Everyone? Peter Zion here coming to you from Yosemite. This is an unnamed lake behind me, so I’m going to claim it. This is Peter Lake, and there’s Peter island right in the middle of it. Great for laps, and I built a summer home here. Anywho, I wanted to talk a little bit today about the global structure of employment, looking forward and back. If you could sum up the concept of globalization into a single phrase, it would be lowest cost producer. The idea is, whoever can produce the product or the step in the supply chain at the lowest cost in a reliable manner, pretty much gets the business. And when the Chinese bellied up to the bar in the 1980s they brought a billion industrial workers with them, and that’s before you consider the fact that it’s a single legal structure, such as it is, or that they subsidized the bejesus out of everything to drive any competition out of business. Basically, they took all the assembly in the low end stuff from the rest of the developing world, where no region was probably suffering more than Latin America, where the geography is much more difficult for infrastructure. And so the Chinese could out compete them there as well, for the first world countries, and most notably the United States, we got out of that sort of business, because if you pay an American $50,000 a year to say, assemble a car, it’s going to be a really expensive car. And so we doubled, tripled, quadrupled down on design work, and there are few industries where this shows up more than technology. The Chinese may make some low end semiconductors and do a lot of assembly, but it’s the Americans who design most of the chips and make a lot of the high end chemicals that are necessary for Chinese fabrication facilities to work. So when someone tells you that the Taiwanese or the Chinese or the Koreans or the Japanese stole our industry and semiconductors, no, no, we still do the high value added stuff. The Chinese do the low value added stuff. Anyway, this has been the state of affairs and increasing intensity for the last 30 to 40 years, and now we’re entering a new world where the Chinese are aging out, and so they’re losing their economic competitiveness even at the low end, and their workforce is collapsing because their population is in demographic decline. Actually, demographic decline, two kind demographic collapse. They now have more people aged 60 to 75 than zero to 25 if I remember my math correctly, anywhere where it’s close. Sorry, I can’t fact check out here. Anyway, lots of old people, very, very few young people, and even fewer people coming into the workforce in the future. Okay, so what happens now? Well, the Chinese are no longer competitive. It’s only because of the sunk cost of the industrial plant that we still think of China as an industrial power. And you know, 30 odd trillion dollars in sunk cost in industrial plant. That’s not nothing, but it’s not enough without a workforce. That’s before you consider the trade wars that are intensifying regardless of who wins the American presidential election, regardless of who wins in various European elections, both the American and the European bloc have turned very sharply protectionist, specifically versus China, and so we’re probably going to see significant crunches in the trade portfolio of products coming from China very, very soon. What we’ve seen with the electric vehicles is really only the beginning. What that means is, if the Europeans and especially the Americans still want stuff, they’re going to have to make it their damn selves. And there is the problem, because the United States has geared its educational system, has geared its infrastructure, has geared its capital structure, over the last 30 years to do more and more higher and higher value added work, not a lot of assembly. And so we’re going to have to take highly paid, highly skilled American workers and put them to work doing things that under normal circumstances, that have people in another country do now. This will generate a lot of employment. This will generate a lot of political power for labor, organized or otherwise, but it comes at a cost, because if you’re going to pick one word to sum up, globalization, it was efficiency, and there is nothing about having people do jobs that they weren’t trained for, that they’re overqualified for. There’s nothing about that that’s efficient. So yes, we will get huge growth, and yes, we will get huge inflation to go along with it, the 23456, 7% that people been bitching about these last three, four years, that’s just the start.
With globalization ending, the US can and should adapt
By Straight Arrow News
Geopolitical experts have cautioned that the era of globalization and “off-shoring” may be ending, and a new era of regionalization and “friend-shoring” might be replacing it. These changes are especially obvious in U.S.-Chinese trade relations over the past few years, although similar observations can be made around the world. Others warn that even “friend-shoring” may be too optimistic, and suggest instead that nations are heading towards nationalist-protectionist economic models.
Watch the video above as Straight Arrow News contributor Peter Zeihan explains how the global economic system may be changing in the years ahead and predicts how those changes might impact the American people.
Be the first to know when Peter Zeihan publishes a new commentary! Download the Straight Arrow News app and enable push notifications today!
The following is an excerpt from Peter’s Sept. 6 “Zeihan on Geopolitics” newsletter:
Globalization led to the rise of China as a manufacturing powerhouse, since finding the lowest cost producer was the priority. However, deglobalization, coupled with China’s demographic decline and aging workforce, has both eroded that competitive advantage and changed everyone’s priorities about cost. So, what happens next?
With China fading from the spotlight, Western countries will become more protectionist, which means manufacturing will be coming back home to places like the U.S. and Europe. But that’s going to bring a whole slew of problems with it.
