Reshoring manufacturing to the US faces significant hurdles beyond just labor costs. Decades of offshoring have eroded the US industrial base, resulting in a shortage of skilled workers, weakened supply chains, and a lack of crucial infrastructure. While automation can address some labor challenges, it requires significant upfront investment and exacerbates the skills gap. Furthermore, complex products like electronics depend on intricate global supply networks that are difficult and costly to replicate domestically. Simply offering incentives or imposing tariffs won't solve these deeply entrenched structural issues, making a rapid and widespread resurgence of US manufacturing unlikely.
U.S. restaurant productivity has seen a surprising surge since 2019, defying typical economic patterns during recessions. This growth is primarily driven by a substantial increase in real revenue, outpacing the rise in employment costs. The study attributes this phenomenon to a combination of factors: restaurants raising menu prices significantly, a shift in consumer spending towards restaurants from other services like travel and entertainment, and operational adjustments like reduced menus and streamlined services adopted during the pandemic that persisted even as restrictions eased. These changes have effectively raised average revenue generated per worker, resulting in the observed productivity boost.
Several commenters on Hacker News discussed the potential reasons behind the reported productivity surge in US restaurants. Some attributed it to increased automation, such as online ordering and kiosk systems, reducing labor needs. Others pointed to a shift in consumer behavior, with more takeout and delivery orders streamlining operations and requiring fewer front-of-house staff. Skepticism was also expressed, with some suggesting the data might be flawed or that increased productivity came at the expense of worker well-being, through higher workloads and fewer benefits. Several commenters also discussed the limitations of using revenue per worker as a productivity metric, arguing that it doesn't capture changes in food quality, portion sizes, or menu prices. Finally, the impact of the pandemic and resulting labor shortages was mentioned, with some speculating that restaurants were forced to become more efficient out of necessity.
The US is significantly behind China in adopting and scaling robotics, particularly in industrial automation. While American companies focus on software and AI, China is rapidly deploying robots across various sectors, driving productivity and reshaping its economy. This difference stems from varying government support, investment strategies, and cultural attitudes toward automation. China's centralized planning and subsidies encourage robotic implementation, while the US lacks a cohesive national strategy and faces resistance from concerns about job displacement. This robotic disparity could lead to a substantial economic and geopolitical shift, leaving the US at a competitive disadvantage in the coming decades.
Hacker News users discuss the potential impact of robotics on the labor economy, sparked by the SemiAnalysis article. Several commenters express skepticism about the article's optimistic predictions regarding rapid robotic adoption, citing challenges like high upfront costs, complex integration processes, and the need for specialized skills to operate and maintain robots. Others point out the historical precedent of technological advancements creating new jobs rather than simply eliminating existing ones. Some users highlight the importance of focusing on retraining and education to prepare the workforce for the changing job market. A few discuss the potential societal benefits of automation, such as increased productivity and reduced workplace injuries, while acknowledging the need to address potential job displacement through policies like universal basic income. Overall, the comments present a balanced view of the potential benefits and challenges of widespread robotic adoption.
Apple announced a plan to invest over $500 billion in the US economy over the next four years. This builds on the $430 billion contributed over the previous five years and includes direct spending with US suppliers, data center expansions, capital expenditures in US manufacturing, and investments in American jobs and innovation. The company highlights key areas like 5G innovation and silicon engineering, as well as supporting emerging technologies. Apple's commitment extends beyond its own operations to include investments in next-generation manufacturing and renewable energy projects across the country.
Hacker News commenters generally expressed skepticism about Apple's announced $500B investment. Several pointed out that this is not new spending, but a continuation of existing trends, repackaged as a large number for PR purposes. Some questioned the actual impact of this spending, suggesting much of it will go towards stock buybacks and dividends rather than job creation or meaningful technological advancement. Others discussed the potential influence of government incentives and tax breaks on Apple's decision. A few commenters highlighted Apple's reliance on Asian manufacturing, arguing that true investment in the US would involve more domestic production. Overall, the sentiment leaned towards viewing the announcement as primarily a public relations move rather than a substantial shift in Apple's business strategy.
Apple announced a plan to invest $430 billion in the US economy over five years, creating 20,000 new jobs. This investment will focus on American-made components for its products, including a new line of AI servers. The company also highlighted its commitment to renewable energy and its growing investments in silicon engineering, 5G innovation, and manufacturing.
