America has the highest cost of production in the world. This has nothing to do with a lack of technology. This is because all the extra costs that are born by governments in other countries are paid for by labor and employees here in America. To dismantle the government is to dismantle the basic means of subsidizing public services and manufacturing. No wonder industry has been driven abroad. No wonder it’s impossible to encourage industry here.

And why #Bitcoin? Bitcoin makes it much harder for the FIRE (finance, insurance, real estate) sectors to dismantle public services and to privatize them at a great profit to themselves.

#michaelhudson

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

America has the highest cost of production? In general? Why do we make anything here?

We don’t. We do not have an industrialized economy anymore. GDP used to be a reasonable measure of goods and real services. Now the majority of GDP is financial services: accounting based on fictitious production, capital gains, leveraged buyouts, premiums, and buybacks. The great difference between the US economy and the competing economies in Russia, China, India, and Brazil, is that these other countries kept a steady course toward developing an industrialized economy. The US is a zombie economy, wherein more than half of the S+P companies flaunt paper gains. This serves a small minority of US citizens at the expense of the vast majority of laborers.

Manufacturing is shrinking as a percentage of US GDP, but total production is near an all-time high:

https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/manufacturing-output

And financial services are not even close to half of US GDP. See table 3:

https://www.bea.gov/sites/default/files/2022-12/gdp3q22_3rd.xlsx

It’s the percent that is important. Looking at that chart you sent, manufacturing as a percentage of GDP has dropped from 16-10%. Total growth is irrelevant: growth from 1,400 billion to 2,400 billion between 1998 and 2021 is less than even the inflation numbers published as CPI, which we all know drastically underestimate real inflation. “Growth” that matches or lags inflation is not growth at all. If purchasing power has not grown, growth is fictitious.

Those numbers were adjusted for inflation.

Why is manufacturing’s share of GDP important?

It is important because the FIRE industries (finance, insurance, real estate) wish us to believe that they play an important role in the economy, while in fact they play a parasitic role that eviscerates the real industrial economy and leaves the majority of the laboring public working ever harder for a dollar that is worth ever less, while the minority levies ever increasing rents and interests upon them.

The book that most clearly elucidates the transition from industrial capitalism to financial capitalism is perhaps Michael Hudson’s “Killing the Host.” I recommend this to every Bitcoiner.

When the government does something, that doesn’t make it free. It’s usually more expensive because they’re spending other people’s money, and therefore have less incentive to economize, innovate, or produce what consumers want most.

When the government does something, there is no profit margin built into the cost. When a project is privatized using the largely contrived argument of “efficiency,” contractors neglect to remind consumers that they plan to skim off 20+% in profits. The very nature of privatization is to add a middle man between public funds and public services. Of course there are inefficiencies in any government, but there is a systematic increase in the cost of public services when a profit must be extracted by an intermediary.

Profits serve a function; they’re not dispensable costs. How are capitalists supposed to know what to produce to satisfy consumers, or what resources to use? How would they be incentivized to delay their own gratification to take a risk and invest in production? If we can save money by doing away with profits, can we also save money by doing away with wages paid to laborers? Can you give me an example of an economy that succeeded without profits?

I’m not arguing against profits at all. I am stating that the cost of a public service as provided by government is (labor + admin + materials). The cost of a public service as contracted out to a government contractor is (labor + admin + materials + profit). Contractors wish us to ignore the added cost to public services

The most common reason government agencies contract out work to private firms is to reduce costs.

The most common reason is not to reduce cost, it is to satiate the desires of the electorate. And the electorate are not members of the public; they are controlling members of corporations that sponsor elections and put people in office…for the sole purpose of winning those contracts