How Auto Manufacturing Makes You More Likely to Die in a Crisis, Plus, Ironman is a Mass Murderer.

“The most efficient killing machine ever invented; you’ve got her doing the laundry.” – Terminator, The Sarah Connor Chronicles

counterproductive.jpg

My first job was in a toy vampire manufacturing factory.  I worked as part of a two man team, so I had to make every second Count.

Modern society is based on efficiency.

Efficiency in what?

Efficiency in everything, from the proper number of employees to completely mess up my order at McDonalds© to using the absolute minimum amount of labor and material to make a car.

Let’s stick with cars, because the local McDonalds™ in Modern Mayberry is primarily efficient only at serving me a Sausage McMuffin® without sausage, egg, or cheese.  Yes.  They served me a plain muffin, which I guess is more efficient.  In 2018, Toyota® sold roughly 8,000,000 cars, trucks and station wagons (I refuse to call them SUVs on principle) worldwide.  Overall, 86,000,000 new cars were made and sold in 2018.

I think cars just might finally be catching on as a consumer item.  Maybe they’re not a fad after all.

When you do something 86,000,000 times, though, you start to get good at it, or at least sore.  I brought up Toyota© because they decided to get good at making cars, and were highly innovative in trying to increase quality while at the same time increasing efficiency – they made better cars with less labor, less rework, less effort.  While I can make the case that Detroit finally caught up with Toyota™ by the early 2000’s as far as quality goes, Toyota® was leading the pack for decades – that’s why they’re the number one auto manufacturer in the world today.

One particular innovation that Toyota® came up with was “just-in-time” manufacturing, which is also known as “Lean Manufacturing.”  The concept is simple:  I make a car with parts that just showed up – nobody has to go get them, they just show up right when I need them.  The ideal would be the supplier delivers the part to the production line at the moment it’s required.  The windshield wiper salesman puts two in the bin as the next Corolla™ arrives at the windshield wiper installation station.  There isn’t a bucket of thousands of wipers behind the worker, just the few he or she needs right then.  Hence?  Just-in-time.

Just-in-time sounds really nice.  The things you need just show up, right when you need them, as if teddy-bear angels with lace wings made them materialize from the aether as they used to when Victoria was Queen.  In practice, you need more than two windshield wipers at the Corolla© assembly station, but you might only need enough for an hour.  Or two hours.  That de-clutters the line, and makes the work actually go faster.  Implementation of this system is one reason Toyota™ went from a mass producer of cheap cars to a mass producer of high quality cars.

Why didn’t they invent and do this just-in-time production in 1880?  Transport speed.  Slow transport requires stockpiles and large shipment.  Also required is production coordination.  Assembly lines break from time to time – you have to make sure that the windshield wipers don’t stack up like chocolates on an assembly line.  There has to be sufficient communication, and the Internet helps make it easy.

Now?  I can order prescription glasses online and have them shipped to my house directly from the manufacturer in China in less than a week.

Worth watching again even if you’ve seen it before.

The rest of the world has, in the last thirty years, done everything they could to adopt this system, which is now called “Lean Manufacturing.”  Accountants love it, because it reduces inventory, and turns that inventory into cash as soon as possible.  An example:  the average grocery story turns over its entire inventory nearly 14 times per year, which means lots of items hit the shelf and disappear.  Some grocery stores even have the vendor stock the shelf, eliminating costs there as well, as they attempt to get the customer to do the job of a checker.

selfcheckout.jpg

But the at least the cashier was dead sexy.

The result of this effort is a one-time boost in profits as inventory is reduced.  There is also the ongoing benefit that the money that paid for the inventory (that no longer exists) can be used for some other business purpose like bonuses, bacon-wrapped shrimp, corporate jets or Harvey Weinstein’s sexual harassment lawsuit settlements.

But since there’s less inventory, you need fewer warehouses.  And fewer warehouse workers.  Yay!  More money for bacon-wrapped shrimp!  You can see how this was a dominant concept in the late 1990’s when most corporate jobs required that you sign over your soul to Satan®, or Al Pacino if Satan™ had taken the corporate jet with Weinstein that day.

