the manufacturing rebound is a myth - air purifier manufacturer

by:Yovog     2023-03-26
the manufacturing rebound is a myth  -  air purifier manufacturer
Discussions on the revival of manufacturing are pending.
In fact, the United States has grown for a quarter.
Industrial jobs (million)source)
Starting in 2010.
Unfortunately, this is less than 15% of the number lost during the recession.
In addition, after the rise of this teasing, the United StatesS.
Manufacturing output appears to be stagnant again.
So it's worth revisiting a denied fact I 've written here and here before: American manufacturing is in a state of serious crisis.
In order to go through a series of analyses that claim that everything is normal, it is crucial to understand why the usual cited statistics that seem to show US manufacturing health are wrong.
First of all, as most analyses have done, the fact that overall manufacturing output is only stable is masked (or close to it)
Because several industries are developing rapidly.
The rest of the manufacturing economy has been declining.
According to a recent report from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, in terms of real value, most manufacturing industries are actually shrinking --
It increased from 2000 to 2009.
In fact, from 2000 to 2009, 15 of the 19 countries in the United StatesS.
Absolute decline in manufacturing output;
They produced less in 2009 than in a decade.
Food, drinks and tobacco products have declined. 0.
Electrical equipment-
Percentage of chemicals
Mechanical equipment-
Print 14%-
Wood products-15 percent
16% motor vehicles
18 percent Metal Products
27 percent non-metallic minerals and primary metals
28 percent paper-
28 percent plastic-
31 percent clothing-
Furniture-40 percent
43 percent textiles-
Bottom 43%?
15 manufacturing sectors, accounting for nearly 80% of the United States. S.
The manufacturing output in 2009 was less than in 2000.
What is the magic industry that makes up for all this decline?
Mineral fuels (coal, oil, gas)and computers.
Unfortunately, there is good reason to believe that the apparent surge in fuel production in the United States is illusory.
Coal output unchanged at 2000
According to the Energy Information Agency, natural gas production has declined by 2010, so oil must be very prosperous for these figures to be correct. (It hasn't. )
The increase in oil production is mainly due to the rise in oil prices.
In any case, the classification of oil exploitation (not production! )
For obvious reasons, being a manufacturing industry is questionable.
If we correct these distortions, what will our manufacturing industry look like?
If we assume that there is no real increase in oil production and assume that the computer sector is growing more
Reality 50% during this period, the real of the US manufacturing industry (
ADJUSTED INFLATION
Production fell by 9%. (Source. )
Even if our assumptions about the computer and electronics industry have increased significantly, we will still decline.
To be fair, other analyses of the problem come up with different figures.
This can be expected because not all of these analyses measure exactly the same thing.
But their conclusions are consistent.
For example, economist Susan Houseman reported that while manufacturing output grew by 1.
From 1997 to 2007, the annual growth rate was 18%, an increase of only 0.
Once computers and electronic devices are taken out of the photos, £ 46% per year. That's anemic.
The computer is a good thing. it will be a part of our economic growth. it is understandable.
But this is not a healthy manufacturing industry.
This is a broad image.
The prosperity of an industry masks the underlying recession.
Manufacturing jobs are now considered, not output.
Isn't the US economy declining? S.
Just because of the continuous advancement of factory automation, manufacturing employment is a good thing? No.
If the decline in manufacturing employment is only due to the continuous development of automation, we expect that the number of jobs in this industry will decline slowly since the peak soon after World War II.
But on the contrary, what we see is that employment levels are relatively stable, but after Y2K, things fall off the cliff.
See the following figure (source)
: But the manufacturing technology of Y2K has not suddenly started to drastically reduce the number of workers required, which is why the technical progress has led to the decline mentioned above.
So these figures show that a direct decline, especially a huge trade deficit, is responsible, not a gradual technological change.
In any case, regardless of the Ludd myth, automation itself does not harm the overall manufacturing jobs ---
As facts have shown, Japan, which is the world's leader in robotics, also has a higher proportion of labor in manufacturing than in the United States. S.
If you think about it, it makes sense, as if automation had enabled nine workers to do ten things they had done before, then the nine workers are now even more careful ---
This increases the motivation to hire them. (
In energy economics, this fact is called the Jevons paradox. )
So don't blame technology for our unemployment.
If there is any difference, it is that we lack the technology in the workplace compared to our competitors, which makes us lose our jobs.
Of course, the lack of such technology will eventually lead to investment failures in upgrading manufacturing.
If companies continue to invest in manufacturing, intangible assets such as physical factories and R & D, their manufacturing operations will remain healthy.
If they do not, they will step out of the manufacturing business as their existing factory and knowledge
How to be out of date over time.
They might survive. or not! )
As designers and packagers of goods made by others, they will no longer be manufacturing companies.
This means that the writing of the US manufacturing industry is against the wall because it lags behind our competitors in the investment competition.
From 2000 to 2008, our capital investment in manufacturing as a percentage of GDP was lower than that of most major peer economies.
In fact, between 2000 and 2009, domestic capital investment in the United StatesS.
Manufacturers in the United States fell more than 7%.
As a result, most American manufacturing companies are not as capital as they were a decade ago. (Sources. )
American companies are not only lowering their production capacity at home, but also strengthening foreign capacity.
From 2000 to 2009, their overseas manufacturing investment was on average 16% higher than domestic manufacturing investment. (Source. )
It is no accident that many foreign countries have not experienced industrial decline at all like us.
Although manufacturing in developed countries is bound to decline, the fact is that in the past decade, the percentage of manufacturing in GDP in many other developed countries has remained stable or even increased.
It belongs to Germany, the Netherlands and Norway in the "stability" category.
In the category "growth" in Sweden, Austria, Switzerland, Finland, Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and South Korea. (Source. )
The last flaw in the so-called manufacturing renaissance in the United States is the return to a handful of industrial jobs in the United States. S.
Returned by a much lower wage standard than before.
Suarez, for example.
Is reopening a former Hoover factory in North Canton, Ohio, to produce EdenPure space heaters, vacuum cleaners, air purifiers and other small household appliances previously manufactured in China.
But while the Hoover plant paid workers about $20/hour before it closed in 2007, the new job would pay $7. 50/hr. (Source. )
This is not an intermediate formula.
Class economy now or in the future.
Chat Online
Chat Online
Chat Online inputting...