- US imports 20% of its lumber from Canada vs. 70% local lumber.
- Raw lumber costs are about 1% of the price of a house in California.
- Lumber prices were much much higher during the pandemic and are actually not that high right now: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/lumber (it's at 9 months low and cheaper than in 2018).
I worked for a North American company that moved manufacturing of precision industrial equipment to China to reduce costs circa 2006.
There was a lot of knowledge transferred and training as part of that. For what its worth we previously had trained our North American partners. China could definitely not make our equipment themselves at that point in time. We did retain some key technologies but most of it was moved over.
I don't see how anyone can deny that the Chinese got a lot of the know-how as part of the mass transfer of production to China. 90% of their manufacturing know-how is from the west.
If the point is that Sherline specifically today doesn't have any IP they might care about- sure. It's been copied/reverse engineered/"stolen" a long time ago. I don't know when the Chinese entered the hobbyist machining market but when they did I'm sure copying existing designs wasn't exactly a barrier, or stealing trade secrets, or ignoring patents.
I don't doubt that your company (or any other established manufacturer of non-trivial systems) moving production overseas will necessarily engage in training to support that transition.
However, this does not change the reality that Sherline made extremely basic machine tools. China makes superior and more complex machine tools than Sherline ever did: by far. This knowledge was not 'stolen' in any conspiratorial sense: they have produced metal lathes since the Tang Dynasty (618–907 CE) and modern engine lathes since the 1930s with significant national production since 1949 and CNC lathes since 1973. I should think Russia and China would have collaborated on early modern machine tool production, and this could not be characterized as 'theft'.
Today, most cutting tools, accessories, and machine tools are made in China. The notion China needs to steal knowledge from the west for general equipment is frankly laughable. For specialist equipment, yes there's a lot that Japan, Europe and the US lead in. However, I don't think that's in any way related to Sherline's former or current position as a budget/hobbyist focused entry-level brand.
"In 1970 Adelaide, Australia engineer Harold Clisby patented a novel lathe design that made use of aluminum and other metal extrusions. Clever techniques provided surprisingly good accuracy for such a low-cost production method. He made a modest number of machines and accessories himself.
In 1972 Melbourne engineer Ron Sher began production of what he called the "Sherline" lathe in Australia, as Ronald Sher Pty. Ltd. In 1973 Joe Martin of Martin Enterprises in San Marcos, CA, began importing the Sherline lathe to the USA. In 1974 Martin began manufacturing the Sherline lathe in California USA. In about 1979 the lathe business was separated off as Sherline Products, Inc."
The 1970's patents are long expired but the point is to show there's actually innovation in there despite the obvious simplicity.
I'm sure China could independently come up with better designs. But they do often just copy. Because it's easier. So "needs to steal knowledge" for simple designs/products? No. Steals? I mean you can buy Chinese literal copies of anything.
The Chinese are obviously very capable and pretty much everything and anything other than some very specialized bits are made in China. They got there partly via copying and pretty lax to non-existent IP protection. The Japanese did that before them. There are other aspects of how they compete which are possibly questionable (like poorer working conditions, environmental laws, etc.) Can't say anything specific about Sherline here but it's very hard for a western company to compete with China. Here is what Gemini says on this topic:
"Yes, Chinese manufacturers do produce machines that are widely recognized as direct clones of Sherline's precision lathes, mills, and small CNC setups. The most prominent example is Xendoll (Xendoll Tools), which manufactures a line of desktop and micro machine tools. Their manual lathes, mills, and CNC kits visually and functionally mimic Sherline’s classic designs. Target Market: These Chinese copies are marketed heavily toward education, STEM programs, hobbyists, and DIY makers. Design & Features: They replicate the compact footprint and modular configurations that made Sherline a staple for micro-machining small metal and plastic parts. The influx of these lower-cost overseas clones and cheap desktop CNC imports has heavily impacted the American micro-machining market. Under severe financial pressure from these imports, rising domestic manufacturing costs, and shifting hobbyist trends like the widespread adoption of 3D printing, Sherline announced in mid-September 2026 that it is winding down all US manufacturing. After 52 years in business, the company is expected to close its doors entirely by the end of 2026. While the Chinese copies provide a cheaper entry point for beginners, the machining community frequently points out the intellectual property implications of directly copying a storied American brand's legacy designs."
The rhetoric was trolling. It's sad that a childish troll is president but let's call this what it was. Trump trolling Trudeau. Certainly riled everyone up, changed the Canadian elections results, etc. Doesn't seem to matter if it's uneducated masses or educated masses, the intelligence of the masses seems to be a minimum function at best.
But yeah the quality of people in politics is terrible. I thought very highly of Obama in terms of intellect, honesty, pragmatism, etc. Postcard leader. but he seemingly still managed to mess lots of things up. Or maybe we over-estimate the impact this one person on the top actually has on anything.
That's how it started. I don't recall any actions that went along with that initial trolling but it's possible that I have the wrong sequence of events.
