-
A two party system where there is a hyper-partisan divide on marginally different policies might be the worst of the both worlds. Of course you occasionally get reactionary, anti-establishment types in power, but they don't get it right either. They rely on overly simplistic and emotionally potent constructs to gain popularity, like broken systems that can be fixed with sledge hammers and electric saws. When they get in power, they realize that many elements of the system are there for a reason and they are complex. You can't fix a watch that is running slow by first smashing it. But fixing systems with careful analysis and revision cycles is not a sexy message that energizes angry crowds.
Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
06-11-2025 03:49 PM
-
That was a good line and I’m glad you repeated it so I could quote it … well, quite. Originally Posted by Spook410
Re your previous points I also agree that manned space flight is an expensive boondoggle.
The fact that it is doesn’t mean that it isn’t in fact something that’s tied up massively with political prestige.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
America does manufacture a lot of high-tech products, exports agriculture, and of course produces services that the rest of the world needs.
However, the run-of-the-mill manufacturing (and I would include guitars in that)--it's history. Only 8% of Americans work in manufacturing, and most of them are pushing buttons and designing machines, not hands-on carving and welding and assembly.
The country that can most efficiently produce the products should produce them. That's capitalism 101.
The US CAN make certain products including guitars that are desirable because of their quality and reputation, for instance Gibson and Fender and Martin and Taylors. And small luthiery operations. I wish they would make archtops, of course, but c'est la vie.
But the idea of producing guitars or any number of other common consumer products for the masses, with some exceptions (autos for instance)...that's a fantasy that IMO is dangerous to indulge in. It would be like Britain deciding to again rule the seas or recolonize Africa and Asia.
-
Except when it comes to preparations for war. That's Sun Tzu 101. Originally Posted by Doctor Jeff
-
I don’t think Sun Tzu played guitar. Originally Posted by Spook410
I’m not sure if this is really an argument. What, is banning all foreign guitars going to benefit the guitar-buying public in the US? That seems rather fanciful.
-
Hmm.. clearly wasn't clear. Hate it when that happens. Originally Posted by Doctor Jeff
Was responding to the idea of capitalism being such a primary driver for the optimal location of manufacturing. And I was referring to manufacturing in general and wasn't even considering guitars. Though I'm sure the troops would love to have a few. Having a substantial manufacturing base (supply chains, materials, skilled labor and mgmnt, et al) is critical for success in conventional warfare. China is in good shape for this. The US is not. Part of the argument to spur more manufacturing in the US.
(side note for the casual observer: Sun Tzu reference is 'Art of War')
-
The USA's own Office of Naval Intelligence concedes that China's shipbuilding capacity is today 200X that of the US. Our atrophied shipbuilding capacity is, btw, our own fault. Quite a comedown from our WWII performance when we built almost 9000 warships, aside from landing craft, which was more than 3X combined shipbuilding output of all other powers together during that war. There is no practical way for the US to match China in shipbuilding capacity anytime soon. Our best bet is to formally team with Japan and South Korea, both of whom can build ships more quickly, in higher quantity than we can. In 1999 China held 5% of the global shipbuilding market. By 2023 China's market share was over 50%, just 24 years later. The United States' world-beating mastery of military logistics can perform supply miracles, but it has to have the goods ready for distribution. Originally Posted by Spook410
Then we have the irony that our air, sea and land forces have acute functional dependencies on Chinese materiel. Effectively, we are in the ironic position that the US needs China to supply it if it wishes to fight China. This also cannot be effectively remedied soon. From the F-35 fighter to cruise missiles, about 80% of the US' weapon systems are dependent on rare earth metals for which China is the dominant supplier. The capitalist US economy has myriad actors, huge to small, who in aggressive allegiance to comparative advantage, don't collectively think much about national security. That's someone else's problem. We've effectively made David Ricardo a pacifist theoretician of the first order, for undermining our own latitude for unfettered war-making. We cannot any longer sustain serious losses in our hyper-expensive military hardware, since we can't replace any of it very quickly. And if this or any administration thinks China is our strategic rival with a potential for hot hostilities, we'd presently have to ask their permission to engage in an extended conflict. I suppose we still can heave Gibson and Fender solid body guitars at them. Telecasters and Les Pauls falling out of the sky seem particularly effective at cracking heads and if we combine Corona, MIM, MIJ and MII production, we might have enough for an ill-considered, extended conflict. But, what, us worry? We're pretty sure the Chinese can't innovate so what's the fuss?
PhilLast edited by 213Cobra; 06-26-2025 at 04:33 PM.
