zlacker

If they had manufactured 80% of the stuff in my house, wouldn't Reagan have concluded that they had won the war before it started? A country that manufactures 80% of the things you need to live might just decide to not sell them to you if you misbehave.

>>NoMore+(OP)
Yes, but the real question is if Reagan still would have pushed as hard for financialization and deindustrialization if he understood that he was ultimately selling American industry to communists.

I think he would have. I think he hated American labor more than he hated foreign communists. If his head were still around in a Futurama Jar to comment on the matter, I think he would be blaming American workers for the consequences of his own policies.

>>smallm+I6
Reagan didnt push for deindustrialization and "the world is flat" world view didn't take precedence until after the fall of the Soviet Union in the 90s.

At the time, everyone was still optimistic that China would eventually become more open and even democratic, that Russia would not regress, etc.

It was still common for electronics and microprocessors to be made in USA well into the 90s. Reagan had nothing to do with the expansion of WTO and trade deficits with China that ballooned under HW, Clinton, Bush Jr and Obama.

>>smallm+I6
> I think he hated American labor more than he hated foreign communists

Ironic, considering his own history as a union leader.

>>chrisc+Ge
You can't have financialization without deindustrialization and he didn't push in that direction, he shoved. This macroeconomic story is 500 years old. He knew what he was doing.

>>NoMore+(OP)
US Gov/cabinet in that period were basically so racist they thought they could outsource all the manufacturing to asia and nobody would ever figure out how to develop advanced technology like cars, desktop computers, telephones, jet engines etc, and would remain dependent on US controlled fossil fuels forever anyway. in a sense they thought India or LatAm in 2025 is where most of Asia would peak, and US giants would retain control.

both sides of the aisle, the old school Wellesley college democrats were just the same. they didn't even think China would be able to make washing machines! you must remember that in the early 1980s the majority of whitegoods (washing machine, toaster, fridge, etc) were made in the USA and the idea of moving it to China was about as crazy as space data centres or self driving cars

>>smallm+vv
you give the 'elites' far too much credit. reagan was a tv cowboy that got elected because he was really popular, and cut taxes. Bush 1 was a cowboy and oil man from texas, and clinton was a cowboy from arkansas who made money trading cattle futures and doing land deals in the ozarks. Bush 2 grew up in rural texas and had a GPA of 2.35.

these people were really good at fundraising and getting elected, nobody after kissinger was competent in these ideas (kissingers morality is debatable, but he was very competent)

>>Daedal+6J
Agree wholeheartedly with the exception that Bush 1 alone out of all of them may have actually been a successful shadowy lever-pulling elite. Spends his early life running a tiny front company for the CIA then all of a sudden he's the director, and then a top member of the Republican party. All while maintaining this "aw shucks", dorky persona.

>>Daedal+6J
Neither Bush is from Texas, they’re from the north east.

I guess the cowboy hats are working.

>>Daedal+6J
But wasnt it kissinger who normalized relationship with china?

>>meekaa+PM1
yes he did, but that was only diplomatic relations not industrial policy and tariffs. this was also done in the context of dividing the communist spheres.

mainland chinese manufacturing and trade in the 70s and 80s was still mostly garments, appliance assembly and so on. the kind of thing you see in bangladesh today - even vietnam has mostly developed past garment manufacturing.

the world leading electronics manufacturing and precision components only began in china after bill clinton invited china into the wto in 99/2000 and the heavy capital started to flow. even by then, I don't think the USG expected shenzhen to exist

china didn't really move from bicycles to private car ownership until the 00s.

I mean its easy to forget; if you said in 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000, maybe even 2005 that china would be the worlds largest producer of cars, electronic cars, smart phones, drones, etc, on track to develop its own EUV lithography, and that many chinese cities would have the highest living standards in the world, you would have sounded ludicrous. intel was king and nokia/blackberry/motorola were the giants in cellular

>>wooooo+yS
I agree in reference to military operations and foreign policy. economically he was pretty bad though and lost on that basis. a bit like a kyle machlachlan american psycho

although, the more damaging strategic trade decisions did come from clinton later i suppose.