If you want to win a bet next Tuesday, wager your friends that President Obama will say "Made in America" in the State of the Union address. It's the closest you'll ever get to a sure thing.
"Made in America" is a wildly popular notion across the political spectrum. The President has uttered the phrase dozens of times over the past year. So, it shouldn't be shocking for him to say it on January 24. But, what's behind the rhetoric? Is there any "there" there? That's what I'll be looking for on Tuesday evening.
It's fair to say that this administration has showered more attention on American manufacturing than it has seen for a long time, and that our sector of the economy has stabilized somewhat after years of serious decay. But, treading water simply isn't good enough while China passes us, and our high unemployment rate threatens to sink us.
What the President has proposed so far on advanced manufacturing, insourcing, and skills is all positive, but it is also minor league compared to the efforts of our global competitors. The administration's rescue of General Motors and Chrysler has been good for our economy and consumers (who now have better cars from which to choose), but it was more akin to emergency room care than to a long-term strategy to regrow manufacturing. That's one of the reasons why America's share of global manufacturing has declined. It's also why Germany still has over 20 percent of its economy in manufacturing while in the U.S. the number is closer to 11 percent.
We know the American people want the White House and Congress to go "all in" for manufacturing. That means better tax, investment, education, and trade policies. There is plenty that the President could do on his own -- right now -- without having to wade through Congress. As the White House is fond of saying, "we can't wait." For instance, the White House could:
There is also plenty that Congress can and should do, as well. Quite honestly, failing to pass any of these proven, popular policies will result in self-inflicted wounds for our economy.
These policies aren't partisan or ideological. Taken together, they will make a real difference. A strong manufacturing base is critical to many of our economic and strategic goals: rebuilding the middle class, lowering our budget deficit and the debt we owe to China, and ensuring that we have the ability to innovate. China's not waiting for us.
If the President really wants to see "Made in America" stamped on products shipped all over the world, he needs to be bold. We'll be watching. And so will voters.
Follow Scott Paul on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ScottPaulAAM
Peter Seligmann: Conservation 2.5 -- An Essential Upgrade for Human Survival
This is not the case in Germany - it does not require subsidies or government rescue packages for its exports - even though its currency has appreciated a lot against the dollar over the last decade.
If the US cannot compete with China on price, and with Germany on quality (both are actually somewhat historic trends) the focus should be squarely on R&D and leadership in new products and technologies. Here, help with tax credit is not enough: government should massively invest in pure research with direct subsidies, to the tune of hundreds of billions, in the manner of Manhattan Project and Race to the Moon.
Counting on breakthroughs coming from private R&D is fantasy, when we look at corporate focus on quarterly results and declining productivity of investment in research.
http://www.flixya.com/blog/3201910/Beautiful-Butterflys
These FTAs destroyed the opportunities for US citizens to be employed, unless they were willing to work for the equivalent of Asian Wages, or maybe less than Asian wages so that US labor costs can compensate for the US EPA compliance costs of having jobs in the USA.
To be fair, the first George Bush and most all of the elected Republican (and Democratic) US Congressmen and Senators were also in favor of NAFTA, so I guess the US workers were just sold out for lower cost consumer products.
Americans have not shown a willingness to pay more for products made in America. They want the lowest price possible.
Companies are forced to offshore productions to remain economically competitive. It is virtually impossible to compete and keep the company doors open if you try to produce domestically against a company that utilizes offshore labor and lower operating costs. You either join the corporate exodus or go bankrupt and liquidate.
Everybody laughed at him but Ross Perot was right on the money when he declared "you will hear a giant sucking sound" of American jobs leaving this country as a result of NAFTA.
The Genie is out of the bottle and I'm afraid impossible to put back. Manufacturing will only return when our costs are in line with the worlds.
I only remember Ross Perot objecting to NAFTA!
I thought that the AFL-CIO had Bill Clinton in their pocket!
I thought that the AFL-CIO would have asked President Clinton to veto that legislation, but I guess that the AFL-CIO was not interested.
Which government laws?
Which government Treaties?
Why did US businesses relocate their factories and jobs to foreign countries?
How can we get jobs to return to or be created in the USA?
The jobs are growing in the industrialized nations and shrinking in the USA and other de-industrialized nations!
The US job market is disappearing!
It's not slavery, of course. Slaves have to be fed.
Whic is why I find it very difficult to understand why anyone in the business community would ever support the Republicans.
Republicans want to dump the cost of employee healthcare onto our backs rather than have a national program like all of our international competitors.
Republicans don't want to invest in the schools that educate our future workers, so we employers have to pay for the education and training of those employees.
Republicans want to eliminate business regulations; or, at least their enforcement, resulting in good business men and women being required to compete against the cheaters and thieves.
Republicans won't invest in the energy and telecommunications infrastructure business needs to compete in the 21st century. Again, leaving us further and further behind out international competitors.
I can't understand why any business person would ever look at the Republican party as anything but an enemy.
For many, this is the only thing that counts...
