Slashdot Mirror

We have no real manufacturing capability

Hogwash. American factories produced goods worth more than two trillion dollars per year. That is about 20% less than China, but still the second highest in the world, nearly as much as Germany and Japan combined. Manufacturing output in America is at an all time high. American manufacturing employment has declined, but improved productivity has more than compensated for that.

These turkeys have persistently missed predictions over the last 20 years.

No, not just the Cargo Cult speech, which actually fits many CAGW claimants to a T, but this speech: http://management.curiouscatblog.net/2012/05/17/richard-feynman-explains-the-pdsa-cycle/

Richard Feynman: “If it disagrees with experiment it is wrong, in that simple statement is the key to science, it doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t make a difference how smart you are (who made the guess), or what his name is, if it disagrees with experiment it is wrong.”

If something is testable and flunks, it is wrong. If something is not testable, it's pseudoscience. Take your pick, my view is that these CAGW turkeys take double helpings with both.

28 out of 435 And most are MDs or engineers - one PhD in Mathematics.

And there are probably less after the Tea Baggers got done in '10.

Tea Bagger is a derogatory phrase

yes.

28 out of 435 And most are MDs or engineers - one PhD in Mathematics.

And there are probably less after the Tea Baggers got done in '10.

Tea Bagger is a derogatory phrase

28 out of 435 And most are MDs or engineers - one PhD in Mathematics.

And there are probably less after the Tea Baggers got done in '10.

The US never lost its "Manufacturing Might", we just lost jobs by becoming more efficient.

I haven't found any data more recent than 2009, but it clearly shows we never lost "Manufacturing Might".

China was projected to out-manufacture the US in 2011 or 2012, but that's questionable now given the slow down in the global economy and rising cost of manufacturing in China. I can't tell without more recent data.

All this "3D printing, robotics, AI, and nanotechnology" means is that manufacturing in the US will become all that more efficient. Not that it will bring manufacturing jobs back to the US.

Sorry, that information has been overcome by events - as if anyone had any doubts it would be, given that it showed a virtual tie. I was waiting for someone to complacently fall for the trap.

China and the US changed places in 2010.

Look at the comparative graphs.

Doesn't lead to much complacency on the part of rational people in the US, and if you separate out the "defense" manufacturing, the gap is FAR wider.

Here is the authoritative statistical data.

"It is very hard to find skilled manufacturing managers, engineers, or even operators in the West because there are few places to build up those skills."

This is such utter bollocks and it's so tiresome to hear.

Whilst there's no doubt the proportion of Western economies consisting of manufacturing has decreased, it's to nowhere near the extent naysayers like you suggest where we hear proclaimations about how manufacturing is dead in the West, we don't have the skills anymore. Here's news for you, the countries with the largest manufacturing output in the world are:

1. China
2. US
3. Japan
4. Germany
5. Italy
6. Brazil
7. Korea
8. France
9. UK
10. India

As you can see the West has an extremely strong showing still, and the UK even still having a larger manufacturing output than India. If you're talking about manufacturing for export you can likely drop Brazil a good few notches too as it's massively disproportionately focussed on it's own internal market.

Even at 9th place for the UK, to have the 9th largest manufacturing output in the world means we have a massive amount of competent people in the manufacturing field to be able to do that.

But let's look at it in context, if countries like France and the UK with their populations of ~60million, and Germany with it's population of ~80million are displacing countries like Brazil (pop. 195million), India (pop. 1.1billion), Russia (pop. 171million) Mexico (pop. 113million), Indonesia (pop. 140million) in terms of manufacturing, then doesn't that actually imply that as things are in the world, we've got proportionaly more people skilled in manufacturing in countries like the UK, Germany, and France relative to our population than almost every other country in the world?

We can't even complain about how manufacturing as an industry is on a downward path in countries like the UK:

http://investing.curiouscatblog.net/2011/12/28/chart-of-manufacturing-output-from-2000-to-2010-by-country/

This seems to imply it's only the 2008 recession to blame for any decrease, and that up until 2008 it was still showing very healthy growth, just not as fast as industries like services such that it's only declining as a percentage of total industry, not declining in itself.

When people say the West, particularly countries like the UK are seeing a decline in manufacturing they're wrong beyond the current obvious effects of the global recession. When people say we don't have any people skilled in manufacturing anymore, they're even more wrong, as things go, we've got more than nearly every other country in the world relative to our population size - you'll find more people skilled in manufacturing amongst every hundred people or whatever here, than you will almost anywhere else.