"Donald Trump’s comments about Canada becoming the 51st state began on November 29, 2024, during a three-hour dinner with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate. During the Thanksgiving weekend meeting, Trump reportedly joked that if Canada couldn't handle the economic impact of his proposed 25% tariffs, the country should simply become the 51st state, with Trudeau acting as governor.
While Canadian officials present, such as Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc, initially downplayed the remark as lighthearted teasing, Trump continued to lean into the rhetoric publicly. By February 2, 2025, Trump was referring to Canada as America's "Cherished 51st state".
The actions were generally tariffs with the initial excuse being Fentanyl and border security when Trump took office.
And yes, Trudeau has been gone for a while but this is how this started.
We shall see. But Russia's invasion of Ukraine way predates the recent wars in the middle east. It's more like the inability to restrain Russia's aspirations in Ukraine have led to instability in the rest of the world. More generally the failure to sustain a more free and democratic Russia or China is perhaps the source of all the other instabilities which all involve political, military and financial support from the China/Russia axis.
I wouldn't write off the US quite yet but it's definitely more of a multi-polar world with the US and China the major powers vs. the brief single polar world that followed the fall of the USSR. Arguably the quietest and most prosperous period ever, the largest number of people worldwide rising up from poverty etc. We're gonna miss it.
By the summer of 2023 when Ukraine's big counteroffensive had failed my own view was that the situation was stalemated and Russia will wait until the West gets bored or the situation changes and Russia's geopolitical position improves. Russia has that option available to it in a way the West doesn't.
Sanctions in general don't work. They don't work against enemies. Arguably they only work against allies (eg apartheid South Africa). Sanctions were never going to work against Russia and Russia has more manpower to throw at the meat grinder than Ukraine does.
And that changing situation has come to Putin with the Iran War. The US has lost. It has been strategically and militarily defeated by a lesser regional power. It's just a matter of time before it accepts this loss.
Because of attacks from Ukraine on Russian energy infrastructure, Russia has changed from a net diesel exporter to banning diesel exports and arguably being a diesel importer. That's a big problem that we're all about to learn. China too has banned the export of refined petroleum products (including diesel) for months now. Diesel prices are about to go way up and the US is now considering a ban on diesel exports. All this "energy nationalism" is going to torch Europe, Asian economies and South America. Just you wait.
By foolishly attacking Iran, Trump has made Russia's position much stronger. So yes, the Ukraine war predates the Iran war but the Iran war has made the Ukraine war much better for Russia. That's the point.
> Iran war has made the Ukraine war much better for Russia
I think that from a geopolitical perspective it is far more advantageous to let Ukraine lose the war, than to allow a situation in which, in 20 years, Muslims will destroy the world with nuclear weapon.
Or maybe the lesson to Russia is that if the US can't win against Iran how is it going to win against Ukraine? Another angle to look at it is through who does China support (Russia and Iran?).
I think your perspective is interesting and not wrong. The weakness of the US (and the west) is emboldening Putin. I do still think the order of events starts with Russia, China and Iran's challenge the post USSR collapse status quo. In a parallel universe if Russia was able to embrace democracy and become a free country, and if China kept opening up and didn't reverse course, then we wouldn't have the Iran war at all (likely the regime in Iran would have long fallen). The world seemed to be on a course to more freedom, democracy, and prosperity, and less wars, when the Berlin wall fell. And then at some point we went backwards.
As to Putin and Russia it doesn't seem like he has a path to anything that looks like a win. How long he's going to persist is a good question. What is Iran's path forward here is also far from clear. I wouldn't want their sort of "win" myself. It's like Afghanistan's win against Russia maybe. None of these wars have a conclusive win so hopefully a lesson there (to China?) is to think twice before going to another war. Though those lessons seem to be forgotten too quickly.
I am puzzled why do you think the level of democracy in Russia has anything to do with the war in Ukraine. The US being democracy has not stopped them from kidnapping the foreign leader, plundering the country by stripping it of its oil resources and to unleash the war in the Middle East.
Russia had a clear theory of victory for the Ukraine war. It's tiered.
The ideal outcome was to install a puppet regime in Ukraine (like there used to be and is in Belarus). They have failed in this.
Failing that, secure a land bridge to Crimea. If the war ends today, Russia has succeeded in this goal. My estimation is that Putin is waiting for this to happen.
It's hard to get good information on the state of the Ukraine war because there is too much bad information out there. NATO Atlanticists and US imperialists push the narrative that Ukraine is on the verge of winning. Likewise, there's Russian propaganda that Ukraine is about to collapse. Consider this: we've heard that the Russian economy is on the verge of collapse for over 4 years now.
IT's funny that you mention Russia not embracing democracy because the West is responsible for that. When the former Soviet states sought guidance from the West, Western banks and governments simply enabled the looting of the former USSR creating the oligarchs we have today. State industries were sold to friends for a pittance (eg [1]).
