Donald Trump is returning jobs to America. Foxconn will relocate its factory to the United States. How does that affect China?

Updated on : January 17, 2022 by Zachary Freeman



Donald Trump is returning jobs to America. Foxconn will relocate its factory to the United States. How does that affect China?

We have everything made in China, the United States today cannot survive without low-end Chinese products. Things start to change after Donald Trump took office from Obama.

Is China, the world's factory, "emptying"?

Chinese academics and workers have seen a sea change in this situation after US President-elect Donald Trump began urging, and even intimidating, American companies to return jobs to the United States in a at a time when China's tax and regulatory regimes are turning hostile to private manufacturers. .

Donald Trump is indeed a talented businessman, went through bankruptcy and came back

Keep reading

We have everything made in China, the United States today cannot survive without low-end Chinese products. Things start to change after Donald Trump took office from Obama.

Is China, the world's factory, "emptying"?

Chinese academics and workers have seen a sea change in this situation after US President-elect Donald Trump began urging, and even intimidating, American companies to return jobs to the United States in a at a time when China's tax and regulatory regimes are turning hostile to private manufacturers. .

Donald Trump is indeed a talented businessman, he went through bankruptcy and got back on his feet. Now a self-made billionaire.

Taiwan-owned Foxconn Technology Group, which employs around one million workers in China to make iPhones and other leading electronics under contract, previously confirmed that it was looking to set up factories in the US.

"Don't let Foxconn get away," read a headline that went viral on Chinese social media. The plea was in contrast to that of a few years earlier, when the Chinese media described Foxconn as a maquiladora that drove its employees to suicide.

It seems that China is concerned about Foxconn moving to the United States. Large numbers of people in China will be out of work, while the Taiwanese company will replace its workers with robotics and move to a more energy-efficient country to establish a factory.

In the interview, he said that manufacturing costs in the United States were much lower than in China because electricity costs half, natural gas costs a quarter, and transportation even less (because American roads are free).

Cao Dewang, one of China's richest tycoons

They won't worry about facing worker suicides if they are replaced by robots, you can hire lesser people to run the factory, and you can also totally turn off the lights while the machines do their work. There are also rebates for electricity in the United States, making it more profitable.

Why China should follow Trump's lead and cut taxes

China earned a reputation as the world's workshop and helped make it the world's second-largest economy, but is now burdened by stifling taxes and fees, skyrocketing land prices, and other operating costs.

When it comes to manufacturing, according to Cao, everything is cheaper in America, except for labor.

Furthermore, Cao argued that China's labor costs were no longer a competitive advantage. Although they were lower than in the US, costs were increasing and were already comparable to those in Russia and Eastern European countries.

More importantly, Cao said he had seen greater determination in American officials to rejuvenate the US manufacturing industry.

industry, as Trump had promised to lower the income tax rate for US companies to 15 percent.

A bit of plagiarism here, but I just pulled the juicy information from the website.

In conclusion, I would say that the United States is getting good at attracting manufacturing companies to start operations in the United States, leaving China behind with a huge unemployment rate.

Is Donald Trump trying to punish China for defying the United States on the world stage?

Even mainland Chinese investors themselves are moving out of China, not to mention manufacturers from other countries. What can China do to make them stay?

This has nothing to do with Donald Trump.

FoxConn is a Taiwanese company that uses cheap labor in China. FoxConn is Apple's main manufacturer. Most of FoxConn Apple's products are now in China. No corporation should be overly dependent on one country. Certainly Apple is concerned about the continuing threat of intellectual theft within China. There are incalculable hidden costs associated with doing business in China that typically make doing business in China only marginally better than in other countries.

As such, Apple has been lobbying FoxConn for years to move some of its operations out of China. Appear

Keep reading

This has nothing to do with Donald Trump.

FoxConn is a Taiwanese company that uses cheap labor in China. FoxConn is Apple's main manufacturer. Most of FoxConn Apple's products are now in China. No corporation should be overly dependent on one country. Certainly Apple is concerned about the continuing threat of intellectual theft within China. There are incalculable hidden costs associated with doing business in China that typically make doing business in China only marginally better than in other countries.

As such, Apple has been lobbying FoxConn for years to move some of its operations out of China. It seems that this has finally happened. They have moved some of their operations to a rust belt state.

This will not affect China significantly in the short term. This is normal economic behavior. China has enjoyed a low-cost and unlimited labor pool. That supply is now somewhat limited and labor costs are increasing. When you combine this with China's recent assertiveness, China is no longer the place of choice for outsourced manufacturing.

China is beginning to feel the cost of its aggressive stance.