The whole manufacturing whine is little more than a fantasy made up by the likes of right wing nationalists and such to stir up hatred for other countries and things they export.

[1] China leads world in green energy investment
[2] Top Countries For Renewable Energy Capacity
[3] Actually, China accounts for 70% of green energy investment

amazing that you got modded up. America remains one of the largest, if not still the largest (not likely) manufacturer going. USA manufacturers loads. In fact, if you disregard trade with China and oil, we have a positive trade balance with the entire rest of the world. And if you just ignore China, America has a slight trade deficit. Our issue is China. We have a massive trade deficit with China because they are cheating at all aspects. Sadly, many American companies have moved there and now pay congressmen to fight enforcement of our FTA with China and WTO.

And oddly, with the situation in Europe, China is hard at work trying to get EU to be just as foolish as America has been in return for a few euros. Thankfully, EU is fighting that.

The incentives are obvious--provide them more entry-level engineers. Did you miss that?

And what's manufacturing competitiveness got to do with it? The US is the world's largest manufacturer, and what we don't make here we can design and make overseas. The two have nothing to do with one another. The economy is global, as you well know.

I know it always seems like a good jab, but the US isn't "not producing anything anymore."

http://investing.curiouscatblog.net/2008/09/23/top-manufacturing-countries-in-2007/

No, the point of using simple dollar GDP is that the stuff produced in China could be produced in the US instead and sell for the same amount, whether it's produced for "the West" or anywhere else. But when produced in China it produces more CO2 per dollar than in the US. The actual reality.

It's not the GDP impact on pollution. If anything it's the reverse: more stuff is produced and sold because Chinese GDP per retail price is smaller than if the US produced it at higher prices. Because Chinese GDP doesn't have labor and environment costs added to it the way they are in the US. So more is produced, at higher emissions per production. That 5.25x rate is therefore also on a larger amount than the alternative scenario of US production. The PPP version of GDP is not relevant to these giant exporters, whose "emitting GDP" is measured in flat international dollars.

Yes the US GDP includes a lot of pure finance, but even in just the total manufacturing fraction of domestic production the US is far better than China. In (2008) the US the manufacturing GDP per emissions is ($13,178.35B * 13%) / 5,752,289Kt = 297.826743 $:Kt. In China it's ($2,657,840,000 * 32%) / 6,103,493Kt = $139.347878:Kt. The US manufactures 213.72894% of China's production of what's consumed by the world. When you count their respective mining and transportation emissions, the US is far better than China in emissions controls. Which is why China's air, water and soil (and the people, animals and plants in them) is far filthier than in the US.

Keep the proper perspective. Hundreds of millions of Chinese people are counted against their lowish per capita emissions, but they have nothing to do with it, while the US' far more integrated economy must count every person against its middlish per capita emissions. Counting emissions per energy consumed is a better measure, in which the US does much better than China. But ultimately those emissions are produced for global consumption, which is bought in equal dollars. But at far higher emissions when produced in China. Which is precisely why they're produced there: emissions are far cheaper for manufacturers when emitted in China. Which is what we're actually talking about in this thread.

So we lost manufacturing and technology. All we have remaining is "intellectual property" which is really a thing that is not universally agreed upon. The things that made the US great aren't here any longer and while many of us were complaining about it leaving, government paid off by big business persisted in letting it happen.

US manufacturing output has become more efficient. Our manufacturing output is still greater than China's (can't find 2009 data). Of course we can't really expect that to last since China and India actually have more people.

The US still manufactures... a LOT. In dollar figures, we manufacture more than any other country and are still rising at about the rate of inflation, which isn't great, but not bad ( http://investing.curiouscatblog.net/2008/09/23/top-manufacturing-countries-in-2007/ ). We have lost a TON of manufacturing jobs, but not manufacturing, and that is a huge difference. The US is losing highly labor intensive industries, but that's just going to happen when your poor aren't all that poor. We really need to get rid of more of the low paying jobs that can be automated away.

Yes, they decimated some manufacturing - but reduced prices overall. There are local portions of the US that have gotten worse in the last fifty years, but overall the standard of living and buying power of the average person has continued to skyrocket.

We are richer and by a larger margin. We have outsourced our shitty jobs because we can do other things better. Yes, it sucks for the minority of people who worked in those industries who have not been able to transfer their skills to a new field. It may or may not have military implications down the line (although as our GDP and military are still several times larger than our next nearest competitor, it's not an immediate concern).

