be rolling in it.

Buy their stock. Make sure your kid is prepared for a job there.

I think you're looking waaaay out in the future. Folks ain't gonna be eager to relinquish their automobiles. They can have a subscription vehicle now...Uber or lyft or a taxi. Not many folks out here turning in their keys...even though with payments, insurance, fuel and maintenance it might be cheaper for them.

P.S.- I can still ride a horse.