It used to be that owning a TV or radio was an expense you planned for and it had to last.
Of course there are those who were hurt from the move from blue collar manufacturing, but overall, the aggregated benefit is higher than the losses from those who were laid off. And it's not as if new industries did not spring up.
Thereby replacing one problem with another. The hope was that quality would be minimally impacted and repairs would be affordable. Instead, businesses are incentivized to quick-to -obsolesce products.
Disastrous garbage problems that impact everyone, even the wealthiest, though they are blissfully unaware.
> Of course there are those who were hurt from the move from blue collar manufacturing, but overall, the aggregated benefit is higher than the losses from those who were laid off. And it's not as if new industries did not spring up.
Trump’s rise in 2016 shows that this narrative is woefully inadequate.
You've hidden very carefully the causality in this sentence. Who moved them? Why? Its perhaps implied that since shareholders benefited, that they did it. Yet a careful examination reveals quickly the elephant in the room in that thesis: why did outsourcing now, and not before, if the benefit to shareholders has always been there? why did this happen mostly in the US, and not other countries?
Of course, the reality is far more complex and reveals that the road for manufacture hollowing in the US was a road paved with good intentions. History is there for anyone who wants to read it.