If I were to create a personal analogy, Lean Manufacturing is similar to the idea that when you buy gasoline you buy just enough for this trip, and this trip only.  No more wasteful storage of gasoline inventory.  And why keep more than a single meal on hand in the house?  While we’re at it, let’s also reduce that inventory of money we keep in the bank.  I bet we could make sure our lives are structured around a system that I think I’ll invent a snazzy name for:  Paycheck-to-Paycheck™.

paycheck.jpg

If you think no one cares if you’re alive, skip a month’s worth of bills.

So, all sarcasm aside, the paycheck example starts to illustrate the problems with Lean Manufacturing.  Inventory is a bad word in a manufacturing plant, and no manufacturing plant in the world would keep spare capacity that it doesn’t use regularly just sitting there.  Soon enough, a bright young soulless MBA from the head office will either start production on the spare capacity, sell the manufacturing equipment, or take a jet trip to a conference where there is a platter of free bacon-wrapped shrimp.

What has been profitable business advice is, as you can see, horrible personal advice.  Life isn’t about efficiency.  Life is about . . . life.  Being inefficient actually has some huge advantages.

People who regularly prepare for disasters (“preppers”) have popularized the phrase “Two is one, and one is none.”  I looked for the origin of the phrase, and I believe it is old enough that it probably originated in a Roman Legion stationed in Carthage, when a grizzled Centurion stuck a cigar in his mouth and was dressing down a new recruit for having an insufficiently shiny gladius.  And don’t tell me that it was another 1,500 years until tobacco was introduced to Europe – an outfit with a good supply guy can find anything.

twoisone.jpg

Okay, you don’t need two of everything.  A friend of mine has two ex-wives.

The philosophy of prepping is the exact opposite of Lean Manufacturing.  It says that we are stupid – we don’t know what’s going to happen so having extra supplies is crucial.  Stuff gets broken.  Stuff gets lost – just this week somebody found a batch of Revolutionary-era bayonets in a pit at Valley Forge.  You can bet there was a corporal that got his butt chewed over those by George Washington.  But I’m betting that the Continental Army had some extras.  Heck, it’s certain that even the Egyptians knew to store the extra grain in good years 6,000 years ago because:

  • Spare capacity is freedom,
  • Spare capacity is resilience,
  • Spare capacity gives you time and space when both are precious, and
  • Scarcity is the enemy, not inefficiency.

Recently, there have been a series of movies about obscure comic book heroes from the 1970’s.  You might have heard of them – The Avengers™.  In one of them, The Avengers:  Quest for Infinity Cash®, the villain (a very large Smurf™ named Thanos©) had been hungry as a child and decided nobody should ever be hungry again.  Thanos® then gathered a bunch of magic rocks which allowed him to make a super glove so he could make a wish.

I’m not making this up.  People spent $2.048 BILLION dollars to see that story.

grapelives.jpg

See?  Big Smurf® and magic rocks.  Told you I wasn’t making it up.

Anyway, Thanos®’ wish was that half of the people in the Universe disappear.  That’s just what happened.  Half the people turned to ash.  It really wasn’t that sad, at least for me, because it’s a comic book and Superman and Batman have each died something like fifty times, so death in a comic book movie is about as permanent as a Hollywood marriage.  The movie ends with lots of people, including Spiderman®, dissolving into ash.

I took The Boy and Pugsley to go see the sequel, The Avengers:  Endgaming for Even More of Infinity Cash©.  Whether or not the people who turned into ash were going to come back was spoiled before the movie started – one of the trailers was for the new Spiderman® movie.  Endgaming© starts five years after half the people in the Universe turned into ash.

After watching the movie I’m thinking that, like every member of Congress, the screenwriters had no training in economics.  Okay, a big Smurf© snaps his fingers and everyone disappears and I’m concerned they didn’t get their economics right.  Yeah, I’m an economics nerd.

What did they miss?  Well, after all the people disappeared the economy would have cratered.  We would have gone from producing 86,000,000 cars to producing . . . zero.  The economy would stop completely.  Grain would rot in the fields because half the people who ate Twinkies® were ash.  In 2009 when the Gross Domestic Product dropped by 2.5% and the economy nearly locked up.  If half the people disappeared, the economy would drop by 70%.

Anarchy.

But in The Avengers:  Endgaming for Even More of Infinity Cash©, everybody who was turned into ash returns after one of the Avengers® (Tony Stark™) snaps his fingers.  Take that, Thanos©!

Except by doing that, Tony Stark© just sentenced most of them to death when they showed back up.  Why?  In five years, the economy on Earth had contracted to serve not 7 billion, but 3.5 billion.  When an extra 3.5 billion people show back up?  Our just in time world only has food for 3.5 billion.  We only planted enough corn for 3.5 billion.

Massive famine and starvation.

starkface.jpg

Oops.

Thanks, Ironman©.  Instead of a nice, peaceful death you’ve condemned some large fraction of beings on every planet to a horrible slow death of starvation, misery, and violence, mainly thanks to the lack of resilience in our planetary production systems.  I guess that I should stop expecting economic accuracy in a movie that features a talking raccoon.

efficient pantry.jpg

Only be the last guy to the supermarket during a disaster if you want to take amusing pictures.

But I am concerned – our economy is based on a global experiment in efficiency that frees up capital for bacon-wrapped shrimp, at the cost of making our lives less secure.  What could go wrong?

Sweet dreams!

Civil War II Weather Report: Spicy Time Coming

John Wilder’s Civil War II Weather Report Number 1

“Yeah. There were horses, and a man on fire, and I killed a guy with a trident.” – Anchorman

johnbrownlars.jpg

With apologies to Gary Larson, in my defense there are only so many John Brown jokes out there.

Way back in 1998, I ended up with one of the neatest jobs that I had – assessing risks to a major corporation.  The Internet was new at work, and I was being paid to research potential disasters.  It was so interesting and so much fun I felt guilty.  In researching disasters and risk, I came across Y2K.  For those that don’t remember, there was a concern that, as a result of programmers only using two digits to store year information in computers, that many computers and computer programs would cease to function when the calendar flipped over to 00.

There were multiple websites and personalities that were writing about Y2K, and one that I went to from time to time was Cory Hamasaki’s Y2K Weather Report.  Hamasaki was a programmer (he has since passed away) and he had an inside perspective of the ongoing work that was required to keep the systems working.  As a result of his insider knowledge he bought an AR, a lot of food, and spent New Year’s Eve at his remote cabin.

Obviously, the systems kept working.

spicy.jpg

Not my original.  And I’m sorry.

We live, however, in spicy times, with the potential for them becoming even spicier (I got the Spicy Time meme from Western Rifle Shooters (LINK), which really should be on your daily reading list).  I’ve written several articles about the potential for Civil War, and studied and thought quite a bit about it.  As such, this is the inaugural edition of John Wilder’s Civil War II Weather Report.  I anticipate putting it out monthly.  This first issue will probably be a bit longer than later issues, since I’m putting the framework together and explaining the background.

I’m attempting to put together a framework that measures where we are on the continuum between peace and war.  I’ll even try to develop some sort of measures that show if the level of danger is increasing or decreasing.  Civil wars don’t happen all at once, and like a strong storm, they require the atmosphere to be right.  A weather report is probably a good metaphor.

escalate.jpg

If you haven’t seen it, the guy with the trident was the weatherman in Anchorman.  And when he has a trident?  People die.

So, to review the future, let’s start by looking at Civil War I so we understand what happened, and what the potential differences are.

Civil War I was:

  • Based on philosophical differences – the views of the people, North and South were pretty similar, except that the Northerners were descended from Puritans who sailed on the Mayflower, and the Southerners were descended from the Norman conquerors that took England in 1066 but got booted out after having lost a war in England. Although the North and South were the same people, more or less, with the same heritage, there were enough differences to lead to a war.  And it was a doozy.

Civil War II is different because:

  • Certainly we are not the same people today compared to when we generally unified ethnically. Civil War II will likely be fought on the basis of conflicting culture, identity and ideology.

Civil War I was:

  • Fought by armies, mostly, with identified geographical centers.

Civil War II is different because:

  • At the early stages, at least, Civil War II won’t be fought by armies, and there won’t be defined geographical concentrations. Armies are better at killing people and breaking stuff, but irregulars are way better at atrocity.  Expect the initial stages of hot war to be filled with some pretty rough stuff.

Civil War I was:

  • Characterized by a general adherence to the rules of war, though there were some war crimes on either side.

Civil War II is different because:

  • There has been a tendency of civil wars in this century to have increasing levels of atrocity during the war. This will continue.

Civil War I was:

  • Fought with the intent of reunification (by the North), and separation (by the South). The basic desire of the North was to reunify the country, admittedly under more comprehensive Federal control.  Reconstruction sucked, but the goal was a single country.  That’s why all the Confederate statues were tolerated, and even encouraged.

Civil War II is different because:

  • I expect whoever wins to pursue a policy of revenge at the end, especially if it’s the Communists. This is founded based on every single communist revolution ever.  The end of Civil War I occurred in a growing young country with the opportunity to move West.  Now?  Whoever wins will cleanse whatever areas they take.

Civil War I was:

  • Fought by organized, elected governments.

Civil War II is different because:

  • I’m thinking that one side might be a Caesar-type leading a partial military coalition versus Leftist irregulars, but I might be wrong on this one.

I decided to see what other studies had been done about more recent civil wars, and found that James Fearon and David Laitin (from Stanford) did a study in 2003 on civil wars during the 20th Century (LINK).  Here’s what they found:

  • Civil Wars had a median duration of six years
  • Sub-Saharan Africa: 34 wars
  • Asia: 33 wars
  • North Africa and the Middle East: 17 wars
  • Latin America: 15 wars
  • Eastern Europe/Former Soviet Union: 13 wars
  • The West: 2 wars

Why do civil wars develop?  It’s my bet that political scientists are like economists – six political scientists will generate 15 incorrect theories over coffee each morning, although I, for one, have no idea why we would think we would have a more stable country if we import people who keep having civil wars all of the time.  Fearon and Laitin came up with three different types of civil wars:

  • Ethnic: “You other people suck.”
  • Nationalist: “We want our own country, because you other people suck.”
  • Insurgent: “We want to be the boss, because you suck.”

politicalspectrum.png

Okay, I don’t know who the originator was of this meme, but it still cracks me up.

Civil wars were non-existent in ethnically homogeneous and rich countries during the time period of Fearon and Laitin’s study.  As the United States was essentially ethnically homogeneous and rich during Civil War I, you can see that, just like the Revolution, something unique was going on here.  We decided to fight over principles.

Fearon and Laitin had several graphs that pointed out that increased wealth makes up for a portion of ethnic diversity – wealthier, non-homogeneous societies were less likely to go to war than poorer non-homogeneous ones.  Oddly, the very poorest ($48 to $800 a year) societies were less likely to go to war than societies that made just a little more money.  I guess just living was tough enough and going to war against other people who also had nothing was pointless.

One conclusion that Laitin and Fearon found was that civil war onset was no less frequent in a democracy.  Discrimination is not linked to civil war.  Income inequality is not linked to civil war.  Grievances aren’t the cause of civil war – they’re caused by civil wars.  What are risk the factors?

  • New nations. I guess they haven’t developed the “don’t kill the president” tradition yet.
  • People can hide in mountains.  I guess.
  • Higher (absolute) population numbers. I told you big cities were bad.
  • Oil exporting.
  • High proportion of young males.
  • Exporting commodities – risk seemed to peak at about 30% of GDP coming from commodity export.

memewar.jpg

Okay, not directly on point, but my primary export is memes.

So where does the United States stand as a country today?  I guess I’d throw out the thought that the first prerequisite for Civil War II is economic stress.  Why?  Average Joe won’t pick up an AR to go kill people in the next county if Joe has beer in the cooler and another episode of Naked and Afraid® next week.  If Joe has a job and a wife and a mortgage, well, there just won’t be action.  I meant war, silly.  Get your mind out of the gutter.  Our risk now is relatively low based on economics.

The United States is developing a higher absolute population.  That puts us at risk.

With immigration, the United States is forming a higher proportion of young males.  That puts us at risk.

State weakness is generally correlated with civil wars.  I’m torn on this one.  On one hand, we have the largest number of laws ever, along with a very large enforcement mechanism.  On the other?  Laws, both state and Federal are increasingly just ignored.  Victor Davis Hanson describes this paradox in California (LINK).

Nearby civil wars are associated with having a civil war.  Latin America is a civil war factory . . . so we’re at risk.

From the above five predictors of civil war, we have four of them.  Obviously this doesn’t tell the whole story.  The United States has a peaceful history, and, unlike a less established nation, the general populace is going to assume that today was good, so tomorrow will be pretty good, too.  And, generally that’s a good way to predict the future:  tomorrow will look like today.  Building the conditions for civil wars generally take years and what was abnormal becomes normal and tolerated as time goes by.

I’m going to attempt to try to make a metric showing the rise in various societal factors that I think might lead to civil war.  Some of the obvious are:

  • Economic metrics – economic growth, unemployment, average wealth.
  • Organized violence metrics – news of riots, other organized violence and protests.
  • Political instability metrics – use of the term “impeach”, “civil war”, “electoral college.”
  • Sites banned – numbers of political speakers silenced.
  • Number of illegal immigrants per month. This shows greater economic stress or greater problems at their actual home.

index.jpg

Yeah, you just can’t add the North and the South together and end up with a Civil War.  Unless you do it in binary, then you could have a Bipolar War?

I’ll then combine them into an index.  If you have other items that you think can be tracked and should be tracked, let me know, and I may incorporate them, especially if they’re easy find and to incorporate, because I’m lazy.

Finally, Civil War won’t show up all at once, it may take years to get people to the idea that war is better than dealing with your weird neighbor by going into your house and watching a marathon of YouTube® videos where people turn $40 of propane and a bunch of aluminum cans into $10 worth of aluminum ingots.  It’s easier than fighting, right?

Following is my take on the steps that will lead to actual civil war.  I humbly call it the Wilder Countdown to Civil War II™.

  1. Things are going well.
  2. People begin to create groups.
  3. People begin to look for preferential treatment.
  4. Opposing ideology to the prevailing civic ideology is introduced and spread.
  5. Those who have an opposing ideology are considered evil.
  6. People actively avoid being near those of opposing ideology.  Might move from communities or states just because of ideology.
  7. Common violence. Organized violence is occurring monthly.
  8. Opposing sides develop governing/war structures.  Just in case.
  9. Common violence that is generally deemed by governmental authorities as justified based on ideology.
  10. Open War.

I bolded number six.  That’s where I think we are right now.  Violence is occurring, but it’s not monthly, so I don’t think we’re at step seven.  Yet.  And I think we can live at step nine for a long time as long as we don’t have the bottom drop out of the economy.  Might there be some trigger that takes us to nine in a hurry?  Sure.  But I’m willing to bet that we see it take a few years, rather than a few months.  My bet is no sooner than 2024, but I’ve been wrong before, way back in 1989.

This is a project where I’m not only very open to contributions of information (even anonymous contributions) I’m actively soliciting them.  Let me know if you’ve got commentary, criticism, news stories, or suggestions to make issue two (probably in early July) better, either down below or at my email, movingnorth@gmail.com

While we can’t predict catastrophic storms with 100% accuracy, it’s probably about time that someone started looking at the horizon to see what they could see.  Because I see what might be a storm coming.