In the long term, this will likely make China a more responsible and less assertive partner. You might even see China begin to comply with international intellectual property laws and strengthen its legal system to better protect foreign investments.

Foxconn has a dual role at the US factory As a Taiwanese company, it is targeting China and getting the US to pay Foxconn $ 231,000 for work in Wisconsin. American workers will not see that nor will the People's Republic of China. The difference between the cost of an American employee and $ 231k will be funneled to Terry Gao, president of Foxconn.

Apple will also not receive the intellectual property benefits of onshore manufacturing. Foxconn plans to make products destined for the US Department of Defense, which requires a lot of things to be made on land.

Trump is an idiot - he

Keep reading

Foxconn has a dual role at the US factory As a Taiwanese company, it is targeting China and getting the US to pay Foxconn $ 231,000 for work in Wisconsin. American workers will not see that nor will the People's Republic of China. The difference between the cost of an American employee and $ 231k will be funneled to Terry Gao, president of Foxconn.

Apple will also not receive the intellectual property benefits of onshore manufacturing. Foxconn plans to make products destined for the US Department of Defense, which requires a lot of things to be made on land.

Trump is an idiot: He is paying Foxconn to enter a market that was previously closed to them: the US government market.

Masao Miwa is correct in stating that robotic production is killing jobs around the world, including in China. The Carrier deal that she mentions brought jobs to the United States from Mexico. But Carrier was replacing American workers with robots at the same time, and Carrier's employment in the United States stayed about the same rather than declining by roughly 1,400 employees.

China appears to be losing a large number of jobs due to robotics. This will continue. Retaining workers is something that must be done around the world.

Donald Trump brings nothing to the United States except confusion and dismay. Foxconn has played this game before and will probably approve of it. Entrepreneurs around the world are hoping for change, but Trump seems only capable of "negotiating" through threats, especially at inopportune times and without good prior knowledge. China will move on, but it has an aging population, rapidly rising wages, and many low-level businesses are moving to Southeast Asia. Trump will have little effect except to anger and alienate our business partners and allies.

In fact, we have talked about it in Zhihu, you can assume that it is a Chinese quora.

如何 看待 富士康 在 美国 投资 百亿 设厂? - 知 乎

One of the answers, by 李建秋, actually tells the truth.

What Taiwan wants is really brazen and absurd, but I'm not sure Guo Taiming dares ask the United States for the same.

Imagine, if he wants the tax agent of Taiwan to verify the tax of the American company Foxconn, and Taiwan charges a tax of 60%, even all the products were sold to the United States.

In addition, you also want the appreciation and evaluation of the US dollar coordinated with your business.

If you can take all their needs, grab it and go.

1 Introduction The broad answer to this question: if "China's population is 4 times * that of the United States and high economic growth will allow China to become the world's only superpower" is "Yes." But it is not just the high population plus Chinese economic growth that has produced and is producing that result, because several other factors are involved.

* Perhaps it should be noted that the question is not entirely accurate. According to the CIA World Factbook, China's population in July 2018 in 2018 was about 1,384.7 million, roughly 4.2 times the July 2018 U.S. population of 329.3 million.

2 Why has China become

Keep reading

1 Introduction The broad answer to this question: if "China's population is 4 times * that of the United States and high economic growth will allow China to become the world's only superpower" is "Yes." But it is not just the high population plus Chinese economic growth that has produced and is producing that result, because several other factors are involved.

* Perhaps it should be noted that the question is not entirely accurate. According to the CIA World Factbook, China's population in July 2018 in 2018 was about 1,384.7 million, roughly 4.2 times the July 2018 U.S. population of 329.3 million.

2 Why has China become, and continues to be, the world's greatest economic power?

There are perhaps five main comparative factors:

  • China's superior understanding and practice of Shimomuran-Wernerian macroeconomics (the macroeconomics of the economies of the Tokyo Consensus Zone) compared to American inferior practice and the enactment of the Washington Consensus macroeconomics.
  • China's highly effective meritocracy versus the less effective "democratic" US government
  • The Chinese government's understanding and application of the "Mandate of Heaven" versus the US adoption of the "government of the rich"
  • The Chinese understanding, development and application of the leading economic computer modeling assembly line control technology in the form of MadeInChina2025, which is the Chinese version of Germany's Industrie04 that the German federal minister has described as " the fourth industrial revolution "and the American lack of such a program
  • The Chinese government's willingness to learn from best practices in other parts of the world compared to the American lack of such learning and the American assumption that the US economic decline is "the fault of other countries" when it is largely part of local origin.

