Made in America: Why the Pushback?"
Just my view---
It's hard to imagine why anyone would be against bringing manufacturing back to America. More jobs, fair trade, and a boost in revenue—all things that seem like a no-brainer for anyone who cares about the nation's economic well-being. The idea of strengthening the economy with homegrown manufacturing sounds like a clear win. After all, when factories are based in the U.S., they support local communities, provide wages for working families, and keep dollars circulating within our own economy. On top of that, a return to manufacturing would mean far less dependency on foreign nations for essentials, something we learned the hard way during COVID-19 when we had to rely on China for many of the goods we desperately needed. We saw firsthand how a broken supply chain could lead to shortages, highlighting just how vulnerable we are when we rely too much on foreign production. So why is it that some people seem to oppose this?
One reason could be rooted in a mindset shaped by convenience and the allure of globalism. There are those who argue that free trade, even if it means outsourcing jobs, benefits consumers by keeping prices low. But this shortsighted view ignores the bigger picture of long-term economic health. There’s a sense of detachment from the consequences of these decisions on a personal level. The focus becomes purely on immediate gains (like cheaper products) without considering the sacrifice of homegrown jobs and local industries.
On a deeper psychological level, some might also reject the idea of revitalizing manufacturing out of fear or resistance to change. There's an underlying belief in some circles that globalism and trade deals are the natural way forward, and any attempt to change that system feels like a threat to their identity or values. For them, protecting the status quo might feel safer or more comfortable, even if it’s not in the nation’s best interest. They may believe that the costs of reintegrating manufacturing are too high—whether it’s financial, social, or even ideological. Some just don’t see the direct connection between the economy and the benefits that local industries can bring.
Moreover, there’s a psychological barrier where people latch onto narratives or beliefs that fit their worldview, even when those ideas don’t make logical sense. It’s a defense mechanism against the discomfort of new ideas or the fear of change, even when the change could potentially be a good thing. And for some, there's an even more divisive reason behind the resistance: a deep, visceral dislike for the current president. Some people are so opposed to his leadership and agenda that they'd rather see the nation falter than allow the policies and direction Trump campaigned on to succeed. It becomes less about what's best for the country and more about their personal disdain for the political figure in charge. In the end, it’s not about what makes sense for the country but about holding onto entrenched feelings and perceptions, even at the cost of national progress.
A few questions
Why would some Americans resist bringing manufacturing back to the U.S. despite the clear economic benefits?
How does our dependency on foreign nations during crises like COVID-19 reveal the importance of domestic manufacturing?
What psychological factors contribute to the resistance against changing global trade systems, even when they harm the nation’s economy?
Can personal political biases shape a person’s stance on issues like domestic manufacturing, even if it goes against the country’s best interests?Shar,
The only reason I can think of is that the left hates this country.
That is why they side with criminals and illegal aliens over American citizens. They do this every time. They will side with transgender and punish Christians.
They're okay with rioting and causing billions of dollars in damage. Attacking a car manufacturing because they don't like politics of cutting out waste, fraud, and abuse of the system. They are a violent group.
The left only cares about being able to force their social agenda on every American whether they like it or not. They are the ones who are authoritarian. When they shout NAZI...I believe they should look in the mirror if they really want to see one.You’re absolutely right—there’s a clear pattern in how the left operates, and it’s hard not to see it as driven by hostility toward traditional American values. They consistently prioritize criminals and illegal immigrants over law-abiding citizens, and anyone who speaks up—especially Christians—gets targeted. The double standard is glaring when you see how they defend riots and destruction as “justice” while vilifying peaceful dissent from the right.
It does feel like their real goal is control—forcing their ideology on everyone, no matter how extreme or harmful. And the irony is rich when they scream “Nazi” at anyone who disagrees while acting out the very authoritarianism they claim to oppose. You're not alone in seeing through it.No Mike, we hate rightwing oriented tyrants that skirt and ignore the law and constitutional prescription at every opportunity. I loath conservatives ideals and thought as basically the attitude that the ends always justify the means. It is the mark of any tyrant and that is what Trump and MAGA represent.
1. I am not so sure that manufacturing jobs would return, why did they leave in the first place? It is not 1890, high quality goods can be manufactured outside the US at reduced labor costs. Capitalists are not going to return here and pay wages commensurate with the American Standard of living, when they can produce and employ people for a fraction of it. I don’t believe that the introduction of the tariff scheme is going to change that substantially. Ask Trump or his daughter how much of the processing of raw materials for their businesses are done abroad? It is just another of Trumps phony promises that the desperate are quick to embrace.
2. Yes, domestic manufacturing is desirable, but in the automated world those jobs and their commensurate benefits of the past are hard to come by and are compensated less than the high tech industries that are yet to be duplicated by others outside and command a higher wage structure.
3. It is not psychological but factual. I am going the believe the preponderance of our educated economists over Trumps “he will fix it” rhetoric. Most of them say this change that Trump is introducing will be more harmful than beneficial.
4. Yes, no question, I loath Trump for a variety of reasons. I don’t trust him. Your bias will give him the benefit of the doubt and will support him regardless of where his policies will lead. I fundamentally distrust the man and his motives as being malevolent at its core. What he reveals appears harmless on the surface and for those that are prepared to follow him off of the precipice. We differ as to what we believe is in this country’s best interests.
There certainly is a lot of rhetoric about the supposed decline of U.S. manufacturing. I'm going to go in a different direction here and propose that this narrative is not true... U.S. manufacturing is not in decline and never has been. We are still one of the greatest industrial powers in the world. The story of U.S. manufacturing and its alleged demise is actually a story about deceptive political narratives of decline and how they distort our view of the world.
Manufacturing output in the United States is somewhere around $2.5 trillion per year, bouncing back to approach its all-time (inflation-adjusted) high in 2007 after recovering from the shocks of the financial crisis and the COVID pandemic. This follows decades of steady increases in output, even during the years people were singing songs about “closing all the factories down” and moaning about the Rust Belt.
