Unlike previous cycles dominated by a few government-incentivized mega projects, the current increase in US manufacturing investment is characterized by a high number of smaller announcements. This indicates the trend is driven by fundamental economics, not isolated incentives, suggesting greater durability and a more sustainable, widespread industrial shift.

Despite tariffs making imports more expensive, moving furniture production back to the US is seen as unrealistic. The primary obstacle is not financial, but a critical shortage of trained workers who can and want to do the work, a deficit that tariffs cannot fix.

Arm's CEO argues the US has lost its 'muscle memory' for 24/7 manufacturing. The core issue is cultural: manufacturing isn't seen as a prestigious career, unlike in Taiwan where working for TSMC is highly esteemed. This cultural gap is a major hurdle for onshoring efforts.

The national initiative to reshore manufacturing faces a critical human capital problem: a shortage of skilled tradespeople like electricians and plumbers. The decline of vocational training in high schools (e.g., "shop class") has created a talent gap that must be addressed to build and run new factories.

The ongoing wave of investment in automation and upgrading existing US facilities is not the end goal. It's the first step for companies recalculating supply chain costs due to tariffs. This "brownfield" optimization proves the economic viability of US production, paving the way for larger "greenfield" projects once existing capacity is maximized.

Responding to fears of job loss from automation, Siemens' CEO frames it as a necessary shift. In aging societies with labor shortages, automating manufacturing allows for economic growth while redeploying human workers to essential, non-automatable sectors like healthcare and social services.

Contrary to traditional economic cycles where high demand prompts capacity expansion, the current driver is tariff mitigation. Companies are investing in US production to avoid import costs, a motivation that doesn't require a strong consumer goods market. The existing $1.2T trade deficit provides the "demand" to be recaptured domestically.

Despite political rhetoric about bringing manufacturing back to the US, real-time freight data shows a 30% year-over-year drop in the industrial segment. This suggests the opposite is occurring, signaling a deep recession in the nation's goods economy.

Companies offshore production because it's cheaper. Forcing manufacturing back to the US via policy results in more expensive or lower-quality goods. While it improves supply chain resilience, this should be viewed as an insurance premium—a cost, not a productive investment.