Let's examine these aspects of each of these topics in sections 3.1 to 3.5.

3.1 China's superior understanding of Shimomuran-Wernerian macroeconomics compared to inferior American practice and the enactment of the Washington Consensus macroeconomics. Watch

The Rough Guide to Shimomuran Economics - George Tait Edwards - Medium

And for an uninformed and Committee-produced view on the importance of Dr. Osamu Shimomura, check out one of the Springer Briefs

This book gives you a lot of background information on Dr. Osamu Shimomura (1910–1989), the economist, but it doesn't mention how the Shimomuran economy works, and I think that's a huge and important omission. Now there is a recent but not very knowledgeable Wikipedia entry on Dr. Osamu Shimomura on Osamu Shimomura (economist) - Wikipedia. That entry manages to confuse many of the facts about Shimomura's career and is based on a Tokyo Shimbum article. Perhaps a lot has been lost in translation. I note with interest that two of the articles mentioned are my own. For a more complete answer on Dr. Osamu Shimomura (1910-1989), the economist Shimomura, see

George Tait Edwards' answer to Why is there so little information about Japanese economist Osamu Shimomura on the English-speaking internet, despite the fact that the Japanese government has created a scholarship named after him? Even Wikipedia listed him as a chemist and not an economist.

Of course, the questions should not be "why are there so few" but "why is there so little" and must recognize that Dr. Osamu Shimomura, the researcher of green bioluminescence, is a different person from Dr. Osamu Shimomura ( 1910-1989). economist. My answer above discriminates between these two very different different Shimomuras.

AND

The Shimomuran economy is the most significant advance ever made in economic understanding and the West still does not understand and note it.

George Tait Edwards' Answer to Why Do Western Economists Ignore the Writings of Dr. Osamu Shimomura, Called "Japan's Most Influential Post-War Economist"?

Shimomuran Macroeconomics produces the goods. The average growth rate of China's PPP economic GDP has been roughly four times (c10% per year) the US growth rate (c2.5% per year) from 1975 to 2014 and more than three times (or 6.7% per year) the US growth rate (C2 0.2% per year) from 2015 to 2017. See George Tait Edwards' answer to What's Wrong with Washington Consensus Macroeconomics? (WCM)

WCM does not produce the products nationally or internationally. Three IMF economists have recognized this. See the June 2016 article by three IMF economists in Neoliberalism: Oversold? which has the front piece

There is still no sign (January 2019) of any change in US policy, the idea that an "evolution" of that policy is possible and interesting, but completely unfounded and undefined. So far no one has succeeded in laying realistic retrospective foundations under a castle in the air. I wish Maurice Obstfeld and the IMF good luck in that endeavor.

3.2 China's highly effective meritocracy versus the less effective US government

The qualification required to be a member of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is a university degree, held by the more than 80 million members of the Party. The Chinese qualification required for senior political office is CCP membership plus a track record of successful performance in managing one of the local cities or provincial economies. One result of that process is that senior Chinese politicians have a track record of success and have realistic competence in managing a sub-unit of the Chinese economy. That ability is related to the functioning of the entire economy, with the result that the Chinese meritocracy is the smartest, most qualified and most effective government in the world.

A major problem with most governments is succession planning. Even when a Western government runs brilliantly for a few years, there is a lack of succession planning due to the political or democratic process. The excellent and very competent and subtle FDR was "succeeded" (but actually failed) by President Harry Truman, who did not continue with Roosevelt's policies because he did not understand them and, to the extent that he did, did not agree with them. There is an automatic excellent succession planning capability built into the Chinese higher political system. There is no such capacity at the top levels of Western governments.

China's technocratic government plans the future of the country. The United States has no such plans. Please note the key points of the "New China Five Year Plan" covering the period 2015-2020:

The American economic system is more democratic than meritocratic. It was once proudly stated that anyone could become President of the United States. That appears to be true if that person owns or can attract sufficient funds. But it is not a guarantee of even minimal economic competition, and even when the United States succeeds in some measures (for example, Obamacare), the next president (for example, Trump) can partially reverse any popular gains achieved.

3.3 The Chinese Government's Understanding and Application of the "Mandate of Heaven" versus the British and American Adoption of the "Government of the Rich"

3.3.1 The "Mandate of Heaven" The concept of the "Mandate of Heaven" was introduced into Chinese history more than three millennia ago in 1045 BC. C. by the Shang dynasty. See Mandate of Heaven - Wikipedia

The Mandate of Heaven is summarized by Mencius as

“People are of the utmost importance; then come the altars of the gods of earth and grain; last comes the ruler. Therefore, whoever gains the trust of the crowd will be Emperor ... When a feudal lord endangers the altars of the gods of earth and grain, he should be replaced. "

Chinese economic policy acts to ensure the greatest possible increase in people's income, in accordance with the Mandate of Heaven.

11th century China, under the brilliant Prime Minister Wang Anshi (1021-1086), the first investment credit economist, became the world's first industrial economy and then the largest economy in the world. See Wang Anshi - Wikipedia and my own view of that individual's historical greatness in Part 2 (The Invention of Credit Creation for Productive Investments in the Northern Song Empire (960-1126) by Wang Anshi (1021-1086) from

George Tait Edwards' answer to What are the main Chinese innovations?

3.3.2 The forecasts of Oswald Spengler (1880-1936)

What has happened to almost all western and westernized economies was predicted by Oswald Spengler, in his first book

In this pioneering book, (The Decline of the West is two volumes) Oswald Spengler accurately predicted that

  • The natural evolution of all Western "democratic" economies would become plutocratic economies, captured by wealthy interests, and primarily and almost entirely serving the interests of the rich.
  • Western media would also be captured by wealthy interests and people and their education would be misinformed and their understanding would be flawed in the face of the "we decide what is news and what is not news" approach of the Western media.
  • Democratic societies would see the rise of "Caesars", inadequate, generally wealthy individuals who would lead major economies to decline, without possessing the competence to do otherwise.

See The Decline of the West - Wikipedia and

George Tait Edwards' Answer to What Are the Top Reasons Wage Growth in the US Has Been So Terrible for Decades?

George Tait Edwards' answer to How long has China's government been an oligarchy? which refers to spenglerian prophecies

All of these predictions have come true for the major Western economies. These shifts in the approach to Western governance (from favoring the people to favoring the rich) are the main reason for the current and continuing decline of British and American hegemonies.

Since real consumption is the most important spending factor in the Western Keynesian equation of the economy (NY = C + I + G), the most important aspect of economic policy focuses on the best way to increase the rate of income. real average and median living standards. Chinese economic policy does that, Western austerity does the opposite.

The last thousand years of history show that if an economy operates for the benefit of all its people, it becomes a world-leading economy, and if it only operates to place its wealthy class above the people, then that is the point. fast route to economic decline. .

Spengler's observations appear to be consistent as the mirror image of the "Mandate of Heaven." The Spenglerian rule of the rich produces economic decline, the Mandate of Heaven rule of the people produces great growth and widespread prosperity and potential success as a major world economy.

3.4 Chinese understanding, development and application of leading economic technology in the form of MadeInChina2025, which is the Chinese version of Germany's Industrie04 that the German federal minister has described as "the Fourth Industrial Revolution" in the face of the American lack of said program.

China has proposed and implemented the "next industrial revolution" based on the wholesale introduction of the G5 / Internet of Things / integrated credit creation and rapid reaction economy throughout its manufacturing and services economy. Watch

George Tait Edwards' answer to What is the comparison between German industrial policy "Germany04" and "Made In China 2025"? and

George Tait Edwards' answer to China had GDP growth of 6.6% in 2018, is that good or bad? and

George Tait Edwards' answer to When will we know if Trump is winning his tariff battle with China? and see

George Tait Edwards' answer to What are the main differences between the American economic system and the Chinese economic system?

By opposing MadeInChina2025, Donald Trump has lost much of America's future. Watch

George Tait Edwards' response to Why "made in China 2025" is so concerning to Trump that he demanded that China abandon that plan to stop the trade war?

3.5 The Chinese government's willingness to learn from best economic practices in other parts of the world, compared to the lack of such learning in the United States, and the American assumption that the United States' economic decline is "the fault of others countries "when it is largely indigenous.

China has learned high-growth macroeconomics from the Japanese master growth economist, Dr. Osamu Shimomura (1910-1989).

See George Tait Edwards' response to What did China do well in its economic and social development that the United States did wrong?

China is following (by about 70%, more than any other nation) the recommendations set out in The Most Successful Economic Policy of All Time: The German Historical Economic Development of the Shimomuran-Wernerian Macroeconomics.

The leading nations of the West are now firmly on the Spenglerian trajectory of economic decline through the suppression of WCM inventions and the "rule of the rich" that impoverishes the people and follows austerity, and it does not seem likely that any time soon. produce changes in the economic prospects of these economies.

The United Kingdom and the United States have suffered financially from the leadership activities of the five modern "Caesars" in the persons of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, President Ronald Reagan, Prime Minister Tony Blair, Prime Minister David Cameron and the President Donald Trump. All five of these leaders claimed they had a superior economic program when they didn't. Each of them accelerated the economic decline of their nation by governing and directing its economy in the interests of the rich, and they were supported in that goal by slavish means.