A must-read analysis by the Cato Institute’s Colin Grabow sums it up: “In 2021, [the U.S.] ranked second in the share of global manufacturing output at 15.92 percent—greater than Japan, Germany, and South Korea combined—and the sector by itself would constitute the world’s eighth‐largest economy.” Remember when Japan was going to pass us by??
These days, of course, it’s the U.S. versus China. Yes, China now has a bigger share of global manufacturing—but that’s because China has more than four times our population. On a per capita basis, we have more than twice their industrial output. China sounds less impressive when you put it that way, doesn’t it?
And would we want the kind of manufacturing industry China has? It is still a poor country, on average, and its manufacturing has been mostly low-end, inefficient and driven by cheap labor. China’s per capita GDP is one-sixth that of the U.S.—which is to say that most Chinese live below what Americans would consider the poverty line. So we could definitely have their manufacturing—if we were fine being as poor as they are.
As it is, the total U.S. economy is significantly larger than China’s and likely to remain so. So why the narrative of decline?
Most stories about the decline of U.S. manufacturing have little to do with actual manufacturing output, even though people will insist on claiming we “don’t make things anymore.” If you look at the evidence they cite for decline, you will see that it’s mostly about manufacturing employment. It’s not about how much we’re making, but about how many people are making it....
Manufacturing output has gone up and up. Manufacturing employment has declined a bit but is still at the same absolute level it was when America was an acknowledged manufacturing powerhouse.
Once you see this pattern, you won’t be able to unsee it. Look at everything people are saying about the “decline” of manufacturing, and they never talk about manufacturing output, the value of what we’re actually making. Even when they talk about manufacturing employment, they tend not to talk about absolute numbers but about percentages, about what proportion of the workforce is in manufacturing.
When you think about it, this is a crazy way to measure the state of an industry or an economy.
Manufacturing, overtime, has became massively more efficient and productive.
The kind of manufacturing that dominates in the United States tends to be high-tech, automated, skilled and highly productive. We aren’t making as many of the big and simple machines and instead are making more complex electronics. We aren’t making as high a proportion of goods manufactured for the consumer market...which is probably why it seems to the average person that America doesn’t make thing...but we are making more machines and materials that are crucial for businesses. Here is Grabow: “In 2020, for example, the United States was the world’s leading exporter of medical instruments, gas turbines, and aircraft parts—goods not often found on retail store shelves.”
The overall pattern is that not that manufacturing is declining, but that other stuff is growing—more sophisticated stuff, requiring new and higher-level skills, and yielding bigger rewards. Which is a good thing, right? For all the lament about the loss of “good jobs” in manufacturing, Grabow notes that “a 2022 paper found that the wage premium for manufacturing jobs has disappeared and noted that manufacturing wages rank in the bottom half of all jobs in the United States.” Even as factory jobs have been a declining percentage of employment, America is rapidly becoming an upper-middle-class nation. Why? Because the other jobs we’re doing pay better.
The only way in which this signifies “decline” is that manufacturing is no longer dominant. It is no longer the default or expected way for someone to make a living. A 2022 paper found that the wage premium for manufacturing jobs has disappeared and noted that manufacturing wages rank in the bottom half of all jobs in the United States. Manufacturing jobs aren't necessarily better jobs or even "good" jobs.
Additionally, there are manufacturers’ concerns over labor shortages that have been described as the sector’s greatest long-term obstacle to growth. Through most of 2021 and 2022, for example, the number of unfilled U.S. manufacturing jobs never dropped below 800,000, and it remained historically elevated in 2023 even as the industry struggled. Far from a lack of employment opportunities, the apparent greater threat to U.S. manufacturing prosperity is a lack of workers to fill such positions.
But yes, trade plays a role as well. Factories located in other countries have a comparative advantage over those in the United States for certain manufacturing activities. But this shouldn’t provoke undue worry...
"Rather than undermining U.S. prosperity, however, manufacturing’s spread allowed for greater specialization and trade that undergirded the post-war economic boom and rise in living standards. Outsourcing jobs abroad allowed for the creation of new and better compensated jobs within the United States. Driving down the cost of production through cheaper production overseas has allowed U.S. firms to lower prices and increase sales of their products, which in turn increases demand for better compensated jobs in areas such as design, market, and maintaining or servicing these products."
US manufacturing is actually healthier and in better shape than headline numbers and public perception would have it. it would be best to dispense with the fantasy of bringing back traditional assembly-line jobs: They are never coming back, not because of Mexico or China, but because robots and automation are taking the place of people on the factory floor.
There is nothing wrong with politicians’ trying to save what remains of U.S. manufacturing, nor with trying to avoid repeating old mistakes on trade. But like it or not, the U.S. is now a service-based economy. It’s time candidates started talking about making that economy work for workers, rather than pining for one that’s never coming back
"Trump has a fundamental misunderstanding of how trade works. More domestic manufacturing does not mean a better economy,"
It's bizarre to me we are trying to revive the economy of the 1950s when we are on the cusp of a major economic technical revolution.
https://www.cato.org/publications/reali … alization#You mention GDP per capita when comparing the US and China. You might want to look at manufacturing per capita, when comparing the amount of manufacturing from 50 years ago and from today.
I think it is a no-brainer that it has fallen, and fallen drastically. Just look at the percentage of jobs today that are white collar rather than blue and that is quite clear. Yes, automation has helped reduce that difference, but it is still there and very strong.But why is that a bad thing? Why look at it as fallen rather than looking at manufacturing as having changed, evolved?
"But why is that a bad thing? Why look at it as fallen rather than looking at manufacturing as having changed, evolved?" willow
Your comment reframing the decline in manufacturing as simple "evolution" misses the broader point. Yes, manufacturing has become more automated and efficient over time, but that doesn’t erase the real and measurable consequences of its decline per capita. Fewer Americans are employed in manufacturing today, which has drastically reduced the number of well-paying, stable jobs available to those without a college degree. This shift has hit working-class communities especially hard—many towns and regions that once thrived on industrial work have experienced long-term economic decline, increased poverty, and social issues like drug addiction and unemployment.
Beyond the human impact, there are broader economic consequences. A shrinking domestic manufacturing base means less taxable income from that sector, which contributes to higher federal deficits and increased borrowing. As we've offshored more production, we’ve also lost a degree of economic self-reliance, increasing our trade deficits and making us more dependent on foreign supply chains. The decline in manufacturing has also reduced the kind of federal oversight and long-term strategic planning that once came with maintaining a robust industrial economy. So while it’s true that manufacturing has “evolved,” calling it that without acknowledging what’s been lost—economically, socially, and fiscally—oversimplifies a serious national issue.But as I previously mentioned, the decline per capita in manufacturing in the United States is primarily due to a combination of factors including the increased automation, labor productivity gains, and the shift towards a more service-oriented economy. Additionally, outsourcing to countries with lower labor costs... And in outsourcing certain manufacturing, what have we lost? Sweatshops. What have we gained?
A manufacturing focus on producing higher-value goods, often in the sectors of technology, aerospace, and defense...rather than widgets.The argument that the decline in U.S. manufacturing is mainly due to automation, labor productivity, and the shift to a service-based economy makes some valid points, but it doesn't capture the whole picture. Yes, automation and labor productivity have significantly reduced the need for manual labor in manufacturing, but these factors aren't the sole cause of the decline. Outsourcing to countries with lower labor costs has played a huge role too, and this hasn’t always resulted in net positive outcomes for the U.S. economy. While it’s true that focusing on higher-value goods like technology, aerospace, and defense can lead to more sophisticated industries, we’ve also lost the ability to produce basic goods domestically, leaving us reliant on other countries. In this context, outsourcing isn’t just about cutting costs; it’s also about job displacement and the erosion of middle-class manufacturing jobs. What we’ve gained might be more advanced sectors, but we’ve also lost crucial aspects of our manufacturing base, including jobs that provided stable, well-paying opportunities for many. The debate isn’t just about what industries we focus on; it’s about the long-term consequences of hollowing out our manufacturing capacity for the sake of cheaper production overseas.
but we’ve also lost crucial aspects of our manufacturing base, including jobs that provided stable, well-paying opportunities for many.
Yes and the return of traditional blue-collar jobs is very unlikely due to automation. Time Marches on, we can't revive the economy of the 50s or 60s. The face of manufacturing has changed. Fewer people are required and we have shifted into manufacturing of a different type....the millions of people screwing in tiny screws on iPhones as Lutnick tells folks is coming here is laughable.Once again, a prediction, as your prediction inflation would rise in March.... At this point, I can only repeat my sentiments to address your concerns. There is always another side of a coin again here it is ---
Yes, automation and labor productivity have significantly reduced the need for manual labor in manufacturing, but these factors aren't the sole cause of the decline. Outsourcing to countries with lower labor costs has played a huge role too, and this hasn’t always resulted in net positive outcomes for the U.S. economy. While it’s true that focusing on higher-value goods like technology, aerospace, and defense can lead to more sophisticated industries, we’ve also lost the ability to produce basic goods domestically, leaving us reliant on other countries. In this context, outsourcing isn’t just about cutting costs; it’s also about job displacement and the erosion of middle-class manufacturing jobs. What we’ve gained might be more advanced sectors, but we’ve also lost crucial aspects of our manufacturing base, including jobs that provided stable, well-paying opportunities for many. The debate isn’t just about what industries we focus on; it’s about the long-term consequences of hollowing out our manufacturing capacity for the sake of cheaper production overseas."Outsourcing to countries with lower labor costs has played a huge role too, and this hasn’t always resulted in net positive outcomes for the U.S. economy."
China makes widgets cheaply and efficiently. We have a huge amount of unfilled manufacturing jobs right now. How do you reconcile the two? I don't understand what people are wanting to bring back? Widget production? Screwing in little screws on iphones?
No, Apple iPhones won't be made in America anytime soon..if ever.
Regardless, total manufacturing output in this country remains strong and has even seen growth in recent years. This suggests that the sector hasn't been "hurting" or declining in terms of production... Just because we don't manufacture every trinket known to man on our soil does not mean we are declining or suffering. The United States has the world’s second-largest manufacturing economy..."China makes widgets cheaply and efficiently. Meanwhile, we have a massive number of unfilled manufacturing jobs here. How do you reconcile these two facts? What exactly are people trying to bring back? Is it widget production? Screwing in tiny screws on phones?"
This exact sentiment was expressed on MSNBC as well as CNN almost verbatim.
Trinkets?Honestly, your question should give you pause. It sounds almost identical to the talking points you’d hear from left-leaning media outlets. Are you really under the impression that China only supplies the U.S. with cheap trinkets and widgets? That view shows a serious misunderstanding of global trade and just how deeply reliant we are on China—not just for consumer goods but for critical materials and strategic industries.
Fact --- As of 2024, the United States had a trade deficit in goods with China totaling approximately $295.4 billion.
Major Categories of Chinese Exports to the U.S.
Electronics & Electrical Equipment
Broadcasting equipment (e.g., radios, transmitters)
Computers and laptops
Office machine parts
The Observatory of Economic Complexity
Integrated circuits and semiconductors
Telephones and accessories
Electric batteries
Video displays and monitors
Machinery & Industrial Equipment
Nuclear reactors and boilers
General industrial machinery
Electrical transformers
Tools, implements, and cutlery
Furniture & Home Goods
Furniture
Lighting fixtures
Prefabricated buildings
all appliances.
Toys, Games & Sports Equipment
Toys and dolls
Video and card game
Sports requisites
Apparel & Textiles
Knit and non-knit clothing
Footwear
Textile articles and accessories
Plastics & Rubber Products
Various plastic items
Rubber footwear
Rubber tires
Vehicles & Automotive Parts
Passenger vehicles (excluding buses)
Motor vehicle parts and accessories
Optical & Medical Instruments
Optical and photographic equipment
Medical apparatus
Chemicals & Related Products
Organic chemicals
Pharmaceuticals
Fertilizers
Miscellaneous Manufactured Articles
Articles of iron or steel
Articles of leather and travel goods
Miscellaneous base metal articles
Electrical, electronic equipment: $124.52 billion
Trading Economics
Machinery, nuclear reactors, boilers: $88.98 billion
Furniture, lighting signs, prefabricated buildings: $30.66 billion
Trading Economics
Toys, games, sports requisites: $29.36 billion
Trading Economics
Plastics: $23.25 billion
China has been increasing exports in sectors like electric vehicles (EVs), renewable energy equipment (e.g., solar panels, wind turbines), and smart home devices, reflecting global trends towards sustainability and smart technologies.
Steel & Aluminum
Steel Products: China is a major global exporter of steel, supplying various forms such as sheets, coils, and structural components.
Aluminum: China dominates global aluminum production, accounting for over half of the world's output. The U.S. imports significant quantities of aluminum products from China, including sheets, extrusions, and castings, utilized in automotive, aerospace, and construction industries.
Rare Earth Elements (REEs)
China controls over 60% of global rare earth production and nearly 90% of processing capacity. These elements are vital for manufacturing permanent magnets used in electric vehicles, wind turbines, fighter jets, and various consumer electronics.
Critical Minerals & Strategic Materials
Gallium & Germanium
Essential for semiconductors, solar panels, and fiber optics. China supplies over 50% of the U.S. demand for these materials.
Antimony
Used in flame retardants, batteries, and military applications. China accounted for 63% of U.S. imports of antimony metal and oxide in recent years.
Graphite
Critical for lithium-ion battery anodes. China controls 80% of global graphite output and processes 70% of it, making its dominance a significant bottleneck in the clean energy supply chain.
Carbon Credits
Other Critical Minerals
Yttrium: Used in catalysts and microwave filters; China supplies 94% of U.S. imports.
Bismuth: Utilized in metallurgy; China provides 65% of U.S. imports.
Arsenic: Important for semiconductors; 57% of U.S. imports come from China.
Tungsten: Used in metallurgy; China accounts for 29% of U.S. imports.
America pretty much depends on everything from China. Do you ever look at labels?In looking at your list, do you think it wise that Trump started a trade war with China?
Using an analogy...when it comes to real war, if you have reason to be afraid of being invaded, it would be suicidal to provoke your adversary before you’ve armed yourself. That is essentially what Trump’s economic attack risks: given that the U.S. economy has dependence on Chinese sources for some vital goods. it is wildly reckless, in my opinion, not to ensure alternate suppliers or adequate domestic production BEFORE cutting off trade. By doing it the other way around, the administration is inviting exactly the kind of damage it says it wants to prevent....
I suggest you take a look at the extensive list of products China exports to the U.S. Your comment didn’t make much sense to me, especially given your view that China only exports “widgets.” It also sounded almost identical to the latest talking points coming from the left-wing media—right down to the use of words like “widgets” and “trinkets.”
I am really not trying to advance the idea that we only import superfluous items from China. But I think the issue is that China is very efficient in their manufacturing processes
They are the most automated and 60% of the worlds robots are deployed in Chinese manufacturing. This makes them masters at producing the trinkets, the toys the clothing the home accessories, the shoes and so on.
On top of that they are able to make products faster, better and yet 50–75% cheaper than anyone else. How do you compete with that?
If the U.S. wants to manufacture things for themselves, people need to prepare for a 100–150% increase of prices. That equates to crippling inflation. What is the answer?
As far as some of the other things that we import, the minerals and chemicals. I see that as more of their geographic advantage. We just don't have those things here in the supply needed, so what do you do?They use slave labor.
They have subjugated an entire foreign population.Yes, It’s cheaper to manufacture goods overseas, where labor is less expensive Do you believe people here in America would be willing to pay much more for items that can be made cheaply elsewhere? I don't think so. .
When Obama asked the late Apple CEO Steve Jobs about making an iPhone in the U.S., Jobs didn't mince words.
"Those jobs aren't coming back," lol that was in 2011.
What do analysts put the cost of an iPhone made in America today? Around $3,000... Apple is obviously going to continue putting those phones together in China.
This reality, however, has not penetrated the Trump administration’s myopic economic thinking. To listen to the White House talk about tariffs and trade is to hear a message on manufacturing that would have made more sense in the 1970s or 1980s.
Trump’s obsession with manufacturing is the economic equivalent of missing the forest for the trees. The fact is, even if the U.S. could bring more manufacturing back to the United States, there’s little evidence that it’s what Americans want. If they did, perhaps there wouldn’t have been 482,000 unfilled manufacturing jobs in February...Greed is a tremendous thing, isn't it? "I want what I want, and I want it for less than we can make it.". Forget the future, forget our children, forget our nation; give me what I want!
If it were not the typical liberal thinking it would be laughable. But it is, and it is not funny to watch as liberals literally destroy our country with their greed.
(I would point out that the components of an Apple phone don't even come close to the cost of the phone. No, it is the other matters, the programming, the chip design, etc. that make it so expensive. It could be assembled here for very little more, but it won't be. The greed for those few extra bucks is strong.)Well for me, in terms of a phone for example it's not "I want" but "I need"... And I can't afford to pay $3,000 for a phone, paying $1,000 for a phone is enough of a struggle... As far as phones being assembled here, no Americans aren't willing to work for those kind of wages that would make it affordable. Plus, people keep ignoring the fact that almost half a million manufacturing jobs in this country are unfilled as of February of this year.... And in terms of grade? The accusations of "liberal greed" I think are misplaced, why no talk of corporate greed??
Never paid a thousand bucks for a phone in my life, not close...
But I guess you WANT the latest greatest phone, huh?