-
Why would China wage war on its export markets? What would China do with its rare earths, in a trade war or an actual war? As the Economist observed a few years ago, 'If China cuts off exports, it would hurt America but also undermine its own long-term economic goals."
China needs to make and sell stuff to prevent collapse. Youth unemployment was almost twenty per cent in the middle of 2024, before the measurement tools were altered to make the numbers look better. Making cheap guitars is an easy way to make money and keep people working, because electric guitars are 1950s technology.
Of course, China builds more skyscrapers more quickly than anyone else, but many are never occupied because supply outstrips demand. Besides, they are made of tofu:
-
It’s an interconnected world, not the 1950s anymore. Modern capitalism relies on incredibly complex ‘just in time’ international logistics. Without China the US can’t make cars - or modern military hardware.
I kind of get why people might want to bring production back to a single nation and political control. We all feel that to some extent.
(Did someone say Taiwan?)
But if a politician tells you that this is possible they are either lying or don’t understand how it works.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
China is making HUGE advancements in modular factory made home design, to produce these quickly, that are high quality, made to order and customizable. They need to, in order to further urbanize 200-300 million.
I wonder if these customizable made to order principles can be applied to instruments like guitars? Why not? I inquired with Lollar in Seattle if they could make a CC magnetic pickup for 8 string guitars. In short shrift: NOPE. They would have recast and re-die their mold designs and that costs $5k or something.
The ability to make high quality instruments (or houses or whatever) that can be easily made-to-order (ie, customizable) will be one of the serious advancements of centralized design and supply chains all located in one place. As opposed to the dispersed, Just-in-Time Toyota style parts and inventory allocation that has basically existed for decades.
Paradoxically, it’s an exciting time for people who want high quality, affordable guitars and instruments. We’ve never had it so good. Give credit to Bill Schultz and Fender, in small part. As Jack C explained to me, Fender standardized their production so much that they can knock out the same guitar in Mexico or US or Japan or wherever, in about 3. 5 hours max.
The next advancements will be in customizable made to order options.
-
Yeah I mean the flip side is as Varoufakis points out Apple did bring some production back to the US, but of course it’s all automated so the jobs produced were very small.
We are approaching a zero marginal cost society. Which is not to say a post scarcity one ;-) but that’s a political discussion.
The centralised production thing is interesting.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Understood. I was being snarky, of course, which is my default. Originally Posted by Spook410
I think everyone would agree we need to have a certain critical manufacturing base. The question is what is critical.
Semiconductors--yes. Guitars--no. Steel and aluminum--highly debatable.
I personally don't think we can possibly keep up with China on most fronts, and maybe we don't even want to. The best we can do is manage our decline, like England after WW2.
To quote Jerry and Robert: "He's gone, he's gone, and nothing's gonna bring him back, yes he's gone."
-
It's also worth noting the idea of peaks and valleys, as well as the changing nature of what a country is... Granted I know nothing about the topics at hand nor any others for that matter but it seems like we're kind of approaching a mortal choice between global equality and mutual global annihilation.
It's not right that the US should control the whole world, but it wants to. It's not right that China should control the whole world, but it wants to. Maybe they both end up with half or 3/4 China 1/4 "The West" for a while.
At some point (assuming humanity survives long enough) the continent of Africa will be in a position to take back its autonomy, then the pie gets smaller for east and west alike.
I think history tells us that subjugated peoples tend to throw off the yoke given enough time, so to me either we last long enough for every subjugated population to throw off their yoke and we get a world congress or something OR either a yoke throwing or some great power conflict destroys the planet OR while we're waiting for one of the first two to happen we accidentally kill everyone. To me option 3 seems the most likely. Just thought I'd introduce an uninformed perspective to the thread
-
But England did not do that. England created the Beatles and James Bond. England found new products and new markets. Originally Posted by Doctor Jeff
Britain took leading roles in international organisations, such as NATO, the Council of Europe and the United Nations. Britain converted the old expensive Empire into the Commonwealth of self-governing nations aligned with the Crown. Britain joined the European Economic Community and found opportunities on the continent. Britain created a welfare state that provided social security for its people. New schools, technical colleges and universities were built. The National Health Service was formed, to provide free health care from birth to death. The City of London maintained its position in global finance. British corporations enjoyed worldwide success. By the 1960s, British people enjoyed the highest living standards they had ever known.
The orderly management of decline was a notion of Sir Robert Armstrong, Margaret Thatcher's Cabinet Secretary; he was talking of the role of the civil service. It was never official policy.
-
Ultimately, I think Americans are much more preoccupied with the British Empire than most Brits.