Margaret Thatcher's main program (commonly known as TINA because she said "there is no alternative) was the destruction of much of the" Postwar Consensus "that had placed Britain at the forefront of nations as a progressive economy of the state of Well-being at the service of her people The positive legacy of Clement Attlee's postwar administration (comprising the five pillars of the welfare state) and John Maynard Keynes's ideas on reducing unemployment were two situations that she reversed. Some newspapers British praised Mrs Thatcher as a simple housewife who proposed housewife cost cutting economics as a solution to Britain's economic decline, but it quickly became clear that her knowledge of the real economy was minimal,while his policies were industrially disastrous.

The use of vast additional government revenues from North Sea oil (much of Scotland) was to lower the top income tax rates to the benefit of a very wealthy income. That policy was introduced by Nigel Lawson who, from my brief discussions with him, understood even less economics than Thatcher. Lawson described the future of Britain not just as a low-tech economy but as an economy without technology, a nation highly dependent on tourism, a nation of hamburger lovers but with minimal technology. The pound was allowed to skyrocket upward, destroying roughly 20% of the British manufacturing industry, a result that several economists at the time described as greater industrial damage than that done by the Germans during World War II. Thatcher reduced workers' living standards (and their ability to finance the Labor Party) by selling nationalized industries to private hands and through her preference for finance and the City of London over manufacturing. Keys to Britain's industrial future - machine tool builders like Stone-Platt (see Platts Textile Machinery Makers by RH Eastham) and Alfred Herbert (see Alfred Herbert (company) - Wikipedia saying “it was one of the largest machines tool manufacturers in the world. At one time it was the largest British manufacturer of machine tools ”), both filed for bankruptcy without any supportive action by the government. British banks closed both companies after they increased their investment in new equipment, but reduced their liquidity in doing so.

The climax of Thatcherism was the Poll Tax, a system that has historically been used (especially in the US) to deny the poorest people the right to vote. He achieved his main objective by driving so many voters off the electoral rolls that John Major's government was elected despite all opinion polls indicating a Labor victory. That was Thatcher's last achievement, although it was preceded by her downfall.

Ronald Reagan destroyed America's manufacturing preeminence through a deliberate policy of relocating what he saw as the major "smokestack" industries overseas. Please refer to REAGAN's HIDDEN 'INDUSTRIAL POLICY', which indicates

“Reagan's plan to reduce America's basic industries has been enormously successful. Since 1981, when the value of the dollar began to rise to unprecedented levels as the budget deficit skyrocketed, some 2 million jobs have been lost in traditional manufacturing companies. Steel, automobiles and others have been forced to reduce national capacity, establish operations abroad (or participate in joint ventures with foreign producers) and diversify into specialized niches ”.

As I have noted elsewhere, the multiplier effect between the loss of manufacturing jobs and the total loss of jobs in the U.S. is between three and five, probably three for effect five years from now and five years from now. within a decade. The loss of future chimney industries is almost permanent and the future loss of their potential developments is crippling for job prospects in these affected states. In 1982, I watched that decline in American industries firsthand by driving on vacation from New York to Buffalo through some highways often lined by closed factories and discussing that situation with my wife's American relatives.

Here is a map illustrating the "American Rust Belt" consequences of Reagan's policies:

Source: Copyright B Jennings, 2010 and reproduced with permission.

Tony Blair pretended to be a socialist with a "New Labor" policy, but once in office he went on and adopted the policies of Thatcher, who accurately described it as "his greatest achievement". His political achievements were minimal and his self-admiration almost limitless, the two main tracing marks of a Caesar. While Blair reduced some of the child poverty, he (along with the late Mo Mowlem) in the "cocktail offensive" had promised money speculators in the City of London that, if elected, he would continue to treat them favorably, continuing to Thatcher's main financial preference policy. with industrial decline. (The main ex-industrial areas of the UK become the British Rust Belt, around Glasgow, Newcastle, Sheffield, Liverpool, Birmingham, Manchester and South Wales, but I can't find any relevant map to illustrate that reality. The stark contrast between the very high hopes that the British people had after the election of a Blair-led Labor government in 1998 compared to the tiny subsequent achievements of the Blair governments caused a great collapse of Labor voters. Blair admitted that he was a Thatcherist after leaving office, an admission that would have placed him in the position of historical obscurity that he deserved, had he declared that reality before taking office and not after. He's probably the most disappointing Labor leader of all time. an admission that would have placed him in the position of historical obscurity that he deserved, if he had declared that reality before taking office and not after. He's probably the most disappointing Labor leader of all time. an admission that would have placed him in the position of historical obscurity that he deserved, had he declared that reality before taking office and not after. He's probably the most disappointing Labor leader of all time.