Can't be seen schlepping around with an Android phone, oh my, what would people say?All quarrels aside. The tariff war with China is a war that the US can't win. It will only be worse of, compared with before the tariff war.
China controls almost the entire rare earth market. Raw materials used in all electronics. in the end China has more leverage over the US than the other way around. Plus the US has distanced itself from its former trade partners.
In other words the US is fighting trade wars on different front lines. A terrible strategic.
As well China is a one party system with a very small group of people deciding. They can be far harsher to it's own population than Trump can towards the US voters and cooperation. (talking about a consequential crisis)
Also the Chinese mindset is completely different. They think in decades not in seconds (What Trump is doing with his impulsive influencer behavior)The answer then is to continue as we are, slowly giving China enough American dollars to purchase the entire country? You paint a pretty bleak picture.
Perhaps I do. But if you do it slowly. (Chinese tactics, think in decades... What the west can't) You have more room to negotiate and to adjust. If you play all or nothing, what Trump is doing, you loose, as it will mean US against the rest of the world. And the rest of the world together (even China alone) is stronger.
Fighting on to many front lines and you loose.
From an ecological point of view I'm all in for buying local. (and not just groceries but also commodities, clothing etc). As we basically destroy this world with crude oil used for transport. (tankers, trucks, planes etc.)
But the world market is what it is, a world market. And I don't think Americans want to do the dirty cheap and dangerous jobs that are done in China.
Why would Nike dislocate a trainers factory from China to the US. (which will take years...) same for HP, Apple, Versace etc.Ahhh... someone who understands the Chinese gameplan.
China's goal is to supplant America as the Global Leader... economically... militarily... in every way possible.
In turn, China's goal is to subordinate America to its wishes, and subjugate it like it will subjugate everyone else, to the extent that they can.
Maybe it won't be as bad as the Uyghurs:
"In January 2021, the U.S. State Department declared that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) was committing genocide against the Muslim ethnic minority Uyghurs in the Xinjiang Autonomous Region of China."
But it will be at least as bad as how they dominate Iran:
China dominates Iran's economy, with 92% of its oil exports directed to China. This dependency comes at the cost of significant autonomous restrictions and adherence to stringent terms dictated by China.
Chinese engineers have also built infrastructure in Iran, including bridges, dams, railroads, and tunnels. In a way making Iranians second class citizens in their own country.
Not that I don't think some Americans don't deserve it... the lack of interest in what our government/politicians are doing... or... the ignorance of those who fail to see how they serve corporate and foreign interest rather than the interests of American citizens... and... the lack of Patriotism and belief in America's freedoms that so many now have contempt for...
Falls under... you get what you deserve... right?
The economic collapse... or the impoverishment of the majority of Americans and the eradication of the Middle Class...
If you want to know what is in store for America... look North... to Canada... which has been owned by China for a while now.
It’s easy to say the U.S. can’t win a tariff war with China, but that argument overlooks several key dynamics that level the playing field more than people think. Yes, China dominates the rare earth market, but “control” is a strong word. The U.S. and other nations have already begun aggressively diversifying their rare earth supply chains, investing in places like Brazil, Australia, and even domestic sources. So that leverage, while real today, is far from absolute and is weakening over time. As for the U.S. being worse off since the tariff war began, it’s not that black and white. Manufacturing has seen pockets of resurgence, and tariffs did shift some supply chains away from China, which was part of the goal.
Now, claiming China has “more leverage” just because it can operate as a one-party state is both oversimplified and dangerous logic. Sure, authoritarian systems can act swiftly, but that doesn’t always mean they act smartly. Economic pain cuts both ways. China’s economy was also damaged by the tariffs, and their export-reliant model doesn’t handle demand shocks well. On top of that, the U.S. dollar still rules global trade, and U.S. consumer demand continues to be the engine of the world economy. That’s leverage too.
And while Trump’s tactics may seem impulsive on the surface, there’s a case to be made that his disruption forced long-overdue conversations about fair trade, IP theft, and national security vulnerabilities. China may think in decades, but the U.S. isn’t just thinking in seconds, it’s finally thinking about the next move after decades of being passive. Strategy doesn’t always look pretty, but that doesn’t mean it’s not working in ways people aren’t yet seeing.The US has not enough rare earth materials today. How it is in one year time doesn't matter. As the tariff war is today.
True, the US dollar is still very important. And perhaps the most powerful tool in the toolbox. But it can easily turn against the US with huge inflation. Already the gold price has gone up.
Trump tactics may seem impulsive. They are. He is an impulsive man.
There are so many professionals from the economic field who say that Tariffs don't work. I'm not an economist and neither is Trump. But I would listen to the best economists in the field as a president, but I don't have the impression that Trump does.It’s important to remember that Donald Trump was very transparent about his bold agenda—including his use of tariffs and his unorthodox leadership style. He campaigned on these issues very clearly in 2016 and again in 2024. And the fact that he won a historic number of votes second only to Biden this shows that a significant portion of the American electorate was not only aware of his agenda but actively supported it.
Whether someone agrees with his demeanor or not, he wasn’t hiding who he was, and never has.
As for tariffs, while some economists criticize them, others, especially those in favor of economic nationalism or protecting domestic industries, have supported their strategic use. Trump didn’t just ignore experts; he simply aligned with a different school of thought, often reflecting the concerns of American workers and industries that had long felt ignored by more globalist policies.
So to suggest that Trump acts solely on impulse ignores the broader context: he followed through on campaign promises that millions of Americans voted for. Like him or not, that’s not recklessness—that’s representation.No he definitely wasn't hiding his ideas. With acting on impulse I was thinking about his: One day tariffs, other day delay of tariffs, then tariffs again... This insecurity isn't attractive for companies to invest in the US.
The other thing that I think is not good for the US is the strategy of wanting to do it alone. What if Canada, UK and Europe come together as an economic block? Now Trump is making a tariff war with those three powerful markets?
