America and Manufacturing

I keep getting different opinions regarding America and manufacturing jobs.
Some people say that American manufacturing jobs have dramatically dropped and are in dire danger.
Some say that, though they have dropped, how much they have dropped is vastly overstated, and we are still the top producers in the world with nothing to worry about.
Still others say that Amrican manufacturing jobs have actually increased in number.

What's the story?
From what I see around me, my inclination is to believe they have dropped dramatically, and those who claim otherwise are fudging a bit (for example, referring to American companies who manufacture more, but the actual jobs are done in overseas factories), but I simply don't know.

Can someone offer solid numbers, verifiable claims and trends and perhaps why people believe otherwise?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hello, Raven,

A quick search didn't bring up exactly what I wanted but I did find the employment/unemployment numbers and percentages back to 1980 here: http://www.nidataplus.com/lfeus1.htm

It shows a steady increase in employment - with a few bumps here and there - over that 27 years period.

I do realize that it doesn't directly address your question about manufacturing jobs in particular but I still think it's excellent news as far as the state of the nation goes. Also, it's important to remember that factory jobs, per se, aren't nearly as important as they were decades ago given the big changeover to automation since then. Given the fact that the population keeps growing - which means the labor pool does as well - I'd say employment is in very good shape.

Also, keep in mind - as I'm sure you are already aware - the shift away from factory jobs an into the service industries has been a fact of life for a very long time now. The vast majority of new jobs are always in the service sector.

As to your final question about why some believe otherwise, the answer seems quite simple (to me, anyway). We've always got more than a fair share of nay-sayers and chicken-littles. Far too many will quickly pounce on even the smallest bit of negative news and immediately turn it into a dooms-day situation in their opinion. Optimists and pessimists will always be going at it but the trends in the chart I just gave you clearly shows that the pessimists are mostly afraid of imaginary ghosts rather than solid facts.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I peronally DO think that the trend toward service-oriented and white collar jobs is troubling, to say the least.
I think, if the trends are correct, it speaks volumes about the stability, adaptability and longevity of our economy and the standard of life in the US.
We can't go on forever being nothing but brokers and peons who serve brokers.

I can't seem to find multiple, reliable sources that agree on the numbers, however.
One site said...

http://www.impomag.com/scripts/ShowPR.asp?RID=6625&CommonCount=0
I'd like to see the reports that information was extrapolted from, however.

I have personally seen Northern New York State get finacially crippled due to the loss of the manufacturing industry, but people say that nationally, that trend is blown out of proportion.

I am one who doesn't like to be a chicken little, and would very much like hard numbers to deal with, I just can't find unbiased (relatively, of course) reporting.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

These answers should also take into account salaries, benefits and job security. Temp jobs, part time jobs just under the legal limit or company policy limit which would lead to benefits, selective firing to reduce wages and other practices have all gone up. A manufacturing job in the 60s was very different from one today.

 

Perhaps people who say American manufacturing is not suffering are using import/export ratios to qualify their stance. If it is manufactures in a Malaysian plant by am American company, that would look good for American manufacturing, while still decreasing manufacturing jobs.
Plus, as Read-Only touched on, with further automation, you can make more with less people.

Yes, if it is not clear yet, I am a Luddite, in the classical sense of the term.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I don't believe the services sector is as much "brokers and peons" as you seem to think. For example, where we had sheetmetal workers in auto plants we now have more and more people in the IT and computer servicing industry. And THE fastest growing service job field is health care - primarily hospitals: lab technicians and diagnostic machine operators.

 

Let me explain what I was referring to.
Either we manufacture goods and export them as a source of income, or we broker deals (buy cheap from A and sell for more to B) as a source of income.
We can make what we sell, or buy what we sell. If we buy what we sell, we are brokers.
It seems to me that if the current ideal comes to fruition (which is what I am trying to determine) then we will be resellers, bankers and investors, playing a game of chess with the workers of other nations as the pawns.
The jobs in this country will mainly be brokers and those who serve and/or entertain brokers.

Can you see where I am coming from?

 

Yes, I do see you point and concerns. But the current answer is that that we are still producing PLENTY of stuff. It;s just as you and I said - it's now done in factories that are extremely more automated than before! That's the whole key.

 

I can certainly see that as an option.
Though, the economic crippling of New York I stated above was due to countless factories shutting down, nit just paring down their work force.
Though, I DO recognize that those factories could very well have been shut down because factory B in Bumbfuck, Iowa modernized, and can now produce the same product for cheaper with less employees.
That's exactly what I'd like to determine.

 

The question, as I see it, is:
Did they move the maufacturing from New York to Bumbfuck Iowa, or to Bumbfuck, Malaysia?

 

This is what I could find:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/02/BU88RSLP0.DTL

Some numbers here:
http://www.bls.gov/oco/oco2003.htm

And here:

They discuss the restructuring of the manufacturig base; losses for lowere skilled workers but improved prospects for higher skilled workers

http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/current_issues/ci12-2.pdf

This is what the big picture is like:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2002-12-12-manufacture_x.htm

Current statistics

http://useconomy.about.com/od/economicindicators/a/Job-Stats.htm

 

I'll try and get some figures later, but atm this doesn't sound right to me

America does have more people getting university and other higher education degrees than anywhere else, but I thought only a small percent were in science.

 

Well, there are hundreds of thousands of degrees in science and engineering awarded in the US every year. Also, the quality of science and engineering education is higher in the US than in certain other countries which churn out larger numbers of degrees. Finally, it doesn't matter that much anyway, as the smart foreigners can come to work in the US after finishing their degrees abroad. The presence of innovation industries in the US has as much to do with the business/research climate, government funding, presitgious academic posts and desirability of living here. It's about attracting the top 20% of the world's scientists and engineers, not producing the bottom 80%.

 

My understanding is that most of the downturn in manufacturing jobs was due to improved efficiency rather than offshoring. The jobs that used to be done by New Yorkers are not done by Iowans, Mexicans, Malaysians or Chinese, but rather by robots. Notice that the remaining manufacturing jobs are high-paying, high-tech positions: these are the people who run the robots that do the actual work. Business elites and politicians have, for their part, been happy to nurture the myth that it's Mexico and China that stole all the jobs, as this keeps their constituencies from noticing the truth, which is that said executives simply eliminated the jobs because they were inefficient. To the extent that jobs actually were offshored, those foreign workers that got them will meet the same fates in a few years (i.e., they'll be replaced by robots, or their jobs will move to even cheaper countries).

 

Do you have some evidence of this?

 

This one is a good overview:

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdoc.cfm?index=5078&type=0

 

China is gaining strength everyday. It is only a matter of time before it takes control of Americas companies by buying them up and putting Chinese in charge.

 

You do realize that sales of American companies to foreign entities have to be approved by Congress, right? And that Congress is, if anything, overly protective? They squashed a bid from a Chinese firm to buy an American oil company a year or two back, and only narrowly let Lenovo buy IBM's PC business.

 

Who owns Chrysler, why Mercedes!

 

Actually, Daimler sold off 80% of Chrysler about a month ago. It's now owned by Cerberus Capital Management, an American firm.

Not that that has anything at all to do with China.