(Awareness tends to come from those Brits who have family histories in former colonies etc.)
Certainly for my generation there’s a sort of cultural amnesia about it which is a big problem in itself for many reasons.
My first encounter with the history of the Empire was learning about Chinese history for GCSE (age 14) and encountering the Opium Wars which was a shock lol.
I suspect this may have changed a bit.
If you want to see a sort of averaged British idea of who we are go to the 2012 Olympic ceremony where the Empire is pretty much airbrushed out. That narrative may change over time. I perceive little appetite to restart c19 style imperial ambitions or much nostalgia for that era. The political battles are usually about how much we should align with Europe or the US.
most of the nostalgia focusses around the post war era. And we are willing to but our nose of in spite of our face in pursuit of that…
All in all we are a very self obsessed nation that doesn’t really consider the effect it’s had on other nations historically. Tbh I’m amazed we have the soft power we have haha.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkLast edited by Christian Miller; 06-12-2025 at 08:11 PM.
-
With all due respect, this is the stupidest comment that could have been expected. Originally Posted by Alter
-
Not wishing to partake in the political discussion, but sharing my experience working in industry. We make a niche machine for fire protection purposes. We CNC machine all the parts ourselves, and we assemble the machines in-house. From hunk of metal to machine all inside 4 walls.
However, we need a couple of parts externally as we don't have the tooling to produce it ourselves; springs, bearings, one custom screw, etc.
When I order 500 screws (off-the shelf, ISO 4029) locally, it takes two weeks to travel 150-200 km from the supplier. More than once they've only shipped after reminding them that we're waiting (the post log is public data and we can see that mysteriously, the shipment was only generated 10 minutes after our reminder...).
When I order 5000 pcs. our one custom screw that we don't make, I get the part, with QC report, delivered in ten days from China. My first e-mail is RFQ, my second is confirming the order.
... Or let's take a needle bearing. JIS0 standard. Local price with a 50% """""discount""""" is $35. The best price I've found in the country is $7,25 per bearing, with a lead time of 6 months.
When I ask for confirmation of tolerances, the answer is "see catalogue attached".
The same bearing to the same standard, from China, is $1,50. Delivered in full in 7 days. All 1000 pcs. When I ask for confirmation of tolerances, I get a short and sweet answer either with a standard or the actual tolerance.
People think that China is just a matter of price, but my experience in dealing with Chinese suppliers is that they have the highest professional standards, and that they deliver the goods, in a timely manner.
It's a well-known fact that you get what you pay for, but yet there is this misconception that Chinese = lower-quality. It's not that simple. The factories are given a budget and build accordingly. Big wigs in the west want to have the highest possible margin, so a guitar that cost 50 bucks to make might sell for who knows, 500?
I have a wonderful 7-string classical guitar built in China. It's my most-played guitar these days, much more than my Gibson. We had a fire in our building and had to leave our home for the next 4-5 months, and I only brought this guitar.
I think China wins on guitar manufacturing because they're focused on industry and modernization. Guitar manufacturers think they don't have to adapt.
I can only remember Furch and Taylor off the top of my head, they understand what they have to do. Martin gets to survive because of their high regard. What will happen to Gibson acoustic guitars? In my last few years selling guitars for a living, every Gibson acoustic that came in sounded like crap and cost twice as much as a Taylor of a similar grade and 3 times more than a Furch. It begs the question "why should Gibson exist?".
I see a parallel in the history of wristwatches. When the quartz watch arrived to the masses, the Swiss industry almost perished. Those who survived were a few high-end outliers, and those who could adapt to modern industry; what became the Swatch group. People complain about composite parts and laser-adjusted balances, but at the end of the day, you get a great, solid, Swiss-made watch for the price of a Taiwanese-built watch.
Is there perhaps a bit of cultural chauvinism in this? We should have a "right" to a market share because 50 years ago we were the best?
-
@ mr. quick
for years l´m searching for a classical 7 string , price range up to 2.000,-
Thomann´s are not good enough, brazilian imports tend to fall apart due to different moisture in the air in our drier climate
so... where and how did you get your instrument?
l would be grateful for your help
woodpecker, europe
-
Mine is made by Altamira, though it was a one-off and supposedly built to order in accordance with their Hanson-grade guitars. I've actually contacted Altamira about the facts on this, regarding whether it has solid back & sides. Originally Posted by woodpecker
Anyway, I love the guitar.
Sete Cordas
– Altamira Guitars
If it has laminate sides & back, it sure doesn't sound like it. It's like a grand piano to me.
I store it with a humidifier in the winter as the RH frequently drops to 20%.
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos