Here's the US table of employment by category.[1] (I keep mentioning this table in discussions of employment.) 14% of the workforce makes all the stuff. That's manufacturing, mining, construction, and agriculture. 14%. US manufacturing employment peaked in 1979. Manufacturing output is at peak now.
That 14% number was about 50% in 1950, and maybe 90% in 1900. That's how much things have changed.
As for imports, China's government has decided that it is going to reduce its imports from the rest of the world. This is part of the "China 2025" program announced by Li Keqiang in 2015.[2] The US may have to reduce its imports from China to keep up. At most, though, this will add a few percent to manufacturing employment.
Manufacturing employment can't be 90% in 1900--agricultural employment certainly would have dominated. The 50% of 1950 also seems high.
According to <https://www.minnpost.com/macro-micro-minnesota/2012/02/histo..., manufacturing employment peaked at about 35% in 1950s. In 1900, it was around 25%, with services about 33% and the rest in agriculture. That graph has services employment always outpacing manufacturing (which meshes with my knowledge of US history) and manufacturing only outpacing agriculture around the 1910s, 1920s (which also meshes with my knowledge of US history--agriculture was very labor intensive prior to mechanization).
I meant agriculture, mining, construction, and manufacturing - the making of physical stuff. All that is only about 14% today. Not sure what the Minn Post's definition of "industry" is.
That 14% number was about 50% in 1950, and maybe 90% in 1900. That's how much things have changed.
As for imports, China's government has decided that it is going to reduce its imports from the rest of the world. This is part of the "China 2025" program announced by Li Keqiang in 2015.[2] The US may have to reduce its imports from China to keep up. At most, though, this will add a few percent to manufacturing employment.
[1] http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_table_201.htm [2] http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/922394.shtml