Russia's theory of victory is easy: just hold onto eastern Ukraine.
The US has no theory of victory in Iran. None. Iran just has to survive.
Putin has the same choices Trump had: face the music or start a new song.
Trump was under pressure about the Epstein files, so he started a war. So far, so normal. It's what politicians do. He thought it would be a simple war, but that turned out not to be true. He's now under pressure from that war, so he's eyeing up Cuba.
Putin was under pressure, so started the Ukraine war. Again, he though it would be a simple quick war, but that turned out not to be true. He's now under pressure from that war, so he's eyeing up Poland.
I'm coming to agree with the folks who think Europe has to actually do more than fight the proxy war in Ukraine. It has to actually hurt Russia for this to resolve. Putin cannot recognise his loss any more than Trump can, so he's just going to continue hurting people.
That's been my impression with all running shoes over the last few years. They fall apart. I bought myself some nice Reebok shoes and they disintegrated. The sole is gone holes develop in the sides etc. I guess they make them lighter and thinner. I would prefer something that's a bit more durable but that doesn't seem to be an option.
There are still plenty of shoes that will last for a while. You just need to avoid the super-light ones. Those are designed to go fast, not to be durable.
There's a lot of noise and confusion about what exactly "zone 2" is and why. But definitely longer easier (you're not out of breath) runs build a foundation in more ways than just your cardiovascular system. It's those other components that take a longer time to build. The key is that you are not over-training (watch your sleep and joint pain as an indicator) and can recover and that you are progressively increasing your load by lessay ~10% distance a week. Easy system would be 2 shorter runs and one longer run a week.
There are plenty of online training program generators that are pretty good and will take you from zero to running 10k. I used an online program to run my first 10k somewhere circa 1990.
There a lot of more cutting edge science online (and I follow Nick as well) but if you're not a competitive athlete and are just trying to get in better shape then the answer is mostly just do it. Over some base of running you can throw in some interval training including HIIT.
I would look into a used entry model Garmin. Something like a 235 (I have my old one sitting around). It has an HRM though it's not a terribly reliable one.
HIIT can have a pretty quick impact on your VO2MAX but that is going to level off. As others have said you will want a more balanced routine in the long run.
It is also possible you were over-training in your "moderate" intensity or conversely not increasing the load/distance enough. Training over years should result in good improvement even without HIIT. You will need to put a lot more time in.
I have a pretty diverse training load these days. Hiking, mountaineering, running, plus a few sports and some resistance. While I have overtrained in the past on running in particular, it was mostly due to lack of diversity. Nonetheless, none of those things puts the same load on the body as HIIT.
To be clear, I was objectively in good cardiovascular condition before adding HIIT. My resting heart rate has been in the 40s for years. The surprise was that there was so much easy margin left by adding HIIT to my regimen.
If your heart rate has been in the 40s for years your cardiovascular system is at the peak of what’s possible. It’s not “pretty good”. A resting heart rate in the 30s is the kind of thing Olympic distance runners touch on. You are either exaggerating or your assessment of what’s normal is way off. Most very fit people have resting rates in the 50s and 60s.
Or, like me, who has never been a runner, a heart rate in the 30's can mean that you have heart block, an electrical problem with your heart where beats are gradually spaced further apart and then there is a longish delay before a reset. In a recent 2-week heart monitor test, my longest delay was 3 seconds and I had 4 of these. There are different types of heart block: mine is type 1 Mobitz/Wenckebach. Not really dangerous - I've had it all my life and known about it for ~35 years. It shows up on all of the modern automatic heart/blood pressure machines because the delays cause unusually low readings whereas a nurse checking your pulse may miss it.
My average heart rate on the test was 58, lowest was 21 (for 3 seconds), and highest was 250 (for 6 beats). A few minutes after getting in bed, my heart rate regularly is in the 40s and sometimes low 30s.
I never implied my cardio fitness was poor, just that some metrics are relatively better than others. My RHR (currently 47-48 per various fitness trackers) has always been pretty elite. I don’t think about it and it doesn’t change much except in response to stress.
I’m more interested in getting into the 90+ percentile range on the cardio metrics where I’m closer to the average. I don’t obsess over it, it is just interesting to see how different activities that I was going to do anyway move the needle.
A long race will do it just fine. AKA Runner's High.
I also do hill sprints. I try to do one [HIIT] workout a week and also some longer runs.
Hill sprints tend to be safer then sprinting on flat surfaces. Last time I did my HIIT sprinting on level ground my knee didn't really like that at all. A stationary bike (like the "assault bike") is even safer. Or you can just do burpies. People who don't run and haven't sprinted in a long time shouldn't just jump into sprinting.
I have to disagree on both points. Long races don't do this for me - that's also the point of the paper. And I have had more close calls of spraining an ankle when running uphill. The problem with hills also is that you might want to jog down after, but that's super bad for knees.
reply