Hacker News users discuss Apple's announcement with skepticism. Several question the feasibility of Apple producing their own AI servers at scale, given their lack of experience in this area and the existing dominance of Nvidia. Commenters also point out the vagueness of the announcement, lacking concrete details on the types of jobs created or the specific AI applications Apple intends to pursue. The large $500 billion figure is also met with suspicion, with some speculating it includes existing R&D spending repackaged for a press release. Finally, some express cynicism about the announcement being driven by political motivations related to onshoring and subsidies, rather than genuine technological advancement.
Acer CEO Jason Chen stated that US tariffs on Chinese imports have led to a 10% increase in laptop prices in the United States. Chen explained that while Acer has shifted some production to other countries like Mexico and Taiwan to mitigate the impact, these locations are more expensive than China, resulting in the price hike. He believes that the tariffs ultimately harm American consumers and hopes the situation can be resolved, potentially through regional trade agreements.
HN commenters largely discuss the dubious nature of blaming tariffs for the price increase, pointing out that Acer's profits have increased and questioning whether the tariffs are truly the primary driver. Some suggest the price hike is simply opportunistic, leveraging current economic anxieties and inflation. Others note that component shortages and general inflation likely play a larger role. A few commenters mention that Acer laptops aren't particularly desirable, potentially necessitating price adjustments due to market forces. Several also point out the self-serving nature of the CEO's statement, as it deflects blame from the company itself.
Summary of Comments ( 546 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43692677
Hacker News commenters generally agreed with the article's premise that reshoring manufacturing is complex. Several pointed out that the US lacks the skilled labor pool necessary for large-scale manufacturing, emphasizing the need for vocational training and apprenticeship programs. Some argued that automation isn't a panacea, as it requires specialized skills to implement and maintain. Others highlighted the regulatory burden and permitting processes as significant obstacles. A compelling argument was made that the US focus should be on high-value, specialized manufacturing rather than trying to compete with low-cost labor countries on commodity goods. Finally, some commenters questioned whether bringing back all manufacturing is even desirable, citing potential negative environmental impacts and the benefits of global specialization.
The Hacker News post titled "America underestimates the difficulty of bringing manufacturing back" has generated a substantial discussion with a variety of perspectives on the challenges of reshoring manufacturing.
Several commenters emphasize the significant role of automation in the decline of US manufacturing jobs, arguing that bringing manufacturing back doesn't necessarily equate to bringing back jobs. They point out that even if production returns to the US, it will likely be highly automated, requiring fewer workers than in the past. This leads to discussions about the implications for the workforce and the need for retraining and adaptation to new skillsets.
A recurring theme is the complexity of global supply chains and the difficulty of disentangling them. Commenters highlight the intricate network of suppliers, logistics, and expertise that has developed over decades, making it a formidable task to replicate domestically. Some argue that simply bringing manufacturing back isn't enough; the entire ecosystem needs to be rebuilt, which is a long-term and capital-intensive endeavor.
The issue of cost competitiveness is also prominent. Several commenters point out that labor costs in the US remain significantly higher than in many other countries, making it difficult for domestic manufacturers to compete on price. They discuss the various factors contributing to this cost differential, including regulations, taxes, and healthcare costs. Some suggest that addressing these underlying cost factors is crucial for successful reshoring.
Another key point raised is the decline in skilled trades and manufacturing expertise in the US. Commenters lament the loss of institutional knowledge and the lack of investment in vocational training, which has created a shortage of qualified workers for manufacturing jobs. They argue that rebuilding this skilled workforce is essential for any meaningful reshoring effort.
There's also discussion about the role of government policy in supporting or hindering reshoring. Some commenters advocate for targeted policies to incentivize domestic manufacturing, while others express skepticism about the effectiveness of government intervention. The debate touches on issues such as tariffs, tax breaks, and investments in infrastructure and education.
Finally, some commenters express a more pessimistic view, arguing that the decline of US manufacturing is a structural issue related to globalization and comparative advantage. They suggest that attempting to reverse this trend is unrealistic and potentially counterproductive.
Overall, the comments on Hacker News present a nuanced and multifaceted view of the challenges involved in bringing manufacturing back to the US. The discussion highlights the complex interplay of automation, global supply chains, cost competitiveness, workforce development, and government policy, suggesting that there are no easy solutions to this complex issue.