As I said trump started a tariff war on to many fronts. (in my humble opinion)Only my view --- That’s a fair concern, but here’s the other side of the coin: the back-and-forth on tariffs is actually part and parcel of what a tariff war looks like, it’s not necessarily a sign of indecision but rather a strategic maneuvering tactic. In my view, Trump’s shifting tariff positions, implementing them, pausing them, and reinstating them were meant to apply pressure and maintain leverage in negotiations. This isn’t unusual in trade battles, where flexibility can sometimes be a strength rather than a weakness. Companies might prefer stability, yes, but they also understand that international trade disputes rarely play out in a straight line. As for the idea of going it alone, that’s debatable too. The U.S. was asserting its own terms after decades of trade imbalances, and while cooperation with allies is ideal, sometimes a firm stance is needed to shake up entrenched systems. Betting on the formation of a powerful counter-block like Canada, the UK, and the EU uniting fully against the U.S. is speculative, as each of those countries has its own economic priorities and dependencies with the U.S. However, food for thought.
Trump’s approach may be aggressive, but it was rooted in a broader effort to recalibrate trade dynamics that many Americans felt were no longer fair.
You would be hard pressed to find anyone with even a mid-level of credibility that supports Trump's current course of action with tariffs
That statement overlooks a key point: it’s the American people who sent Trump to Washington, trusting him to keep his promises, one of which was to bring about fair trade. His tough stance on tariffs, particularly with China, was a core part of his campaign. Voters, especially in manufacturing-heavy regions, wanted a president who would fight for fairer trade deals and hold other countries accountable.
Economists can debate the effectiveness of tariffs, but many in the protectionist camp argue that they are essential for promoting domestic industry and protecting national security. Trump is doing what he promised the American people: standing up for their interests and addressing the negative impacts of globalization.
By dismissing this support, you're ignoring a large, politically active segment of the electorate who view tariffs not just as economic tools but as a necessary step in restoring U.S. sovereignty in trade. Trump is fulfilling the trust placed in him by the voters who sent him to Washington.
Regarding his actions, he's not doing anything outside the norm for an ongoing trade war. Things are not stagnant; one can expect a back-and-forth until agreements are reached."That statement overlooks a key point: it’s the American people who sent Trump to Washington, trusting him to keep his promises, one of which was to bring about fair trade. "
Yeah there's no accounting for poor judgment. Maga owns this, that's for sure.Own what? So far, I don’t see anything to be overly concerned about when it comes to the trade war. I expected some market fluctuations, but that’s normal. What I’m seeing is the media spinning endless 'what if' scenarios—some people are running around like their hair’s on fire.
Shar,
I'll gladly own what President Donald Trump has done.
Will the democrats own what a dementia-ridden democrat president did for four years? Can they do it without rationalizing it or making excuses?
I don't think so.Exactly! I mean, who wouldn’t want to own a legacy that includes wandering offstage like he's looking for a Dairy Queen, talking about his uncle being eaten by cannibals like it’s a bedtime story, and giving speeches that sound like rejected “Mad Libs” drafts?
And oh, the note cards — presidential flashcards for when you can’t remember if you're in Iowa or on Mars. Meanwhile, the Democrats are out here acting like he’s the second coming of FDR… if FDR forgot what country he was leading.
But sure, let’s clutch pearls over Trump’s tweets while Joe’s actively driving the economy into a ditch and calling it a smooth ride. Their hypocrisy would be hilarious if it wasn’t so dangerous.
Dan, Yeah, this is the kind of thinking that sounds like “common sense” on the surface to some, but it’s really just people getting comfortable with a broken system. Like, it’s cheaper to make stuff overseas; we all know that. (And in the next breath carrying on about slave labor) Instead of asking why it’s that way or if it’s actually good for the country long-term, people just accept it like it’s gravity. That mindset, “those jobs aren’t coming back”, is exactly why nothing changes.
There’s also this weird idea that Americans only care about low prices and wouldn’t pay more for goods made here. But come on, if companies never even offer that choice or explain why it matters, how would people ever know what they’d support? People make choices based on what they’re given, and all we’ve been fed for decades is that cheap = good.
The tone in Willows's comment acts like trying to bring back manufacturing is some outdated fantasy, but honestly, what’s outdated is thinking we can keep sending everything overseas and still have a strong, independent economy. COVID clearly showed how risky that is. We’re dependent on other countries for way too much, not just phones, but pretty much everything--- the list is long. One only need to look around their home to see most all comes fro China.
It’s not about being stuck in the 1970s. It’s about not wanting the U.S. to be completely hollowed out. Yes, bringing manufacturing back would take time, effort, and maybe even higher prices for a while. That’s what leadership is for. Fix it, make it better... Just brushing it off because it's hard? That’s not realism — that’s giving up. That is not what the Americans who built the country did."There’s also this weird idea that Americans only care about low prices and wouldn’t pay more for goods made here. "
We have to look no further than eggs to very clearly see how Americans feel about higher prices... To be honest, in my opinion, Americans don't give a crap where this stuff is made, they want things that are at a reasonable cost. And when they don't get it, oh they're going to wail and whine and cry.And that would be your opinion. And not sire if anyone can speak for all American's. Especially after this last election. I see whining for one side at this point.
LOL we need only two revisit the maga wing posts from this forum over the last year describing the abject suffering Americans were enduring due to high prices of certain items.
That would be factual, but we connected the high prices to the poor decision-making of the previous administration, which led to a 9% inflation rate. It’s important not to confuse the two. Anyone with common sense could see that a tariff war would cause issues, so your analogy doesn’t really make sense. We were prepared, and let me remind you that in the past three months, we’ve still seen a decline in food products, energy costs, and even interest rates on homes. You clearly consider yourself to be “winning,” but I’ve pointed out economic stats that are positive, and yet, you seem unhappy about that. Sorry, but this tells me that you might hope to see us go backward just to satisfy your dissatisfaction with losing the election to Trump.
Trump is the only one trying to drag this country backward... Yes to the Golden age of 1890.
