[bell-cot]

Obvious Solution: Re-establish the military draft, but with a far smaller pool of potential draftees - and make sure the families of current & recent members of Congress, Wall Street big-shots, Fortune 500 CxO's, McKinsey consultants, and such are all assigned to serve in front-line "meat shield" battalions on the western shores of Taiwan, just south of Korea's DMZ, etc.

[edrxty]

Do it ancient Rome style. Send the Senate with the troops

[Taek]

How does this make US manufacturing more competitive?

[bell-cot]

Is the real problem that US manufacturing is "uncompetitive"? Or is it that actual US-based capability to manufacture advanced and military products at scale is a non-priority for the folks making all the decisions?

[Taek]

Having seen US and Chinese manufacturing side-by-side, I'm quite confident that there is a substantial competency gap.

[coliveira]

You should remember that the US military is a two-tier system: there are the officers who rarely see real battle, and the rank and file who effectively die. In the case of war, if the rich ever serve they will be officers, they will only command other less fortunate to battle.

[bell-cot]

Ignoring the combat-duty service records of President Theodore Roosevelt and his sons, President George Bush Sr., President John F. Kennedy and his brothers, etc., etc. - did you notice that I specified service in front-line ground combat battalions, in places where major wars seems all too likely to start?

Major wars might be far less likely if America's ruling classes felt that they had some real skin in the game, and people they cared about could easily get killed.

[ianburrell]

Junior officers had a higher death rate than enlisted in Vietnam. Junior officers lead their men and suffer the same risks. It is the senior officers that command behind the lines.

That might be changing with smart weapons. 15 Russian generals have died in Ukraine, enough to have Wikipedia page.

[coliveira]

15 was the claim from Ukraine, but only 6 deaths have been verified.

[avs733]

Or maybe just treat blue collar workers better? And enshrine such treatment into law so this doesn’t happen again.

That would seem to be simpler

[bell-cot]

While "treat blue collar workers better" sounds like a nice goal in itself...I fail to see how that would do anything at all to address the problem which the article is about.

In other news - treating your oxen wonderfully will not transmute a wooden moldboard into an iron plow.

[coliveira]

The root of the problem is exactly that America never wanted to treat blue collar workers in a decent way. That's why they sent all manufacturing jobs overseas: it was getting very expensive to pay for these unionized workers. The goal of destroying unions of blue collar workers was the main reason for deindustrialization.

[avs733]

I don’t think it was the goal as much as a biproduct. This article hits the same cultural problem…all this discussion of actions by the capitalist and ruling classes, by companies and governments. The simple solutions of respecting people are so incomprehensible as to be not even discussed.

[avs733]

because what they are talking about is the workforce. Treat your workforce like cogs, like oxen, and guess what thats what you get even when you find out quite some time later that you actually need something else. The contrast of these two quotes in the article makes the point

> "Mass production technologies and the division of labor created a workforce consisting of relatively unskilled employees on the line combined with a smaller group of highly skilled workers and the engineering teams that designed it."

> "Japanese producers pursued precision production, just-in-time production, quality built into all production stages (not just at the end), continuous improvements by the entire workforce, and collaborative labor practices, all of which led to dramatically increased efficiencies and quality."

One (Ford) seeks to deskill its workforce in the name of efficiency because they see their opinions as irrelevant because they are not the capital class. One (Toyota) seeks their input as valuable specifically because they are the ones doing the work.

I've worked in both types of factories as an engineer. BOTH sought to apply the principles of lean manufacturing to build efficiency. It only worked in one of them, the one with a culture of treating factory staff with respect. In the one where management and engineering looked down on the employees they didn't listen for efficiency opportunities they only looked for them themselves, they presumed the unskilled workforce provided nothing. Funny enough - that plant couldn't attract better quality employees.

The articles has an entire section dedicated to workforce education...great! but as with all post secondary education in our modern society, the participants are (in large part) motivated by the economic potential of that pursuit. If I can make the same working at starbucks (with benefits because employer scale) as I can as an electrical tradesperson (yes, there are levels but not all are union) why would I pick the one that destroys my body? Why bother with workforce education if your leaders don't respect their work and will seek to Taylorize them instead of partner with them. Apprenticeship and training works in Germany and Japan because the jobs are not awful. It works because of the culture of work. I would argue this is actually the same reason we lag in another marker the article talks about - robots per worker.

