> Companies don't offshore because they are greedy. They offshore because, if they don't, they cease to exist. We have reached a moment in time where, but for a few select market segments, the options have been reduced to one: China.

You're completely ignoring the base reason: why did China do this and the US didn't? Because it was cheaper for US companies to invest nothing and move production to China instead of doing it in the US. Because the US government, unlike the Chinese one, is not allowed to directly invest and create these sorts of supply chains itself, because companies start complaining (read: lobbying against it) that it's out competing them (muh free market!).

In fact, the US did have all of this. After the war, US manufacturing was second to none in the world, and no one except maybe the USSR came even close. But US workers are expensive: cost of living is high, workers demand a work/life balance, regulations don't allow you to risk them losing hands for a slightly faster product.

Along came China, which had far too many people to know what to do with. Cost of living was low, they were more than willing to force people to work as long as necessary, and if they collapse from exhaustion or lose a hand here and there, no problem, there's a billion more who can take their place. And so, even while they were still learning and had little know-how, it was so much cheaper to offshore things to China than to manufacture them locally, even with much worse yields and QA at that time, that companies started moving in droves.

Now, if the US had not been run by capitalists, the US government could have easily stopped this. They could have eaisly prevented this from happening by disallowing companies to buy these factories abroad, or they could have bought and run any local factories that were getting shut down, and out-competed many companies on quality and branding.

Instead, the US government, run by and for corporations, embraced this whole-heartedly, creating international treaties to facilitate the flight of manufacturing from the US, sometimes even enforcing cheap labor availability if countries tried getting out of line with pesky workers rights that would cut into US corporation bottom lines

One thing they didn't count on though was that China did not intend to simply become a US colony, providing cheap labor to fuel US profits. They used this as an engine for their economy, investing in education and ever more efficient production as you pout out. Crucially, they also completely disregarded international IP laws designed to allow US companies to produce high-tech goods in other countries while not giving up the know-how. Instead, the Chinese government essentially applied an IP tax for all of this production and used the accumulated IP to start competing with the US on end products, not just manufacturing.

Now, this is becoming unacceptable, since they are starting to actually eat into those profits, and even more frighteningly, to come up with their own technology that rivals US efforts. This is the culmination of the Chinese plan, and the side effect of US profit seeking and short-term thinking.

Fortunately, this is starting to align US external policy goals more with US workers, even if US companies would still rather benefit from Chinese manufacturing. This will probably mean renewed investment in US manufacturing, incentives for US-built goods, and a resurrection of US engineering culture. But it may also mean a weakening of worker's rights if unions are not careful.

So yes, you are right about the current state of Chinese manufacturing and their advantages, but you are completely ignoring US capitalists role in how we got from Mao to here. Your weird tangent about teaching children marxism or socialism in the most economically right-wing country on earth, I will just ignore.