US economy shrank 0.5% in the first quarter, worse than earlier estimates

>the tariffs will encourage the creation of more, better, jobs in the US through re-shoring

that isn't possible for any production other than a primitive one. The modern production is very complicated, and in particular contains long lists of components, materials, tools, technological stages of production and engineering services. I.e. it is a pyramid with very wide base. Even large country like US is too small to maintain all what is required for any even moderately complicated product. Tariffs are kind of shrinking the pyramid's base - the result is lower pyramid so to speak.

Of course, you and anybody welcome to bring counter-examples.

>This would, in theory, also increase domestic consumption

It would increase prices, and decrease productivity thus resulting in lower consumption.

Dell used to make computers in the US. Then they moved manufacturing to China. You're saying Dell can't make computers in the US ever again? If the economic incentives are there then the supply chains can be (re-)built, right?

> You're saying Dell can't make computers in the US ever again?

The person you are replying to said no such thing.

Yes, of course, in isolation, some manufacturers can build new factories. Not overnight. Not in a year, if the supply chain is remotely complicated.

Okay, lets say Dell, who moved their manufacturing out of the US nearly two decades ago, succeeds with their factory building and starts building here. Great! What are they building? Are they fabbing 100% of the components that are going into these computers they are building? Absolutely not.

>then the supply chains can be (re-)built

similar like with networks the value of supply chain grows with its size, ie. more competing suppliers decrease the prices and increase the productivity and efficiency. It also lowers the risks of failing suppliers, and the supply risk is also an additional cost.

So, you suggest to rebuild supply chain hosted by the "technologically civilized" half+ of the world, i.e. by 4B+ of people, in a country of 340M. I.e. a supply chain at least 10x smaller, with at least 10x less competition (or the alternative - same number of suppliers 10x smaller in size). We all know what happens when there is 10x less competition. (and the alternative is even worse - the suppliers being 10x smaller in size is a loss of manufacturing efficiency which comes and goes with the scale of mass production and probably isn't possible at all as small suppliers usually quickly fail and/or scooped by larger ones, especially given that their addressable market is also 10x smaller)

How quickly did they move to China? Decades, right? Coming back takes that kind of timescale because everything needs to align – making PCs means that they need suppliers for every component, and those factories inputs, and logistics keeping factories’ production synchronized, and a lot of different skilled labor categories which aren’t trivially available. If you’re setting up a factory in the Midwest assembling parts from China, all you’re doing is ensuring that the results cost more and none of the key businesses are likely to come back because tariffs won’t make a factory competitive outside of the country.

You can encourage the whole thing to move but it needs to be a carefully considered long-term plan with strategic investments and ongoing investment. That’s the opposite of what we’re seeing now with tariffs changing every time an octogenarian gets cranky, and his party is trying to slash investments rather than grow them. No business is going to assume that any promise made will last for a business quarter, much less the years needed, and without some major funding commitments nobody is going to jump to line up tens of billions in financing.

how much of the value chain was actually in the US back then, and, how much could feasibly move to the US?

Even in the 90s, major components were made in Taiwan and Japan. And since that time, the US ability to make what we did previously has atrophied

What do we really get out of Dell moving PC manufacturing to the US if every single part they consume was manufactured in China or Taiwan? Final assembly is the lowest value part of the equation. Apple already did this shell game with the Mac Pro a few years ago and it didn't last long nor did it have a meaningful impact on anything other than the price of the product

I said: >the tariffs will encourage the creation of more, better, jobs in the US through re-shoring

they said: >that isn't possible for any production other than a primitive one.

What I find bizarre in this discussion is the refusal to even acknowledge that there are other economic effects at play besides the first order effect of tariffs increasing the cost of imports. A second order effect is to make building things domestically relatively cheaper, all other things being equal, because those things won't be subject to the tariff. Will the net effect be positive or negative? Who knows. But people refusing to even acknowledge that there are effects that cut both ways tells me that they are dishonest or stupid and you probably can't have much of a conversation with them.

> A second order effect is to make building things domestically relatively cheaper, all other things being equal, because those things won't be subject to the tariff.

that is just opposite of reality. Several people explained that to you here, yet you state :

>But people refusing to even acknowledge that there are effects that cut both ways tells me that they are dishonest or stupid and you probably can't have much of a conversation with them.

People brought you a ton of arguments, yet you haven't addressed any of them, haven't produced any counter-example, and instead shouted that bizarre statement.

The reason you don't hear much about positive knock-on effects is that their time frames stretch beyond anyone's planning horizon. The only immediate effects will be losses, and they'll be around for a while.

There's no existential threat compelling enough to shut down trade for the generation or two it would take to see real benefits, and those benefits could be realized within the same time frame through other means.

This turns conversation around positive effects into a thought experiment people might not find germane to a current discussion. The tariffs simply won't be in place long enough.