"For reasons economists don't understand, when workers without college degree lose their manufacturing jobs, few choose to move elsewhere"

Well, let's explain to those journalists then.

A human being is a social animal and to function properly it needs a social circle. That circle is comprised of friends and family.

While a single peraon may lose his manufacturing job, the parents, friends and wife don't lose their jobs. That person is unable to move.

Labor mobility is never as high as economists think. There is a high degree of social friction which prevents that. In addition, jobs now move very fast, every few years, it's extremely difficult socially for people to change as fast as job locations.

Finally, this is a factor economists can measure - house loans. When an area loses manufacturing center, mortgage loans go in default and housing values collapse. People are unable to sell their homes and move. Or if they sell their homes, they experience substantial losses...

which hinder their ability to move to another location.

Ultimately economists need to understand that at most 2 put of 10 people will be able to move due to a job loss.

That has to be factored into every trade model.

You simply can't ravage localities in concentrated fashion

The economist profession has a huge blind eye for the subject of labor mobility which is completely unacceptable in 2021.

The tools and research ability is there and such lack of understanding is not acceptable.