"It’s about not wanting the U.S. to be completely hollowed out.
The United States still has the largest economy in the world, the best-performing economy of all developed countries, and the seventh wealthiest country in the world in terms of GDP per capita...
This is hollowed out?
Plus as of February of this year, we have almost half a million manufacturing jobs that are unfilled...As of the most recent data (2024), the United States still has the largest economy in the world when measured by nominal GDP — that's the raw dollar value of goods and services produced.
Here’s a quick breakdown:
United States: Around $27 trillion in nominal GDP.
China: Around $17–18 trillion in nominal GDP.
However, if you look at Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) — which adjusts for cost of living and inflation — China actually edges out the U.S. In PPP terms, China's economy is often estimated to be slightly larger than America's.Again, in light of my previous post, how is this "hollowed out? "
Plus, I forgot to mention in the previous post that unemployment is very low, really almost full employment.
Quoting the Cato Institute to defend the state of U.S. manufacturing is like quoting Big Tobacco on the health benefits of smoking. Cato is a libertarian think tank funded by billionaires and corporate interests, not exactly known for their concern about working-class Americans. Their entire mission is to minimize government and champion free-market policies. The same policies that helped offshore American jobs in the first place.
Yes, we still manufacture things, but that doesn't mean there's no decline. You can cherry-pick output numbers all day long, but that doesn’t undo the fact that entire communities were hollowed out, wages stagnated, and the middle class shrank while CEOs got rich. The real issue isn’t whether America makes aircraft parts—it’s that millions of people who used to make a living building things now can’t afford a house, healthcare, or even a stable future.
Cato’s version of “everything is fine” conveniently ignores the human cost, and that’s not a serious argument. That’s just spin."it’s that millions of people who used to make a living building things now can’t afford a house, healthcare, or even a stable future.
Robots now do many those jobs. How we manufacture things has changed drastically from decades ago. What we manufacture has changed drastically. US manufacturing has increasingly moved towards higher-skilled roles and specialized jobs. We need to better prepare our people for those types of jobs rather than widget making. And you haven't addressed the fact that there are almost half a million unfilled manufacturing jobs in this country today....yet, The United States is the world's second-largest manufacturer after China.
With our advancements in humanoid robotics, it's probably time to separate the idea of manufacturing capability from manufacturing jobs. 'Factory' jobs for humans are going the way of buggy whips.
Manufacturing capabilities are a different matter. They are as important as ever—just not as a job producer. The perspective of the Cato article makes sense.
GACorrect...if we depend on foreign nations for our computer chips and engine parts we will not see mid-century without declining to a 2nd rate nation.
The correction needs to be made immediately or it won't be made... the idea that politicians being backed by Chinese funds or Open Borders ideals will fix our problems is ludicrous.
And then there's this...
In February 2025, the U.S. had 482,000 open manufacturing jobs, according to the latest Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey. This figure indicates a significant number of unfilled positions in the manufacturing sector. For example, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) estimated that there would be 1.9 million unfilled jobs in manufacturing by 2033....
Investments in US manufacturing would likely push the number of unfilled jobs even higher.... Not to mention immigration policies. Lol, this Administration is so misguided.
https://www.union-bulletin.com/news/nat … challenge.The U.S. is in a precarious financial situation, and if these issues aren't addressed, the country could face dire consequences. One of the most pressing concerns is the soaring national debt, which exceeds $33 trillion, representing about 120% of GDP. This debt is growing due to rising entitlement spending, particularly on programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, as well as defense expenditures and the increasing costs of servicing the debt. In 2024, interest payments on the debt are projected to exceed $800 billion—more than the entire discretionary spending on defense or education. The government's persistent budget deficits, amounting to approximately $1.8 trillion in 2024, further exacerbate the problem. This deficit spending, where the government borrows money to fund operations, is unsustainable in the long term, especially as the costs of mandatory programs continue to grow.
The sustainability of entitlement programs is another major issue. Social Security and Medicare are facing long-term funding shortfalls, with Social Security expected to begin running deficits in the mid-2030s and Medicare's trust fund projected to run out within the next few decades. Rising healthcare costs, which already make the U.S. the world's top spender on healthcare, are a significant strain on the federal budget. Meanwhile, the trade deficit, which was about $1 trillion in 2024, weakens the U.S. economy by creating an outflow of wealth to other countries, further stressing the nation's financial position.
Interest rates are also rising, which increases the burden of debt servicing, and with the Federal Reserve continuing to increase rates to curb inflation, this will likely make it harder for the government to manage its finances. At the same time, rising inequality is making it harder for the U.S. economy to grow, as the wealth gap continues to widen, reducing consumer spending and creating social instability. Productivity growth in the U.S. has stagnated, further limiting the ability to generate the wealth needed to cover rising government costs. Additionally, the U.S.'s global influence is being challenged by rising economic competitors, especially China, which threatens to erode the country's ability to maintain leadership in the world economy.
Environmental costs, particularly due to climate change, present another financial risk. Disasters like hurricanes, wildfires, and floods are becoming more frequent and expensive to manage, while the necessary transition to sustainable energy will require massive investment. Political gridlock in Washington, where both parties struggle to agree on fiscal reforms, exacerbates these financial challenges. The country's infrastructure is aging, and sectors like healthcare, housing, and education are increasingly unsustainable without reform.
If these financial issues are not addressed, the U.S. faces the possibility of inflationary pressures, a potential debt crisis, reduced global standing, and growing social and economic instability. A debt crisis could result in a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating, making it more expensive to borrow money and leading to higher interest rates. This could trigger a financial crisis with severe consequences for the economy. Additionally, social unrest could increase as inequality continues to grow, eroding trust in political institutions and making it harder to implement necessary reforms. Immediate action is needed to reduce spending, reform entitlement programs, increase productivity, and create bipartisan solutions to restore fiscal health and ensure the nation's financial future. If left unaddressed, the U.S. could be headed toward a fiscal cliff with long-term economic decline and reduced global influence.
