Does the U.S. need factories to be an economic power?

[Zorkorist]

It's quite obvious that if you don't have supply, then you will never have demand, and that makes it easy to see why Government should get out of the way.

-John

 

[theeedude]

Not everyone is going to be an engineer or a doctor. Some people would love to work in factory if it paid reasonably well and had decent labor conditions. That's how US middle class was created. Of course those people are being thrown out to send jobs to China.

 

[theeedude]

Yes, we absolutely need manufacturing, and we need to abolish the minimum wage and get rid of regulations on business.
-John

Yeah, instead of American companies going to the third world, let's just turn America into a third world country.

 

[ShawnD1]

Yeah, instead of American companies going to the third world, let's just turn America into a third world country.

Why do you hate America

It's quite obvious that if you don't have supply, then you will never have demand, and that makes it easy to see why Government should get out of the way.

I really can't tell whether or not this is a troll post. Government getting out of the way is why so many factories moved to China in the first place. Free trade with China (ie government getting out of the way) means there's no longer any reason for any factory to remain in the US. When a Chinese man starving to death is willing to work 14 hours for a bowl of rice, there's no way any American worker can compete against that.

 

[Siddhartha]

Yes, we absolutely need manufacturing, and we need to abolish the minimum wage and get rid of regulations on business.

-John

I watched Milton Friedman's 1980 PBS miniseries on the economics. In one episode he advocated bringing back sweat shops. No mininum wage, no OSHA, safety regulations, no unions, and probably no ecological regulations.

Where would you draw the line in regulating business? Get rid of all regulations? What about long term costs?

 

[DominionSeraph]

Government getting out of the way is why so many factories moved to China in the first place. Free trade with China (ie government getting out of the way) means there's no longer any reason for any factory to remain in the US. When a Chinese man starving to death is willing to work 14 hours for a bowl of rice, there's no way any American worker can compete against that.

Exactly. There is profitable capital investment in moving American-innovated efficient manufacturing offshore because with the labor cost differential you can skim money off the American workers remaining.
The rich get richer off the average American getting poorer. The absence of regulation cannot stop this. Pay differential is naturally exploitable.

 

[Acanthus]

Exactly. There is profitable capital investment in moving American-innovated efficient manufacturing offshore because with the labor cost differential you can skim money off the American workers remaining.
The rich get richer off the average American getting poorer. The absence of regulation cannot stop this. Pay differential is naturally exploitable.

The sad part is, from a government standpoint, it is very easily fixed.

 

[5150Joker]

Of course the US needs manufacturing jobs to remain competitive. It is the backbone of any strong economy and it's why China is a rising industrial and economic power. In fact a recent survey was done and the majority of Americans are beginning to realize that the USA will no longer remain the world's economic power: http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/111549/were-no-2

That article speaks volumes about the American psyche and that reality is finally hitting home for many. The problem is that our corporations and government are run by corrupt people that are looking to profit for themselves at the expense of the American public. Being a 2 party Republic is a big scam since it hasn't benefited us at all in the last 30 years.

 

[Brigandier]

Right To Work Laws and Manufacturing

I think this aspect needs to be looked at as well. Unions provide a necessary function in the workforce but being forced to join a union hampers the workforce in an area by reducing competitive options. The American worker has burdened themselves with the weight of too many unions, unable to make them nimble enough to deal with changes in the labor demand.

 

[werepossum]

Auto definitely is, but you guys are doing well in general. Hell, you're even kicking butt exporting right back to China.

U.S. manufacturing makes quiet comeback

Yes, globally we are still the number two manufacturer in the world, only slightly behind China. However, the problem is our ratio of manufacturing to consuming, and resurgence notwithstanding China's share of our consumption is growing whilst our own share is shrinking. Even with our increased exports, our increased imports are even worse. If we consumed at the rate of, say, Denmark - by all accounts a reasonably wealthy nation - we would be fine. With our rate of consumption though we need to manufacture at twice the rate of China - which is not likely to happen any time soon. We could move all manufacturing for our consumption back to the USA by law, but we'd still take a big hit in lifestyle and consumption because right now we benefit from low labor rates (versus productivity) in much of the world.

 

[fskimospy]

Right To Work Laws and Manufacturing

I think this aspect needs to be looked at as well. Unions provide a necessary function in the workforce but being forced to join a union hampers the workforce in an area by reducing competitive options. The American worker has burdened themselves with the weight of too many unions, unable to make them nimble enough to deal with changes in the labor demand.

