[By Guancha Observer Network, Qi Qian] "Tariffs will not lead to America's re-industrialization." On May 14th, Bloomberg published an article with this title, offering advice to the Trump administration: "To revitalize manufacturing, the U.S. needs to learn from China's approach."

In the article, Dan Wang, a researcher at the Hoover Institution History Lab of Stanford University, and freelance writer Ben Reinhardt got straight to the point, pointing out that American industry has lost its former glory while Chinese industry is thriving.

The article mentions that American manufacturing output has never recovered to its pre-financial crisis peak in 2008; the dual impact of the pandemic and the Russia-Ukraine conflict exposed the inability of American factories to rapidly expand the production of essential goods; well-known manufacturers like Boeing, Intel, as well as Detroit's automobile manufacturers have faced setbacks. In contrast, leading Chinese enterprises, such as BYD, CATL, and Huawei, have continued to grow.

"For President Trump, tariffs are the panacea, which can be imposed on friends, enemies, or even penguins," the authors wrote. "However, for almost all economists, tariffs are merely a placebo that may deepen the suffering of American manufacturers." The article points out that building high walls around the world's largest economy is a wrong approach.

Subsequently, the article proposed three more reliable suggestions for revitalizing American manufacturing to the Trump administration: first, study China's development strategies, including attracting foreign investment and building a vast network of industrial centers; second, create new manufacturing paradigms and seek opportunities in emerging technologies like artificial intelligence; third, maintain American advantages, such as alliances and the attractiveness to global talent.

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA - Exterior view of the Clairton Coke Plant of United States Steel. Visual China.

First, study China's strategies

The article states that China did not become the world's factory through tariffs. Instead, since the 1990s, China has reduced trade barriers while adopting a series of policies to support leading manufacturing enterprises. Policymakers also used standard industrial policy tools, such as subsidizing R&D investments, providing tax incentives and preferential loans to manufacturers in strategic industries like electric vehicles and semiconductors.

The article argues that to reindustrialize, the U.S. should learn two particularly effective experiences from China.

Firstly, China has been actively attracting foreign investment since the 1980s. By comparison, the U.S. has invested less effort in attracting foreign investment, mainly relying on its market size, rule of law, and currency as incentives. The article specifically mentions that the U.S. should also open its doors to leading Chinese technology companies, apart from those from allied countries. Blocking Chinese enterprises from producing electric vehicles or batteries in the U.S. is incorrect.

Another aspect the U.S. should learn from China is its vast network of industrial centers. Shenzhen is the world's electronics production center, where there is an abundance of process knowledge and a large and flexible workforce capable of manufacturing smartphones, drones, robots, or next-generation valuable products. In contrast, the U.S. is the opposite, with former industrial hubs dissipating. Detroit is no longer the "Motor City," and Silicon Valley no longer produces many microprocessors.

The article notes that American companies tend to disperse investments to secure a foothold in multiple congressional districts, thereby expanding their influence in Washington and gaining an advantage in competition for investment incentives. However, the article believes that policymakers and businesses need to collaborate to build concentrated industrial hubs where knowledge can flow between workers, entrepreneurs, investors, and scholars, much like Detroit and Silicon Valley once were.

Second, create an American特色的 manufacturing paradigm

The article argues that compared to the U.S., Chinese manufacturers have cheaper labor and higher levels of factory automation. In 2023, China installed 51% of the world's industrial robots, while the U.S. accounted for only 7%.

Therefore, to remain competitive, the U.S. needs to explore new manufacturing models on a scale comparable to those pioneered during the early Industrial Revolution. In the early 19th century, American inventor Eli Whitney revolutionized gun production by introducing interchangeable parts; a century later, American automobile manufacturer Henry Ford perfected the moving assembly line.

"What technological transformations can 21st-century American manufacturers embrace?" The article mentions that one obvious goal is artificial intelligence. Although China has many advantages in deploying robots, both countries have strengths in this field.