Maybe we can just print cash and rush the inevitable. Or maybe support the guy who is trying to fix some of our problems. Status quo is how we ended up where we are.If you believe the political rhetoric, you probably think America’s industrial base has been hollowed out, gutted or “shipped overseas.” Across the ideological spectrum, people say U.S. manufacturing is in decline. They argue mostly about who’s to blame and how many tariffs we need to fix the problem.
This widely told tale is wrong.
For one thing, for all the talk of job losses and economic decline, it’s worth remembering that the unemployment rate is a very low 4.1% and real wages (those adjusted for inflation) have been growing. If anything, manufacturing is suffering a labor shortage, with more than 600,000 open jobs in the sector.
It’s also worth noting that U.S. manufacturing output, even adjusted for inflation, is near all-time highs. While about 5% below its December 2007 peak, it’s up 177% compared with 1975, the year America last ran an annual trade surplus. Industrial production, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined is higher than ever. That’s hardly a collapse.
A principal source of confusion is the difference between jobs and output. Yes, the number of workers in manufacturing has declined dramatically... from around 19 million in 1980 to about 13 million today. But that didn’t happen because America stopped making things. It happened because we got incredibly good at making things.
Productivity in manufacturing has surged thanks to automation, technology and global supply chains. Just as we now produce more food than ever with just over 1% of Americans working in agriculture (down from around 75% in 1800), we produce more manufactured goods with far fewer workers. That’s not economic decline; it’s progress.
Also fueling the perception of decline are regional factors. Shuttered factories in Detroit or Youngstown bring concentrated pain and struggle for affected workers. No one denies this. But manufacturing didn’t disappear; it relocated and upgraded.
That makes conversations about its so-called demise counterproductive. The conversation should be about how we can best help these communities, including empowering them to benefit from changes that have been more helpful than harmful for the country as a whole.
High-tech manufacturing has boomed in other parts of America, creating jobs in aerospace, semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, and advanced machinery and services. These jobs command much higher wages than manufacturing jobs used to. Output of computer and electronics products has grown 1,200% since 1994. Motor vehicle output is up well over 60%. America and its workers excel in these industries, where we have significant comparative advantages.
The biggest job and output losses were in sectors like apparel, textiles and furniture. Apparel and leather-goods output, for example, have fallen more than 60% since 2007. Should we do something about this?
If we could reverse these trends, it would mean pushing relatively prosperous manufacturing workers back into lower-paying jobs making clothing and shoes. If we could generate a manufacturing boom, we still wouldn’t turn back into a nation of factory workers, because the way to manufacturing competitiveness is through automation.
Then there’s the reality that young people would rather work in the service industry. That leads us to another myth: that a service-heavy economy is somehow weak or unproductive. In truth, services now make up about 79% of U.S. gross domestic product. That’s what rich economies look like. As we grow wealthier, our demand for services such as healthcare, education and entertainment rises relative to demand for manufactured goods.
It’s a consequence of rising prosperity, which also spurs innovation and helps explain why manufacturing gets more efficient. As service-sector jobs become more attractive, manufacturers must raise wages or invest in labor-saving technology to compete for workers. If Americans today were willing to work for 1950s wages in 1950s factories, we’d have less automation. We’d also be much poorer.
Finally, some argue we must protect domestic industries like steel or semiconductors for national security reasons. Even famed economist Adam Smith, who laid out the case for free trade, carved out an exception for defense. But the notion that defense protectionism creates all that many jobs is another myth. They will be offset by job losses in other U.S. industries.
“America doesn’t make anything anymore” is a powerful talking point, but it’s false. We make plenty, including some of the most complex, high-valued goods in the world, from aircraft to pharmaceuticals to advanced electronics. Our workers don’t make many T-shirts or toasters; other countries can do it more cheaply. And the more successfully we produce and export advanced machinery, the more foreign goods we can afford to import.
America’s industrial base is not collapsing. It’s evolving... becoming more productive, more specialized and more capital-intensive. Protectionism won’t bring back the past or revive old jobs. It will just make the future more expensive and shift workers into lower-paying jobs.
https://www.creators.com/read/veronique … r-yourself
Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.
Related Discussions
- 73
Trump and his vision of bringing back manufacturing to the U.S.
by Mike Russo 3 weeks ago
.Trump's vision of manufacturing is in the days of billowing smokestacks. assembly lines, and conveyor belts where all kinds of workers are doing their bit and piece to assemble products that come rolling off the assembling lines and that those workers will be paid a great wage..In today’s world,...
- 8
Whom should we blame that China is fast overtaking the U.S. as a leading economi
by ngureco 10 years ago
Whom should we blame that China is fast overtaking the U.S. as a leading economic power?
- 56
Why is the American Middle Class So Poor?
by Scott Belford 10 years ago
To cement the fact that since the 1980s, the rich have been getting richer because the middle class is shrinking and the poor are getting poorer was the recent announcement that the American Middle Class, the bulwark of this Nation, is no longer the richest middle class in the world and has fallen...
- 37
No Debate About The Poor Or Other Important Issues In Pres. Debates
by Thomas Byers 12 years ago
Rev. Jackson pointed out that their is no debate in the Presidential Debates about the Poor, the Homeless, and the Hungry. Are both of our Presidential Candidates ducking the important issues? What do you think?He also pointed out that there has been no debate about gun violence. At some point in...
- 24
In what ways is Mitt Romney worse than George W. Bush?
by peanutroaster 12 years ago
In what ways is Mitt Romney worse than George W. Bush?I'll start off the discussion with a few observations: 1. He actually profits from shipping jobs to China. 2. No one in his family ever served in the armed forces and he's doesn't even appear to care about veterans. I could go...
- 8
Is outsourcing of production good or bad for an economy?
by Chuck Nugent 12 years ago
Is outsourcing of production good or bad for an economy?Outsourcing has become a topic in the current Presidential campaign. In answering this question please explain how it helps or harms an economy.