←back to thread

How much do you think it costs to make a pair of Nike shoes in Asia?

(twitter.com)
689 points taubek | 10 comments | 09 Apr 25 12:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.013s | source | bottom
Show context
JSR_FDED ◴[09 Apr 25 13:42 UTC] No.43631980[source]▶
It’s like people excited about the new datacenter being built in their town, think of all the jobs that will bring they cry. Nobody realizes it takes 6 people to run a datacenter.

Bringing “manufacturing back to the US” is a fool’s errand. The future of manufacturing is automation, not jobs.

replies(14): >>43632283 #>>43632300 #>>43632333 #>>43632356 #>>43632390 #>>43632872 #>>43632937 #>>43633742 #>>43634455 #>>43634730 #>>43635013 #>>43636738 #>>43636871 #>>43645775 #
xienze ◴[09 Apr 25 14:06 UTC] No.43632300[source]▶
I think you're missing that the bigger value is having the manufacturing on your home soil instead of depending on being in the good graces of China.
replies(5): >>43632376 #>>43632414 #>>43632738 #>>43632894 #>>43633981 #
1. vidarh ◴[09 Apr 25 14:12 UTC] No.43632376[source]▶
Forcing China to become more independent of exports to the US also means China will care less about being in the good graces of the US. It cuts both ways.
replies(3): >>43632397 #>>43632552 #>>43633027 #
2. xienze ◴[09 Apr 25 14:14 UTC] No.43632397[source]▶
Except for the whole military superpower thing. The US is actually in a somewhat unique situation compared to other countries.
replies(4): >>43632423 #>>43632502 #>>43632810 #>>43635186 #
3. hello_moto ◴[09 Apr 25 14:16 UTC] No.43632423[source]▶
Unique for now. It’s changing.

The moment is threatened Canada , Denmark sovereignty and EU/NATO, countries are planning for life without US

4. vidarh ◴[09 Apr 25 14:23 UTC] No.43632502[source]▶
It's only in a somewhat unique situation if people the US is willing and able to stomach a large-scale war, and people believe that to be so, and that belief has also dropped dramatically.
5. NoMoreNicksLeft ◴[09 Apr 25 14:27 UTC] No.43632552[source]▶
One could easily have the impression that despite this, China has never really given a rat's ass about being in the good graces of the US, and that when they do relent it is often the case that they do not do so in good faith at all. If they comply with ethics and human rights, it's to the absolute minimum of that and in an underhanded way designed to undermine, but often not even that and they're just cheating and good at hiding it.

In other words, not much would be lost except the devious lip service.

replies(2): >>43634277 #>>43644644 #
6. ◴[09 Apr 25 14:51 UTC] No.43632810[source]▶
7. absolutelastone ◴[09 Apr 25 15:09 UTC] No.43633027[source]▶
This outcome is probably the end result for either scenario. The degree to which China is dependent on the US has been steadily decreasing. There's no law of nature that says the US will keep winning and have its advantages forever.
8. briankelly ◴[09 Apr 25 17:59 UTC] No.43635186[source]▶
See the threads on the state of US shipbuilding.
replies(1): >>43639123 #
9. ForOldHack ◴[09 Apr 25 23:33 UTC] No.43639123{3}[source]▶
Yes. You should point out that >50% of ships are built by China, and 30% are built by Korea, and United States is not even on the list... Do we even make ships? Maybe a few military wessels.
10. vidarh ◴[10 Apr 25 15:11 UTC] No.43644644[source]▶
It depends on what you're looking at. They've avoided a confrontation with Taiwan, for example. How long that will last if/when they no longer consider open conflict with the US to be a major consideration is anyones guess.