Live data from Hacker News

US Manufacturing Is Not Dead

fivethirtyeight.com

1–10 of 48 posts

Re: US Manufacturing Is Not Dead

#3
Worthless without context. What I'd really like to see is the change in US manufacturing as a percent of world manufacturing over time, and the trajectory of US manufacturing in comparison to the level of manufacturing in China.

Re: US Manufacturing Is Not Dead

#4
Secondary conclusion: As long as manufacturing productivity continues to improve, increasing our manufacturing may lead to American prosperity, but it won't save the economy, in that it won't produce jobs.

Long-term, I've actually not been concerned about American manufacturing for a while now. Why is overseas manufacturing cheap? Primarily, cheap labor. When does that cease to be an advantage? When labor is no longer a significant cost in manufacturing. We're getting there pretty quickly, and IMHO robotics has only recently (i.e., last two or three years) taken off, which should be able to continue the increased-productivity-per-human trend for a while yet.

Bad time to become an assembly line worker. Good time to get into robotics for manufacturing, probably.

I had a contract job in a tool & die facility a couple of years ago. It wasn't a factory, it was a "build-to-order" facility that had a wide variety of equipment in various places and they needed better tracking of their jobs and such. I didn't mention this to anyone, but I was struck by how much work was being done that could be automated in the near future. Tens of jobs dedicated solely to moving things around, which robots are going to be able to take over in the 5 year timeframe. Another tens of jobs that involve placing a metal part just so in a press and pushing two buttons (two so you have to use both hands). QA can't be replaced with robots entirely, but it could be helped. The bulk of the people on the floor were not doing things that required human judgment, even for human-class vision or human-class pathfinding. The future is basically now.

Re: US Manufacturing Is Not Dead

#5
Secondly, there have been calls for a US industrial policy -- that is, for Washington to essentially "pick winners and losers" by promoting some industries that they feel have a high probability of success. Asian countries have been doing this for years with remarkable success and it is a policy which we clearly need to copy.

The market is pretty good at picking winners. Washington likes to take money away from the winners and give it to the incumbent losers that bribe lawmakers.

Re: US Manufacturing Is Not Dead

#6

Secondly, there have been calls for a US industrial policy -- that is, for Washington to essentially "pick winners and losers" by promoting some industries that they feel have a high probability of success. Asian countries have been doing this for years with remarkable success and it is a policy which we clearly need to copy. The market is pretty good at picking winners. Washington likes to take money away from the w…

Yeah, that part seems like it needs more support. The situation for the largest and most diverse economy on the planet is a little bit different than the situation for those Asian countries. Our economy is far too complex for this sort of central planning to be effective. Also, politicians are idiots, and need to secure votes from the workers in industries currently existing, not the industries of the future.

Re: US Manufacturing Is Not Dead

#7
post #3

Worthless without context. What I'd really like to see is the change in US manufacturing as a percent of world manufacturing over time, and the trajectory of US manufacturing in comparison to the level of manufacturing in China.

Why are either of them so interesting in the context of US manufacturing?

The single biggest thing to happen in the last few decades is a couple of billion people (re-)joining the world economy (the PRC, India, the former Soviet Union, etc.).

To the extent a lot of recent manufacturing is satisfying basic needs we take for granted, e.g. refrigerators, isn't that likely to be all to the better?

What I'm saying here is that this gets complicated. Economies of scale are likely to give the manufacturers in the PRC the edge in supplying the world's demand for refrigerators, but on the other hand their increased demand for say aircraft and especially jet and turboprop engines is directly to our advantage.

Or perhaps I should say, this isn't a simple matter of winners or losers at this gross a level (PRC vs. US, US vs. the world). I expect the share of US manufacturing vs. the world's to go down during this period and I expect the trajectory of PRC manufacturing to be wild compared to ours.

Re: US Manufacturing Is Not Dead

#8
I love it how they show a few charts not adjusted for inflation or anything else to claim that the US still has huge manufacturing base and then you can't find a SINGLE "made in the USA" product in a mall. Give me a break with your megalomania.

Re: US Manufacturing Is Not Dead

#10
post #3

Worthless without context. What I'd really like to see is the change in US manufacturing as a percent of world manufacturing over time, and the trajectory of US manufacturing in comparison to the level of manufacturing in China.

Krugman: "He was driven mad by Lester Thurow and Robert Reich in particular, both of whom had written books touting a theory that he believed to be nonsense: that America was competing in a global marketplace with other countries in much the same way that corporations competed with one another. In fact, Krugman argued, in a series of contemptuous articles in Foreign Affairs and elsewhere, countries were not at all like corporations. While another country’s success might injure our pride, it would not likely injure our wallets. Quite the opposite: it would be more likely to provide us with a bigger market for our products and send our consumers cheaper, better-made goods to buy. A trade surplus might be a sign of weakness, a trade deficit a sign of strength. And, anyway, a nation’s standard of living was determined almost entirely by its productivity—trade was just not that important."

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/03/01/100301fa_fact_...

Post reply on HN