Also... the US *still* has the largest manufacturing industry in the world.

http://investing.curiouscatblog.net/2008/09/23/top-manufacturing-countries-in-2007/

Stop trying to turn the unfortunate stories of a few areas into a national trend. Look at the data. Specific industries (Steel, for example) have moved on, but others have taken their place in different parts of the country.

Removing trade barriers has increased our wealth, as well as increasing the wealth of other countries by an even larger margin. It has also tied us so closely economically with countries that are ideologically different from us that we are unlikely to see a war with them until the current economic structure collapses. Protecting a few industries to stop Detroit from happening may look good in the short term, but in the long run it hurts everyone but Detroit.

Try this for starters.

Better yet, try this; "Data on the Largest Manufacturing Countries in 2008".

It's only up through 2008, but it's the latest I could find on short notice.

This death of manufacturing industries is something you hear about a lot in the UK press (and presumably elsewhere). But it isn't really true. The US is the largest manufacturer in the world in terms of USD value, the UK comes sixth:

http://investing.curiouscatblog.net/2009/10/13/data-on-the-largest-manufacturing-countries-in-2008/

Manufacturing still makes up more than 15% of the UKs economic output:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_in_the_United_Kingdom

While the sector has shrunk since the 1960s, the value of manufacturing has actually grown in real terms. At least in the UK, the economy is significantly more diverse than many people realise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_exports

We are #3 behind China and Germany, who both produce 20% more than we do for exports.

As far as raw manufacturing goes, USA is far ahead in the #1 position.

http://investing.curiouscatblog.net/2008/09/23/top-manufacturing-countries-in-2007/

The catch is, while manufacturing is actually increasing in America, employment in manufacturing has fallen because of increased productivity per worker.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/02/us-manufacturing-is-not-dead.html

So while it's not true that the USA doesn't make stuff, it can seem like it because there are fewer jobs in manufacturing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_exports

We are #3 behind China and Germany, who both produce 20% more than we do for exports.

As far as raw manufacturing goes, USA is far ahead in the #1 position.

http://investing.curiouscatblog.net/2008/09/23/top-manufacturing-countries-in-2007/

Face it, you are a nation of consumers with no real manufacturing left. You all demand cheap goods, and if that comes with the price of outsourcing to foreign sweatshops, you accept it by turning a blind eye ... if all your manufacturing was done inside the US, none of you could afford to buy anything.

The USA remains by far the largest manufacturer in the world, producing $1.8 trillion in manufactured products in 2006.

If the US refused to import manufactured goods from outside the country, few jobs would be added, since most work would be done by automated machines - they would be cheaper than US human labor.

"The economy is not a zero-sum game."

It is when you don't make anything useful.

US manufacturing production output was $1.8 trillion in 2007, the largest output of any country now or ever. Manufacturing in the US doesn't have too many jobs any more though because labor is being replaced with machines, and low-skill labor that can't be done by machines (such as sewing) is moving to poorer countries.

Of course, OS X was "manufactured" in the US but doesn't show up in those numbers. And the design for my MacBook was "manufactured" in the US even if its physical implementation was manufactured outside the US. But without the service jobs of software development and system design, the MacBook would not exist.

..what is actually a zero-sum game because manufacturers compete for consumers?

Sales is the process of voluntary exchange where one party has more utility for an item than another party, and money is exchanged to balance the transaction. This goes on everyday on EBay, where the utility for your wall pocket drops because you don't like it as much any more. Or because of the law of diminishing returns, everyone loves one bicycle, but if you manufacture a million of them, you would prefer to sell them instead of riding them.

Competition does encourage producers to be as efficient as possible in their efforts of value added by manufacturing (which I am throwing information manufacturing into) and sales. This value add means that the economy as a whole is continuously growing wealth. We may sometimes overstate out wealth (as in the housing bubble burst), but the long term growth is global wealth increase.

Nothing in the economy is "voluntary".

So you are forced, against your will, to purchase a latte at Starbucks? Are you in North Korea?
 

You might be surprised to know that the US is about equal with China in terms of value added by manufacturing. I couldn't find the article I was thinking about, but here is another chart: http://management.curiouscatblog.net/2007/01/28/top-10-manufacturing-countries/

They make horrible CEOs because they are detailed oriented

Actually engineers don't make bad CEOs. The most common CEO undergrad degrees in S&P 500 companies is ... engineering! See link.