The culture has changed over the last few decades and few people - corporations, rich individuals or politicians - really think long-term. The motto is: let's get rich today, tomorrow's the Flood!
http://www.flixya.com/blog/3201910/Beautiful-Butterflys
When Apple had to change the iphone practically overnight they called their supplier in Indonesia. This is what happened:
A foreman immediately roused 8,000 workers inside the company dormitories,
according to the executive. Each employee was given a biscuit and a cup of tea,
guided to a workstation and within half an hour started a 12-hour shift fitting
glass screens into beveled frames. Within 96 hours, the plant was producing over
10,000 iPhones a day.
When American workers will subject themselves to these slavery like conditions, then maybe some manufacturing will return.
1. if we don't change our trajectory, our country's standard of living will be 3rd world in a few years. This is completely unacceptable for 99% of the country, and
2. the billions of workers already in the 3rd world work in slave-like conditions. If globalism results in a global standard of living, and half the planet endures slavery as a standard of living, the other half must soon join them.
How do we resolve the problem? For most of our country's history, we did not have "free trade" with other countries, we had managed trade. Countries like China, which practice a trade strategy meant to conquer instead of partner, must be managed. It will not get any easier.
Reference: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/free-trade-doesnt-work-in_b_793593.html
Or perhaps someone will finally invent cheap robots that will do all this for us instead of slave-like workers? And cheap, sustainable energy source to power this all? And distribute the benefits of this technology to everybody? Or am I dreaming?
Not long ago (in fact, just about 30-40 years ago) this kind of broad progress - not just computers - was fully expected for the 21st century. Yet we didn't get anywhere near this. Instead, we are sinking into low wages, slave-like working conditions, unemployment and declining living standards.
What amazes me is that despite all this - the clear economic decline and shortfall of technological progress - we somehow managed to delude ourselves that we are in a middle of some great technological revolution, just thanks to our computers and iPhones, made in sweatshops in Asia.
Wake up, people!
It seems many Americans express a theoretical desire to create jobs in America when discussing the issue of tariffs, and so on, yet make an entirely different statement when pulling out their credit cards. Perhaps the explanation for this dissonance is that tariffs on imported products are an abstract cost that are difficult to directly relate to the retail price of goods on the shelves whereas the sticker price on an individual item is very real and one of the primary determinants in a purchasing decision.
It is always telling to see what armchair political commentators and policy makers do rather than what they say.
Individuals will always make choices they deem to be in their self interest. If I have a choice of two identical toys for my child, one made in America sold at twice the price (regardless if the store paid twice as much for the American made toy) and another foreign made at 1/2 the price. I, the self-interested buyer would be a fool not to choose the 1/2 price item to purchase.
What is needed is therefore a collective decision that we will not allow the foreign toy to be sold in America at 1/2 price. We either don't allow it into the country at all; or, apply a tarriff/tax so that the item can not be sold at 1/2 price. We eliminate the beneficial self-interest and now the choice is a matter of which item is better.
We must have systemic incentives to control individual behavior, expecting individuals to sacrafice their self-interest in the service of the larger community does not and will not work.
U.S. workers' share of national income is at an all-time low:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/PRS85006173
FRED« Nonfarm Business Sector: Labor Share
Wrong we have lost these energy intensive manufacturing jobs because China is using the energy source that started the industrial revolution! COAL!
Last summer we lost not just Solyndra but also Solar Companies Solyndra Follows Evergreen and SpectraWatt into Bankruptcy Court. Why would these low labor cost high energy cost companies go out of business? CHEAP DIRTY COAL ENERGY!
China Last year consumed 49% of all the coal burnt on the planet. I have a friend working in China and we compared industrial electric rates he pays $0.025/kwh in California I paid last month $0.13/kwh. Explains our solar industries problem!
How do we compete with that?
Do I want the smog of many Chinese cities? NO!
What we need is an environmental tariff good for the planet good for the American worker!
There are two ways to compete with the Chineese. Lower our standards to meet theirs, a race to the bottom; or, leapfrog them with technology and innovation, which was always America's strong suit before we became a nation divided between the haves and have nots.
This ratio was reversed in the decades after WWII when the USA was an innovator and a technology leader.
For a start, compare the the proportion of the population aged 25 to 64 with a university degree in the U.S. (30.9%) to the rate in Germany (15.4%)
http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/Details/education/university-completion.aspx#context
You got me curious so I looked it up: Many German high school students enroll in an apprenticeship program in trades or an industry right after graduating or even in grade 10. It's not just cheap labour for those industries -- it's real on-the-job career training. Those who go on to university have to take an extra year of schooling and pass entrance exams to get in. Having more money than brains apparently won't get you a university education.
So the way is paved for young people to train as chefs, mechanics, bricklayers, hairdressers and so on, right after high school.
Tele-prompting Toward the Middle In The Face of November 2012
In attempt to re-calibrate to the center, Obama begins to speak of things that will win him votes with the middle left and independents. This is nothing more than the same strategy the Ol Prez Bill did in his bid for re-election.
Unfortunately for Obama this strategy may be too little too late. But we will just have to what and see what the Ol tele-prompter tells him to say this week...
Warm regards,
Michael Winters