While this transition will create significant job growth and increase the political power of labor, it will also bring high inflation and inefficiencies. This will force highly skilled workers to take on tasks that were historically outsourced to cheaper labor markets. So, if you thought inflation was bad now, just wait…
Everyone? Peter Zion here coming to you from Yosemite. This is an unnamed lake behind me, so I’m going to claim it. This is Peter Lake, and there’s Peter island right in the middle of it. Great for laps, and I built a summer home here. Anywho, I wanted to talk a little bit today about the global structure of employment, looking forward and back. If you could sum up the concept of globalization into a single phrase, it would be lowest cost producer. The idea is, whoever can produce the product or the step in the supply chain at the lowest cost in a reliable manner, pretty much gets the business. And when the Chinese bellied up to the bar in the 1980s they brought a billion industrial workers with them, and that’s before you consider the fact that it’s a single legal structure, such as it is, or that they subsidized the bejesus out of everything to drive any competition out of business. Basically, they took all the assembly in the low end stuff from the rest of the developing world, where no region was probably suffering more than Latin America, where the geography is much more difficult for infrastructure. And so the Chinese could out compete them there as well, for the first world countries, and most notably the United States, we got out of that sort of business, because if you pay an American $50,000 a year to say, assemble a car, it’s going to be a really expensive car. And so we doubled, tripled, quadrupled down on design work, and there are few industries where this shows up more than technology. The Chinese may make some low end semiconductors and do a lot of assembly, but it’s the Americans who design most of the chips and make a lot of the high end chemicals that are necessary for Chinese fabrication facilities to work. So when someone tells you that the Taiwanese or the Chinese or the Koreans or the Japanese stole our industry and semiconductors, no, no, we still do the high value added stuff. The Chinese do the low value added stuff. Anyway, this has been the state of affairs and increasing intensity for the last 30 to 40 years, and now we’re entering a new world where the Chinese are aging out, and so they’re losing their economic competitiveness even at the low end, and their workforce is collapsing because their population is in demographic decline. Actually, demographic decline, two kind demographic collapse. They now have more people aged 60 to 75 than zero to 25 if I remember my math correctly, anywhere where it’s close. Sorry, I can’t fact check out here. Anyway, lots of old people, very, very few young people, and even fewer people coming into the workforce in the future. Okay, so what happens now? Well, the Chinese are no longer competitive. It’s only because of the sunk cost of the industrial plant that we still think of China as an industrial power. And you know, 30 odd trillion dollars in sunk cost in industrial plant. That’s not nothing, but it’s not enough without a workforce. That’s before you consider the trade wars that are intensifying regardless of who wins the American presidential election, regardless of who wins in various European elections, both the American and the European bloc have turned very sharply protectionist, specifically versus China, and so we’re probably going to see significant crunches in the trade portfolio of products coming from China very, very soon. What we’ve seen with the electric vehicles is really only the beginning. What that means is, if the Europeans and especially the Americans still want stuff, they’re going to have to make it their damn selves. And there is the problem, because the United States has geared its educational system, has geared its infrastructure, has geared its capital structure, over the last 30 years to do more and more higher and higher value added work, not a lot of assembly. And so we’re going to have to take highly paid, highly skilled American workers and put them to work doing things that under normal circumstances, that have people in another country do now. This will generate a lot of employment. This will generate a lot of political power for labor, organized or otherwise, but it comes at a cost, because if you’re going to pick one word to sum up, globalization, it was efficiency, and there is nothing about having people do jobs that they weren’t trained for, that they’re overqualified for. There’s nothing about that that’s efficient. So yes, we will get huge growth, and yes, we will get huge inflation to go along with it, the 23456, 7% that people been bitching about these last three, four years, that’s just the start.
Hurricane Helene hits US coast, Appalachia and beyond
Israel holds upper hand against Lebanon, Hezbollah and Iran
The Sinaloa Cartel civil war
New Ukrainian weapons hit Russia where it hurts
Weighing social costs vs. economic benefits on immigration
Underreported stories from each side
Trump seizes on Harris ‘not a thing that comes to mind’ Biden remark
30 sources | 4% from the left Getty ImagesTrump has long blasted China’s trade practices. His ‘God Bless the USA’ Bibles were printed there
14 sources | 0% from the right ReutersLatest Stories
DOJ: Election Day terrorist plot foiled, Afghan national arrested
Disney World joins other theme parks closing ahead of Milton
Florida prepares for Hurricane Milton's arrival
Is BlueHalo’s VigilantHalo a C2 game changer?: Weapon of the week
Addressing the China Problem: Weapons and Warfare
Popular Opinions
In addition to the facts, we believe it’s vital to hear perspectives from all sides of the political spectrum.
Why noncitizens in Alabama could gain voting protections
19 hrs ago Ben WeingartenWeak GOP overlooks simple solutions to immigration crisis
19 hrs ago Ruben NavarretteFuture of GOP will be determined in 2024 election
Yesterday David PakmanSCOTUS does not need reform or expansion
Friday Star Parker