If the US is willing to import many more low-skilled workers, then I would agree it's a great idea. Absent that, with a 4% unemployment, then the pigeon hole principle makes it difficult. Open to proposals about how it could be done without significant downside.
> Open to proposals about how it could be done without significant downside.
That's a policy straitjacket: a demand that strategic and necessary things can be done only if there's no downside for some privileged group.
If the US doesn't want to be a weak-ass paper tiger, it needs the capability to mass-produce consumer electronics (a civilian capability that can be redirected for military purposes, if needed). That will likely require trade offs.
Let's employ fewer people in the sandwich-assembly industry and more people assembling electronics.
Downstream assembly factories attract component manufacturers because of lower transport costs and shorter delivery times, which can lead to network effects. (Remember why Intel wanted to build more foundries in China a few years ago?) That's the success formula of Shenzhen, for example.
Why? Especially considering military systems are looking increasingly like masses of consumer electronics (e.g. FPV drones).