David Cameron destroyed the UK's democratic base for a partisan advantage that resulted in its downfall and the disastrous Brexit vote, which was not a valid democratic result. See George Tait Edwards' answer to Does it matter if the British are in favor of Brexit today?

Donald Trump is just another very disappointing Republican president who favors tax cuts for the rich without a more productive American industrial policy. Watch

President Trump wrongly blames the decline of American industry on foreign countries when the main culprit is his political predecessor, President Ronald Reagan.

4. Conclusions

The rise of China and the economic decline of the US is not simply a matter of population and economic growth (a point of view that can be seen as "correct" in general terms, but is too limited an explanation), but also relies more strongly on

  • Much better and more realistic Chinese economic understanding and practice than is available in the US.
  • A more competent and realistic Chinese government serving the people rather than the United States government focusing on serving the rich
  • The Chinese government's practice of the "Mandate of Heaven" while the United States is trapped in a system of government "of, by and for the rich"
  • China's adoption of MadeInChina2025, the best economical transformative technology available, while the US lacks such an industrial policy.
  • The Chinese government as an institution that practices "lifelong learning" and a high investment in the best available technology, while the US neither learns from others nor invests itself, but Trump blames the rest of the world for its economic decline local.

6 Overall conclusion This did not have to happen. If the US had continued the FDR economic miracle of 1938-1944 based on FDR's fundamental ideals of "ruling for the people and investing in US manufacturing," then the US could have. grown about 7% a year since 1945 and the U.S. a 2015 economy about 2 to seven times larger (because 7% produces a doubling of real economic size every decade) of about $ 256 trillion. in PPP prices of $ 2005. This compares with a current world GDP of around 134 trillion dollars. If FDR's policies had prevailed, something like this could have happened. Of course,

But it did not. And that opportunity is now lost forever.

Perhaps the world has had a kind of escape. American culture after 1980 became pathological and became the legal system where you win-lose-money-education-for-the-rich-health-services-for-the-rich-cuts- tax-for-the-rich-austerity-for-the-rich-workers armed with a system of rusty belts that we see today in America. Chinese culture focuses on the national delivery of higher living standards within a comprehensive welfare state and is an internationally constructive and more bilateral approach, as reflected in all project funding from B & RI / OBOR / and others. investments.

In my opinion, the Chinese style is much better.

Your question is not based on facts, but rather on a political conversation piece that was never true. The loss of manufacturing jobs in America has been caused by innovation and robotics. An automobile factory that used to operate in three shifts and employed 3,500 people at union-rate wages disappeared and will not return. A modernized car factory can now make more cars per day with fewer defects and only requires 300 people. And they're building them in low-wage, non-union states (Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi). That, and similar advances in other industries, is where 85% of our factory jobs have gone. Only about 15% of

Keep reading

Your question is not based on facts, but rather on a political conversation piece that was never true. The loss of manufacturing jobs in America has been caused by innovation and robotics. An automobile factory that used to operate in three shifts and employed 3,500 people at union-rate wages disappeared and will not return. A modernized car factory can now make more cars per day with fewer defects and only requires 300 people. And they're building them in low-wage, non-union states (Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi). That, and similar advances in other industries, is where 85% of our factory jobs have gone. Only about 15% of job losses in our factories occur in overseas countries with low labor costs. These are the facts and they are not difficult to find with just a little search. Nor is it just China that received 15% of the jobs. These are divided between Mexico, India, Vietnam, Thailand, China and several other countries depending on the industry. This is simply world trade, and it's actually good for the United States, because when these countries have jobs, they can afford to buy American goods and services.

Therefore, it is better that we do not base our foreign economic policy on political talking points. Our factories are much more efficient and require much less manpower than in the past. We should focus our efforts on retraining and better educating our citizens for the jobs of today and tomorrow. Every economic change has caused the same struggles we face today. When farmers were automated with tractors and specialized planting equipment, there was a big drop in the number of farm workers needed. When technologies dramatically changed data capture processes, data entry jobs were greatly reduced. We invent and build new devices and methods to make processes more efficient. Every time we do this we are likely to displace jobs. However, our economy is constantly evolving and there are new jobs that are developed with each cycle. We have the lowest unemployment rate we have had in 45 years. Businesses are more efficient than ever and more profitable. They were goals and we are reaching them. Yes, we are behind in wage growth and there are far fewer jobs in the economy yesterday.