[doubloon]

I would like to apologize on behalf of other ycombo users for your top comment being downvoted, and also for people calling workers "oxen".

I feel I seldom hear in tech circles (on the internet at least) the empirical evidence around the Toyota Production System. Maybe I didn't either until I read "The machine that changed the world" by Womack, Jones, and Roos.

It is a historical fact that Toyota produced higher quality with lower cost all through the 1980s vs their American competitors. In the same era at General Motors, CEO Roger Smith said he would build a lights-out factory 100% run by robots. It never worked and they had to abandoned the concept.

When I listen to those Toyota people talk about their system, the concept of mutual respect is the basic foundation. The engineers at Toyota have to spend time working on the line. Exactly what you are describing, partnership vs Taylorization.

Sometimes I feel like this explains Tesla quality issues. When I look at how some people at Tesla think about line workers, they literally call them "Button Pushers" or even use racial slurs. Elon when he described the "machine that makes the machine" was echoing what Roger Smith said in the 80s about a "lights out factory". And here we are ten years later and Tesla does not have a lights out factory and their quality is still very low.

Where I work in the US, it is a service business but some of the concepts still apply. Some of our tools and processes were built from the top down with little user input. It is a struggle to do Poke Yoke or Kaizen, and part of that I think may be the grapevine knowledge to "keep your head down and your mouth shut".

[avs733]

> I would like to apologize on behalf of other ycombo users for your top comment being downvoted, and also for people calling workers "oxen".

I appreciate it but no need - the people doing that (typically) are as much victims of this propaganda. They aren't malicious, they have been learned the same culture we're talking about.

Funny enough, the first place I ever interned had attempted to do a lights out factory in the 1980s. Short term, it was a disaster - in part because they literally had not installed sufficient lighting to trouble shoot problems, push automated transfer vehicles back onto control strips, and pry parts apart. The machining centers of the era could do the quality but required experts to operate, monitor, and adjust. When things went wrong they weren't small anymore, they were destructive and shut down production for 12+ hours. The shift had been made in part to leverage concessions from the workforce, and (IMHO) as a result it disregarded all the tacit skills those employees used to keep the place running. Long term, They ended up with higher quality, faster throughput, but more employees. But, it cost them a lot and they needed more employees to move stuff around the factory because they had built this huge space to do lights out and the irredeemable piece of lights out was material movement and handling. What I learned was that robots and machines can't tell you what went wrong - no matter how much you log.

I've got a ton of other examples. Every factory I've worked in I've learned how much of a myth 'low skilled labor' is. On the floor, in every factory, new hires were useless - which is a pretty definitive marker of 'skilled labor'. Same thing in the military - senior NCOs are often critical mentors to new LTs. As an engineer I've typically learned as much from the technicians and operators as from the other engineers. At each, I've also worked with really smart engineers who were terrible at their job because they had been socialized that their intelligence was all they needed and there was no need to learn from the 'floor guys'. Roger Smith (and Elon) thought engineers could make the transition to lights out with their knowledge alone because they had bought into the same narrative about blue collar work be low skill and low intelligence. The result was concerns about air friction on robots but not tolerance stack up of stampings or repairable castings.

The problem is, until you really engage with it, the narrative descriptions of certain work we get from the media and economists become a lens for making sense of reality. I'm not immune from that, I just had it beaten out of me. Oxen aren't stupid either, they're still really useful in situations where tractors struggle.

[doubloon]

dude i could listen to you talk for hours.. do you have a book?

i really feel like alot of this same stuff could apply to jobs inside service / data processing industry. It reminds me of "Gladys the L6", the person six levels down in a bureaucracy who is the only one who actually knows how things are actually working with the spaghetti of multiple legacy systems and arcane rules. Michael Lewis wrote about this case at Athena Health

[SyzygistSix]

An anecdote I remember was that during the 2008 recession German precision manufacturers did not lay off their workers. They reduced hours, sent a bunch to continuing education programs, and retooled for even more high tech manufacturing. When the recession eventually ended, they had retooled foctories with highly trained workers while US companies had to rehire and retrain their work force. Which again brings the focus back to long term versus short term profits.

[20after4]

Laws are so easily changed. Nothing is enshrined in law that can be nullified by the next court case or a hidden rider clause on a 'must pass' spending bill.

[avs733]

Personally I see this as a better option than the one from the dead comment below. We can argue about rules begetting culture or culture begetting rules, I think there is some back and forth and one set of changes is concrete.