You do realize that the peak of unionization came in the 1950's when we experienced some of the broadest and largest economic growth in our history, right? How does that square with the 'weight of too many unions'?

 

[Brigandier]

You do realize that the peak of unionization came in the 1950's when we experienced some of the broadest and largest economic growth in our history, right? How does that square with the 'weight of too many unions'?

The 1950's saw America selling the rest of the world a lot of shit. America helped the world rebuild from a world war, but no I guess it was the unions helping everyone out. I said unions have their place, but if someone is forced to join a union it kind of ruins it all.

Edit: I did some reading and what was responsible for the unions success was a change in their tactics. Labor Unions in the United States

The quarter century after 1950 formed a ‘golden age' for American unions. Established unions found a secure place at the bargaining table with America's leading firms in such industries as autos, steel, trucking, and chemicals. Contracts were periodically negotiated providing for the exchange of good wages for cooperative workplace relations. Rules were negotiated providing a system of civil authority at work, with negotiated regulations for promotion and layoffs, and procedures giving workers opportunities to voice grievances before neutral arbitrators. Wages rose steadily, by over 2 percent per year and union workers earned a comfortable 20 percent more than nonunion workers of similar age, experience and education. Wages grew faster in Europe but American wages were higher and growth was rapid enough to narrow the gap between rich and poor, and between management salaries and worker wages. Unions also won a growing list of benefit programs, medical and dental insurance, paid holidays and vacations, supplemental unemployment insurance, and pensions. Competition for workers forced many nonunion employers to match the benefit packages won by unions, but unionized employers provided benefits worth over 60 percent more than were given nonunion workers (Freeman and Medoff, 1984; Hirsch and Addison, 1986).

I think unions need to change and adapt to a 21st century model of business to best engender success. Compulsory enlistment in the company union doesn't really do anything, workers need to be free to change from union to union as the workers needs change. Trying to have entrenched interests perform with that agility is a herculean task that has a low cost to benefit ratio, which in the end, fucks the worker.

 

[daishi5]

So much fail not even funny.

All wealth comes from either making something, mining something, or grwing something. Everything else is dependent on those.

Nevermind that apple does manufacture, the only reason we are able to afford iphones is credit which will run out one way or another. Either sudden stop or hyperinflation. Then you will see what a nation looks like that does not produce what it consumes.

BTW USA is still #1 in manufacturing, growing and mining but even so not what we consume which is why we run debt.

I see this idea a lot. A question for all the people who agree with this. Pretend every worker in America generates $100 of wealth every hour they work "making something." If I design a device that allows every worker to make $200 of wealth every hour. Who created that extra wealth every worker makes every hour, me or the person doing the work? Did my idea or design generate any wealth? How much of that wealth is mine, and how much is the workers?

 

[Munky]

The first false premise of the article was assuming what's good for Apple is good for Americans. Who cares that Apple's stock price is through the roof, when we are essentially importing Apple's products from China and Taiwan? While the soaring stocks are good for banking and investors, neither of them are producing any actual wealth. Over 2/3 of our economy is driven by consumption rather than production, combined with ever-expanding debt. This cannot continue indefinitely, and it won't.

 

[SammyJr]

they provide jobs for the "mindless millions". You know..the ones wit their pants falling off
black and blue with tats. The latest face bolt fashion with matching cell phone. With retrograde american education..what else can you do??

This is the reality of humanity. Some are smart, some are stupid. Some are strong. Some are good with their hands. Everyone is different and we need a diversity of jobs.

Factory work is a good job for a large segment of our population. These same people are not going to be designers, doctors, engineers, or anything like that no matter how much education is offered. They aren't smart enough, don't care, or whatever. It really doesn't matter. These people do need to eat and it would be preferable if they worked for it.

This is the problem with our offshored manufacturing. There simply aren't enough good jobs for this class of people so they're either working shit jobs like stock that used to be teenager work or they're on unemployment. That's why when you consider "free" trade prices at Wal-mart, add the social services cost in your head. It would probably be cheaper to pay Americans to make that stuff rather than pay the Chinese and pay the American to look for jobs that don't exist.

 

[werepossum]

I see this idea a lot. A question for all the people who agree with this. Pretend every worker in America generates $100 of wealth every hour they work "making something." If I design a device that allows every worker to make $200 of wealth every hour. Who created that extra wealth every worker makes every hour, me or the person doing the work? Did my idea or design generate any wealth? How much of that wealth is mine, and how much is the workers?