We are lagging behind in the education of our children and we are in line with the demands of the market. If we want to improve America's economy in the long term, we must find ways to improve our educational processes and make college low-cost or free to the masses. We are the only country in the world where our college graduates on average have more debt than the cost of their parents' first home. Also, if our college students don't specialize, they aren't properly prepared for today's jobs.

Just as the military is always preparing to fight the last war again, the schools are preparing students for the jobs of the last generation. We must innovate our educational process and adapt it to new job demands. There is no future for labor-intensive factories in America. Look ahead, not back to find the solutions.

So forget about fighting China over its factories and focus on what we can do right here at home to fix what's obvious to anyone who looks at the problem holistically.

Coal mining jobs and huge manufacturing plants employing thousands of people will never come back. We must do what we can to help people who are affected by these changes, but we must also prepare our next generations for their future and not base it on what their parents did for a living.

We have been teaching in the same way for the last fifty years and innovation in our educational systems is necessary to keep up with a global economy. We must maintain and grow our innovation, our creativity and our reach into the unknown. The only way to do this is to build an educational process that is better suited to the requirements of the future. We must devise an improved educational process that prepares our young people for the world they will enter. Not the one her parents entered.

Sorry about the soap box, but we can't fix our problems until we acknowledge them. The politicians who yell about jobs going abroad and claim they will bring them back are either simply lying or too stupid to realize the problem.

The Plan has always been there for China to take the next step forward.

China no longer wants to be a cheap place to manufacture. China wants to take the next step. Rather than mass-produce medium-quality products for the whole world, China wants to manufacture high-quality products such as processors, chipsets, advanced engines as the United States, Germany or Japan do.

Look at China's investment in R&D, which was almost ZERO in 2000 and was at EU levels in 2013 and 2020, exceeds that of the US and the EU. No country that hopes to remain a manufacturing hub will spend so much money on R&D.

Keep reading

The Plan has always been there for China to take the next step forward.

China no longer wants to be a cheap place to manufacture. China wants to take the next step. Rather than mass-produce medium-quality products for the whole world, China wants to manufacture high-quality products such as processors, chipsets, advanced engines as the United States, Germany or Japan do.

Look at China's investment in R&D, which was almost ZERO in 2000 and was at EU levels in 2013 and 2020, exceeds that of the US and the EU. No country that hopes to remain a manufacturing hub will spend so much money on R&D. Only a country that wants to move from manufacturing to advanced manufacturing will spend so much money on R&D. China spends $ 280 billion in real terms. and $ 1.57 trillion in terms of APP in R&D. Advanced stem cell research, advanced motors, chipsets, semiconductors, and 5G-related automation are some areas they are working on to achieve the best.

Whatever happens, Huawei has the most extensive 5G network in the world and has the biggest advantage. Huaweis 5G Network is guaranteed to be way ahead of Nokia or Ericcson initially.

China hopes to use this 5G revolution and begin a massive scale strengthening of its economy to make advanced products that are world leaders at the best prices. This includes revolutionary phones, robots, smart trains, more affordable but advanced chipsets and processors, advanced engines, drones, weaponry, etc., which will feature the most advanced communication system in the world.

Putin is smart enough to know this, so he is allowing HUAWEI to do its best in Russia. Trump is an idiot who has no idea.

By 2035: China expects Huawei to control 70% of all communications in the world, not through its 5G contracts, but with its advanced communication equipment, which will be at least a generation ahead of any other company.

The Africa factor is also a crucial factor. To date: 39.8% of employment in 7 African countries depends directly or indirectly on China, which is more than that of the US (15.6%) or France (11.8%)

Why are China's buildings dams and railways? Why is China establishing 147 programs to educate more than 18,000 Africans and train and teach them?

The reason is to create a skilled workforce in 7 countries, burden them with cheap debt, and use these countries as manufacturing centers for low and mid-range Chinese products.

By 2035, China will have enough railways, 5G and energy in these African countries to establish a giant manufacturing hub and continue in Africa while they are in China, they will go on to make advanced products.

Apple has invested billions in building these Foxconn plants in China. They can assemble more phones than 4 countries like India, Vietnam, South Korea and Taiwan together.

Yet all along, China hasn't once asked Foxconn or Apple to reconsider. It's almost as if China wants Apple to leave.

While Apple will go, its factories, machines will not be able to go with them (China is not a democracy) and the workforce will also be theirs. So China gets advanced machines paid for by Americans or Taiwanese workforces and whose training was paid for by Americans.

