I wouldn’t bet the house that the Chinese haven’t learned a few tricks during the past century. They certainly have learned that a military presence is an effective way to gain entry and influence in foreign markets.

I agree that we will not be building tanks or planes or missiles or spacecraft to confront the Chinese. They are more than willing to just play protracted “chicken” until we get tired of it and let us diffuse or resources fighting political and military brushfires elsewhere.

It’s a matter of will… and I perceive that will eroding rapidly in the U.S. Perhaps that is an unavoidable consequence of past success. The hunger and drive are gone.

I truly hope I am wrong. But I see us on the same path as Great Britain when it became just Britain.

One thing IS different though, and that’s China. But dude – there was no way 1.5 billion people with a Confucian work ethic were going to stay poor and stupid forever. Yes, prosperity means they will assume a greater importance in the world, and no doubt will seek to make mischief where that is perceived to be in their interest. What they perceive to be in their interest will change as their prosperity grows, however, and they are traditionally a people whose primary focus is on their own Middle Kingdom, so warlike imperialist aggression aggression on the massive scale of the 20th century aggressors is unlikely – it’s not their style.

Which is not to say they won’t nibble around the periphery and make mischief elsewhere. But I don’t foresee the need to start cranking out thousands of Abrams tanks and Liberty ships in this new world (not to mention the technological advances that make such things obsolescent – Predator drones and such.)

I can only hope you are correct, but I see a different outcome in 1/4 century.

China will use it’s population advantage for production and military to become the dominant power in the world. Think not? Image the U.S. in 25 years after our military is gutted and the means of production outsourced to other nations’ control.

China will have both the means and the will to use its power to politically influence Africa, Asia, the Middle East and, eventually, South America. They are smart enough and focused enough to use our own system against us.

We no longer have the will to tell our suppliers that they must conform to OSHA standards. We are content to regulate our domestic manufacturers into oblivion.

Then we can become like Great Britain… not-so-Great Britain… that can’t go after pirates attacking western ships because they would have to grant the pirates asylum because the pirates’ home nations would execute them and GB doesn’t tolerate that. Philosophy before reason.

That new reality is scary, and the Norman Rockwell world of your and my youth was a lot more comfortable, but I do believe that the changes since are evolutionary in the sense of being “organic” and inevitable – this future wasn’t chosen, it was “selected for.” The lesson is that we can embrace the present and future by discovering our true comparative advantages and removing our self-imposed artificial handicaps, or not, and eventually find ourselves on the dust heap.

~~~~

“Self determination” means everything for individuals, but could it be that it’s largely political buzz-word when applied to nations? And isn’t what you’re really talking about is “self-sufficient.” No nation has been completely self-sufficient since the first trader started taking goods from one village to another, at least to the extent of producing all it’s material goods.

OK, the US came close for a while, but in part that was a historical fluke (in the post-war period, when we were the only fully functioning industrial economy), and in larger, longer-term sense it was an evolutionary “phase” that has passed as industrialization has spread to vast populations that not long ago eaked out bare subsistence livings.

And even then were weren’t “self determined” if we wanted coffee, bananas, etc. (We went to war over imported tea, and along the way got hooked on imported java!)

PS – I wouldn’t look too closely at the domestic content percentage of Boeing et al.

I agree that no one segment of our economy or production is essential to our survival. But certain actions strength us internally and others weaken us… not necessarily just economically.

The genesis of our nation was self-determination and self-sufficiency. We have moved away from those principles with the notion of “centers of excellence” or “lowest cost producer.”

To the extent that we allow our government or foreign organizations to say “here are your choices,” we become the King’s subjects again. Certainly, we can and already do allow foreign governments and corporations to control what is offered to us and what we will pay for what is offered. And, yes, there is “market competition” for our dollars. But at what point does “finding the best bargain” supplant self-sufficiency?

You didn’t really answer the question about Boeing and Lockheed. Is there any point where bargains are not bargains? Is progress truly progress if we are dependent on others to define what that means?

And just how far can we move away from being a producer nation to a consumer nation before producers ask us for something more than devalued dollars in return? Compare the value of our dollar now with that of 20 or 30 years ago. Then answer the question.

One way is to place artificial handicaps on the members of your own “team,” like those imposed on the Detroit three by the feds as described by Holman Jenkins, and those imposed by the state of Michigan on all businesses here as described by the Mackinac Center.

The other is to place artificial handicaps on the other “team” in the form of tarrifs or non-tariff trade barriers. Economists of all stripes recognize the destructive effect of this variety of handicap, but some of them have a blind spot with regard to the other.

Bruce, if the Germans bomb Pearl Harbor again or some other type of national emergency occurs that requires the type of mobilization you insinuate, the Japanese aren’t going to pack up those “trans-plant” auto factories and haul them back to the Empire. Most of the managers and engineers in those plants are American, and they won’t go anywhere either.

More important, the world has changed in fundamental ways and there’s no point in wishing for a past in which the rest of the world was impoverished compared to us, or blown-up by us in a war. Given increases in productivity, it won’t be long before less than 10 percent of the workers will be able to produce all the stuff consumed by the inhabitants of our industrial civilization, similar to the evolution of agriculture. What will the other 90 percent do? The “cute” answer is “whatever they want,” but there’s a deeper truth to that.

Let me finish with one area where you and I agree and where you are doing good work, and that’s debunking the notion that “we’re all gonna die” because weather changes or because we can’t produce the energy an industrial civilization requires. As you know, with nukes and geothermal and other innovations we CAN produce enough juice, and we can also transition to a mostly-electric economy. THAT will look a lot different too, but it will be a good thing, not something to run away from.

Yes, unions have been a problem with underlying costs. But the larger issue is that our government has been a willing co-conspirator against domestic manufacturers and now sits back in judgment against those manufacturers.

Furthermore, in time of national crisis, will those Toyota facilities or Honda facilities step up? Oh, wait. With Obama at the helm, we don’t have to worry about that anymore. All will be peace and love.

Do you feel the same way about Boeing and Lockheed? Why not? Airbus can come in and set up shop. The French will be glad to help us out.

- American steel is as vibrant as ever… well maybe not
- American television manufacturers are as vibrant as ever… well maybe not
- American textiles are as vibrant as ever… well maybe not
- American balance of payments are as strong as ever… well maybe not
- American middle class is growing and prospering… well maybe not
- American per-capita wealth is growing faster than any place else in the world… well maybe not
- America is producing the highest percentage of the world’s Ph.Ds than ever… well maybe not

There is a difference between self-sufficiency and self-delusional. America no longer sees value in producing what it needs. Rather it seeks to find the next get-rich-quick scheme… dot-coms… flipping houses… oil stocks.

You are correct. We don’t have to produce trucks and cars. We can allow the system to collapse and the Japanese and Koreans and Europeans will continue to state-sponsor their own industries. Likewise, we don’t have to manufacture our own aircraft because the French and British and Russians and Chinese will be happy to do so.

Likewise we don’t have to produce our own energy or food. The Saudis and Venezuelans will handle the oil while we can get our food from South American and Latin America.

Why, we don’t have to do anything except blog and take vacations and consume and have university professors talk about CO2 and politicians talk about sharing the wealth.

And then we live happily ever after… well maybe not.