Absolutely it's yours. But society also has a right to try to limit wealth concentration. If the rules are wise, you will profit greatly, but the workers will over time also receive part of that extra wealth as their labor is actually generating the wealth. This is only natural. As your profits increase, you can afford to raise your compensation to attract and keep the best, most productive workers.

 

[Trianon]

Tell me what you do and I'll prove you are just stripping off one of the three. I sell booze. I don't make the booze or cut the crops r the bottles or the cardboard but I'm just a cog in getting something that was grown and manufactured to market. Problem is it all starts there without which you look like chad. Not too many jobs in chad.

I would not consider engineers non-valueadding, they directly participate in modification of resources into consumable goods. Lawyers and financial types - definitely.

 

[KGB]

Anyone else think it's funny to have Acer and Apple in same sentence?

I thought it was funnier to have 'Wall Street' and 'honest work' in the same sentence.

 

[irwincur]

This is the reality of humanity. Some are smart, some are stupid. Some are strong. Some are good with their hands. Everyone is different and we need a diversity of jobs.

Factory work is a good job for a large segment of our population. These same people are not going to be designers, doctors, engineers, or anything like that no matter how much education is offered. They aren't smart enough, don't care, or whatever. It really doesn't matter. These people do need to eat and it would be preferable if they worked for it.

This is the problem with our offshored manufacturing. There simply aren't enough good jobs for this class of people so they're either working shit jobs like stock that used to be teenager work or they're on unemployment. That's why when you consider "free" trade prices at Wal-mart, add the social services cost in your head. It would probably be cheaper to pay Americans to make that stuff rather than pay the Chinese and pay the American to look for jobs that don't exist.

This big problem with this is that industry is not going to go backwards. We are not going to reduce efficiency or automation. So sadly, even if there was a massive resurgence in manufacturing in the US (and the rest of the developed world) it just requires fewer people per widgit made, so we may likely never get to the point where we can employ all of those that are in the manufacturing class.

This is a problem without an easy answer. At some point we are going to have a whole boatload of people that are either unqualified to participate in the economy or just redundant because we cannot possibly employ them all. Down the road this will be the case everywhere as developing economies push out of their industrial age.

The only real solution would be to reduce population growth, which for the most part the developed world is doing on its own.

 

[sandorski]

This big problem with this is that industry is not going to go backwards. We are not going to reduce efficiency or automation. So sadly, even if there was a massive resurgence in manufacturing in the US (and the rest of the developed world) it just requires fewer people per widgit made, so we may likely never get to the point where we can employ all of those that are in the manufacturing class.

This is a problem without an easy answer. At some point we are going to have a whole boatload of people that are either unqualified to participate in the economy or just redundant because we cannot possibly employ them all. Down the road this will be the case everywhere as developing economies push out of their industrial age.

The only real solution would be to reduce population growth, which for the most part the developed world is doing on its own.

That's not really a solution to Automation at all. Main reason being that you still, especially due to increased efficiency, need a very large Consumer base. Basically you need to find Employment for the Masses, one way or the other, even if that means giving up some of that Efficiency.

 

[irwincur]

I guess we can have them dig ditches.

 

[piasabird]

If you import everything, then if a war occurs all of your supply lines can be cut instantly. Plus, if you import cars and have no manufacturing you need to make your own tanks, trucks, and guns. If it was not for Browning, we would have lost World War II.

 

[Engineer]

That's not really a solution to Automation at all. Main reason being that you still, especially due to increased efficiency, need a very large Consumer base. Basically you need to find Employment for the Masses, one way or the other, even if that means giving up some of that Efficiency.

Don't forget that the manufacturing in the US, while automating, creates millions of support jobs such as tool builders, automation integrators, etc. Without said manufacturing, many high skilled jobs (and to some extent manufacturing themselves as they make machines, etc) would cease to exist.

 

[sandorski]

Don't forget that the manufacturing in the US, while automating, creates millions of support jobs such as tool builders, automation integrators, etc. Without said manufacturing, many high skilled jobs (and to some extent manufacturing themselves as they make machines, etc) would cease to exist.

If that works that way, then it would be fine. I'm not convinced it does though.

 

[irwincur]

The amount of support jobs pales in comparison to the good old days of the assembly line. Yes, there are support jobs, and they pay well, they just do not account enough people.