Not just Apple or Foxconn, but hundreds of others, will give up established factories and workforce for zero pay, allowing China to begin manufacturing advanced products with virtually zero effort.

So as Apple struggles to spend more billions in Vietnam or India and makes iPhones that cost $ 550, China will spend zero money, build $ 350 5G-related One Plus phones, and take over the world.

China says China's days as a manufacturing hub are over. They have the whole plan ready to go to the next level.

Meanwhile, other countries will still need 10 years to become manufacturing centers.

China aims to become by 2036 as a superpower on par with the United States. Everything is in favor of China.

I'm not from Wisconsin and I really don't know much about Foxconn.

Here's what Trump initially said in 2017

TRUMP: “Thank you Foxconn, for investing $ 10 BILLION DOLLARS with the potential of up to 13K new jobs in Wisconsin! MadeInTheUSA "

White House: "President Trump Welcomes Foxconn to White House for Major Job Announcement."

Wisconsin officials reported Monday to Foxconn, the Taiwan-based company that pledged to create 13,000 jobs statewide, that it failed to meet the employment targets needed to be approved for state tax credits for the second year in a row. .

Reuters report

Keep reading

I'm not from Wisconsin and I really don't know much about Foxconn.

Here's what Trump initially said in 2017

TRUMP: “Thank you Foxconn, for investing $ 10 BILLION DOLLARS with the potential of up to 13K new jobs in Wisconsin! MadeInTheUSA "

White House: "President Trump Welcomes Foxconn to White House for Major Job Announcement."

Wisconsin officials reported Monday to Foxconn, the Taiwan-based company that pledged to create 13,000 jobs statewide, that it failed to meet the employment targets needed to be approved for state tax credits for the second year in a row. .

Reuters reported that Wisconsin officials informed Foxconn representatives in a letter that the company did not employ enough full-time employees in 2019 at its Mount Pleasant facility to be eligible for the credits.

"Once Foxconn can provide more precise details of the proposed project, such as its size, scope, anticipated capital investment and job creation, WEDC Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation will be able to offer support for the project with tax incentives," wrote a state official, according to Reuters.

Wisconsin says Trump-touted Foxconn factory has failed to do jobs

I can't find a date for CNBC's story, but it seems like Foxxcon and WEDC are fighting because the company qualifies for grants that are based on the number of hires.

Additionally, the HUGE project that was touted in 2017 was downgraded, including scope of facilities; Gen 10.5 through Gen 6.

Foxconn says it has met its hiring targets in Wisconsin. Now he wants his money

Pretty detailed summary of the deal, the failure ... and the track record Foxconn has of exactly this kind of thing around the world that any literate person could have researched before a relatively small community had to shell out a LOT of money to buy land and donate it to the project. Inside the empty Foxconn buildings, the empty factories and the empty promises in Wisconsin

It's not like Wisconsinites have to vote for it. The biggest shame in all of this is the false hope they gave the people of that region. Near Janesville he once had auto worker jobs in town and it's been a long time since decent manufacturing moved

Keep reading

Pretty detailed summary of the deal, the failure ... and the track record Foxconn has of exactly this kind of thing around the world that any literate person could have researched before a relatively small community had to shell out a LOT of money to buy land and donate it to the project. Inside the empty Foxconn buildings, the empty factories and the empty promises in Wisconsin

It’s not like Wisconsinites got to vote on it. The biggest shame of it all is the false hope they gave people in that region. Nearby Janesville once had autoworker jobs in town and it’s been a long time since decent manufacturing wages have been available in those numbers in that area.

By the way, this isn’t Trump’s baby as much as Wisconsin’s syndicate of GOP majority legislature and governor, Scott Walker. It was a handy thing for all involved for Trump to enthusiastically join in, but this thing didn’t make sense from the start. They needed 6 million gallons of water a day from Lake Michigan, which is 7 miles away as the crow flies (straight line), most all suppliers of everything they need to build screens are in located around the Pacific rim…shipping raw material that far only makes a little sense if they had a North America final market in mind, but they talked about the exports as if they’ll source screens to the world from the American midwest…it was all just absurd. It wasn’t the promise of a shipbuilding yard in Wichita crazy, but still…

For the buildings they have, they’ve now gotten permits to use it as storage…and continue to say that they have big plans there if the incentives keep coming…fool me once and all that…

I wish I could say all this was a surprise…but I’m one of those people who read up on Foxconn’s previous deals way back before the golden shovels got dirty. Same con, different town.

Other Guides:


GET SPECIAL OFFER FROM OUR PARTNER.