←back to thread

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

(twitter.com)
689 points taubek | 4 comments | 09 Apr 25 12:58 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
Clubber ◴[09 Apr 25 13:38 UTC] No.43631933[source]▶
>The second thing we see is that Asian manufacturing in Asia produces US jobs. You go to Footlocker to buy a pair of $100 shoes because you can afford them. This creates jobs for the Footlocker employees, Nike designers, marketing teams, and other US people throughout this chain.

In all fairness, most of those jobs would still exist if manufacturing was brought onshore. The fact that they were manufactured in Asia makes no difference here, except for perhaps the longshoremen that was included in "other US people."

replies(6): >>43632163 #>>43632434 #>>43632495 #>>43632789 #>>43632813 #>>43632870 #
ravelantunes ◴[09 Apr 25 13:55 UTC] No.43632163[source]▶
The author’s point is that the lower cost of goods coming from Asia results in increased demand, which then generates more jobs in the post-manufacturing part of the chain.
replies(2): >>43632322 #>>43633655 #
xienze ◴[09 Apr 25 14:08 UTC] No.43632322[source]▶
That completely discounts the strategic value of self-sufficiency. I mean, why not outsource ALL manufacturing and agriculture if someone else can do it cheaper? Surely that wouldn't come back to bite us, right?
replies(8): >>43632526 #>>43632527 #>>43632764 #>>43632823 #>>43632853 #>>43632907 #>>43632916 #>>43632990 #
1. os2warpman ◴[09 Apr 25 14:54 UTC] No.43632853[source]▶
Domestic production that is perceived to benefit national sovereignty is protected.

See: farming, energy, and defense spending/subsidies.

There is no point in history where any nation, anywhere, has needed to be self-sufficient in the production of Nike Air Maxes.

That being said, my sneakers, New Balance 990v6s, were made in the US-- probably Maine. They're $200.

The shoes I typically wear for work, Red Wing Iron Rangers or Work Chukkas, were made in the US-- probably Minnesota. They're $350 and $290 respectively.

I don't know if increased volume will decrease the prices by much, they're only higher than premium imports by a little bit.

There is domestic production already here.

replies(1): >>43633048 #
2. myrmidon ◴[09 Apr 25 15:11 UTC] No.43633048[source]▶
> I don't know if increased volume will decrease the prices by much, they're only higher than premium imports by a little bit.

I don't think its reasonable to expect lower prices for domestic production at all, because the demand for domestic products is only going up (from people that used to buy Vietnamese Nikes).

Personally I think the whole tariff experiment is predictably going to fail, because "increased self sufficiency" does not buy you anything, and at some point people are just gonna push back politically if the cost increases get too bad.

replies(1): >>43633666 #
3. Clubber ◴[09 Apr 25 16:07 UTC] No.43633666[source]▶
I've had it explained to me that now that manufacturers won't sell to China because of retaliatory tariffs, they're more product to sell domestically which would push down prices. Less demand due to tariffs from China = lower prices.
replies(1): >>43634019 #
4. myrmidon ◴[09 Apr 25 16:32 UTC] No.43634019{3}[source]▶
Maybe there are some products that this argument works for, but certainly not footwear I'm sure.

The US exports ~1 billion worth of shoes per year, and imports ~25 billion (mainly from Vietnam and China), according to https://www.usitc.gov/research_and_analysis/tradeshifts/2023...

I also think the argument is bad in general, because more/similar exports than imports would only really hold for the countries least affected by the new tariffs, anyway.