Matthew Mitchell, Bohannon, Jay Bill discussed on Dave Ramsey

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Fellow director of the equity initiative at the Mercatus center at George Mason University before we go to the calls to simply ask you is a delusional dream to bring manufacturing jobs back into the country. Or did the Foxconn situation merely go about it the wrong way? Well, I don't think. No. I don't think it's a delusion at all. In fact, there's some evidence that certain types of manufacturing are really resurging in the US, but it's a different kind. It's not gonna be the the blue blue collar manufacturing that dominated economy in the sixties and seventies. Instead, it's gonna be, you know, a more advanced manufacturing, the relies a lot on ro- robots and the types of jobs that are going to be you know, in demand for that are. Jobs for highly skilled highly educated workers. So really, I think the, you know, if you the real task here is to make sure that our education system is keeping up with you know, with that economy of the future, and the people are quick to to meet those demands. So a better investment of Wisconsin tax dollars might have been in the schools. Perhaps you know, that gets into another debate about, you know, the weather dollars exactly turn into education by targeted dollars. All right. Matthew in Justin, Texas joins us tonight on the Bohannon show with our guest, Matthew Mitchell. Good evening Matthew in. Hey, Jay Bill. Hi, matthew. How are you guys? We're well. So I guess my comment is your guest seems to be expressing economic intervention through government utility versus free market supply and demand like Larry cudlow talks about a lot. So it sounds like he he spouses just to let supply and demand run its course versus economic intervention. Okay. What what about the is this a pure Lasi fair argument here that that the government keeps hands off? Well, I do think there's definitely an element of a laissez faire. What I would say is, you know, go back to what basic economics says works, and you know, that there should be an active role for the government in providing genuine public goods because public goods are under provided by markets. There should be a active role for the government to ensure that contracts are upheld and promises are are maintained. And there's no fraud. There should be a role for the government to internalize extra analogies to make sure that either through property rights or through some other ski my cap, and trade that extra nowadays there aren't environmental extra analyses. But for all of those there's good economic theory to say that it works. But really in neither economics theory Norian economic evidence. Do we find much of the case for using public funds for private firms all right to John in Las Vegas? Good evening. John welcome to the Bohannon Joe. Oh, yes, sir. I wish we would bring our manufacturing back home. I love the Chinese. But our shoes were better made it home. That's an interesting point that the issue of quality control. But of course, if the Chinese were to make let's say the best possible there is I guess Matthew Mitchell, there's there's just a problem of wage differential here that the Chinese could make shoes out of of platinum virtually and and still make them cheaper than than we can make them. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, the labor differential there is just so great. And in many ways, this is a good problem to have is American workers are high relative to Chinese workers are highly skilled and can command high salaries, and so, you know, it makes sense for firms to locate and other places where the the firm, the labor force isn't nearly as educated, and you know. Weekend specialize in other in production of other activities. Like, I said, you know, really the change from manufacturing base jobs where it's a blue collar job and wages are are nice. But they're not nearly as high as what you would get from manufacturing. Where people are a highly skilled workforce is programming. The machines that make the the do the manufacturing, you know. That's really going to be the future. There's a lot of debate about whether change, you know, creative destruction of capitalism is good or bad. I tend to I tend to side with those who say over the long run. It's it's quite good for consumers and for and for workers. But what you can't do is deny that it exists. You know, it is changes coming, and you can't just hope for an economy that was back forty forty years ago. That's never coming back to AJ in Humboldt County, California on the Bohannon show. Hello AJ. You're absolutely true part question. Okay. All right. You mentioned something about a subbing out manufacturing to places like China weapons guidance systems would have you coming back to haunt us. At some point. I thought that we part why didn't we do that under Bill Clinton's that we subbed out weapons guidance systems manufacturer? We were selling guidance information that would help put satellites in orbit. Ignoring the fact that the very same technology that puts satellites and accurate orbit makes ICBM's more accurate. We did do that. Yes. Okay. All right. The other thing is that based on that answer, which I thought was true. Suppose we make a deal with the Taiwanese. And then the time when he's taken over by the Chinese, and we're not in a position to do it because there's a nuclear stalemate, or what have you and they end up with all of our information from that exchange of information with the Taiwanese they're independent now. But. They are independent. They don't always have to be. Of course, I wasn't suggesting that it's ever a wise decision to sublet are sensitive technological information to anybody for any reason whatsoever. And this issue here as far as I know Matthew Mitchell, there was nothing to be manufactured at the proposed liquid crystals spe plant in Wisconsin. That would have been Bill sensitive, right? Yeah. I've never heard any claims that there is any militarily sensitive manufacturing going on there. More to come. Stay with us on the Bohannon show. One eight six six five zero jimbo's really big question. A lot of people have had this for a long time. And maybe we are through trial and error learning some answers back in a moment. They alarm here. All.

Coming up next