[machpamb]

That's why you need to open up your borders.

[Wmshyrga]

Sava, you're pretty much correct on all points.

[SkapySisy]

It's pretty clear he was being sarcastic.

[Sthjrderfida]

That's why you need to open up your borders.

Maybe if Russia opened its borders to Chinese immigration it could also boast such a work force

[thehhhyips]

That's why you need to open up your borders.

IMO, Makeup of the work force is one of the least of the issues with industry flexibility.

[E4qC1qQ5]

Newt will move manufacturing to the moon. But it will be an American moon.

[Flikemommoilt]

They can choose to work for 31 cents an hour, but aren't allowed to choose to kill themselves. ****ing police state!

[NumStulpata]

They're working for $1.75 an hour nowadays.

[colmedindustry]

While the wage rate disparity is often creditted for the movement of industry off shore, I find the real reasons people will continue to do business in preference with China et. al. is not that the labor is cheaper per se but (that despite the longer supply chain) the ability to make changes midstream.

As an example, when a fab shop for circuit boards runs up against a permitting delay in the US of upwards of 2 years before they can even break ground (for an item that realistically has a product lifecycle and more importantly a profitability window on the same time scale) let alone think about comissioning and operating.

Why would someone think the US is going to get manufacturing back, when foreign based green field shops can be erected sans permitting delays in a matter of months? If a manufacturer decided to be US supplied, his competitors would easily be able to out innovate by bringing multiple generations of product to market before the gen 1 US version even rolled out of the fab shops.

The biggest advantage is not the absolute labor costs but more importantly how willing the society is to make the changes, one of the biggest drivers in that area is the extent to which government inhibits flexibility/change.

This is not to say that the anecdotal "run your laborers into the ground to make things happen" stories are not indicative of a cultural mindset. However, that kind of flexibility only becomes apparent once the decision has already been made to go offshore. The driver for making that decision in the first place is the inability to get things done in the US at the outset.

[iroxmxinau]

Massive inflation.
Collapsed Dollar.
American Economic Depression.
Chinese world domination.

In that order.

I'm not so sure about the last one.

[Britiobby]

Everything goes in cycles.

I remember twenty years ago, when Call centers always looked at Omaha, Neb to set up shop because the labor there was cheap and they had invested a lot in their communications infrastructure. Their success in this area led to a stampede of companies relocating their call centers there. But eventually, due to demand, the labor costs started rising, especially for experience supervisors and managers. The savings started to evaporate but their infrastructure kept it going a while longer. To no ones surprise, other depressed areas in the US were able to compete with lower rates, and eventually other countries got into the game.

Costs are rising in China which will eventually move a lot of business to less developed countries where it is even cheaper. (granted after some infrastructure upgrades)
There will be a window for the US to reclaim a SMALL part of the business where the manufacturing cost differences can be offset by reduced delivery costs.

[Gintovtosik]

There was a reason I capitalized SMALL. But I think it will be a bit more than you think.

[DarrenBent]

Those jobs aren't coming back. Learn a new trade or better create one.

[Drugmachine]

When China controls its exchange rate all it does is print yuan and exchange them for foreign currency, IIUC. Can a country really dominate the global economy by printing money?

[CHEAPCIALISFORYOU]

When China controls its exchange rate all it does is print yuan and exchange them for foreign currency, IIUC. Can a country really dominate the global economy by printing money?

No.