Just as the transition from steam power to electricity required a complete overhaul of typical factories, effectively utilizing artificial intelligence capabilities in manufacturing also requires new machines, sensor suites, and workflows. Imagine the future automotive factory. CNC machines or adjustable stamping systems could produce large modular components. Simple machines would assemble seats, axles, and doors, which are specially designed for easy handling with simple clamps. Artificial intelligence would monitor each step, identify defects, and devise better production process strategies, making real-time adjustments.

The article states that to achieve this transformation, U.S. policymakers need to abandon the idea that factories will create a large number of jobs as they did in the last century. Instead, the focus should be on leveraging the nation's technological advantages.

Besides artificial intelligence, the U.S. should also pay attention to other potential developments.

For example, machine tool manufacturers might be able to produce smart tools, making manufacturing more like programming. The U.S.' leadership in commercial space exploration can provide a platform for advancements in so-called "orbital manufacturing." Orbital manufacturing is a technique that uses conditions in space, such as microgravity, to produce unique materials and products. Additionally, nanotechnology may enable precision manufacturing with atomic-level control.

Third, maintain American existing advantages

The article suggests that if the U.S. continues to prosper, maintains strong alliances, and enjoys an excellent reputation in science and industry, it will have a better chance to consolidate its position as a manufacturing superpower.

"Collaboration with friendly countries should be the cornerstone of America's manufacturing revival," the article first emphasizes the importance of allies to the U.S., criticizing Trump's indiscriminate tariff threats, which undermine long-standing alliances.

The article writes that the U.S. can still fight alongside allies: relying on Japan and South Korea for shipbuilding, obtaining rare earth elements from Canada and Australia, and utilizing Europe's rich industrial expertise. The Biden administration has made efforts in this direction, and allies realize that the U.S. cannot match China's industrial strength alone. But now, many countries are dissatisfied with the U.S. and doubt whether they can repair broken trust among themselves.

Then, the article bluntly states that Trump's attacks on American universities and research institutions are completely wrong. Given that universities undertake about half of America's basic scientific research, they drive scientific progress. The article also questions whether the next potential technological breakthrough might be buried in university laboratories due to a lack of federal funding.

Harvard University students and faculty hold a rally to protest against Trump cutting funding. Video screenshot.

The article also emphasizes that to revitalize and expand American industry, U.S. leaders must support and value overseas immigrants. If Trump turns the U.S. into an unfriendly country, fewer talented individuals will be willing to innovate here. At the same time, the U.S. needs a larger workforce to provide ready-to-work labor for typically grueling and monotonous jobs.

It is worth noting that since Trump took office in January this year, hundreds of visas have been revoked, international students have been rounded up and expelled, and foreign researchers now face the risk of continuous investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

In addition, Trump targeted top-tier colleges and research institutions, threatening to cut federal research funding.

In early March, the journal Nature conducted a survey via its website, social media, and email to ask readers if changes brought by the Trump administration prompted them to consider leaving the U.S. The survey results showed that approximately 1,650 people completed the survey, with over 75% (1,200 people) giving an affirmative response. They expressed a desire to move to Europe, Canada, their home countries, or "anywhere that supports science."

"Because of Trump, American scholars are in exile." On March 31st, the Financial Times published an article with this title, stating that after Trump's inauguration, he continuously launched "direct attacks" on education and science, causing professors to flee American universities.

Nature survey finds over 75% of researchers in the U.S. are considering leaving the country.

"For America to succeed, it must show its best self," the author noted at the end. "The more capriciously Trump acts, whether in trade policy, immigration policy, or investor treatment, the more likely the outcome will be: ultimately, it won't be China but the U.S. itself that becomes isolated from the rest of the world."

This article is an exclusive contribution from the Guancha Observer Network and cannot be reproduced without permission.

Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7504308776175043111/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author. Welcome to express your attitude by clicking the [Like/Dislike] buttons below.