Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Some mfg is coming back, but with technology today, it requires few employees.
Yep, it would be like the pipeline that so many conservatives want; several jobs for initial construction that quickly disappear and any long term employment uptick would be very small.
Actually we are pretty strong in the manufacturing sector. We produce a lot of the worlds cars and dominate in aircraft manufacturing. We also have an almost total monopoly on computer processing manufacture, etc... Because of automation we get a lot more production per capita.
The bulk of the old-style manufacturing jobs left in the period 1970s through early 1990s. There's no way to bring that back, but in terms of manufacturing we're not as bad as people think.
Actually where we're hurting is in the mid-skilled white collar jobs. It takes so much more education to even compete for those jobs these days when before high school graduates who could read, write and do math decently could do them, and college graduates could easily get them. The closest we came in recent years was during the housing boom - it was easy to become a mortgage broker or some other kind of paper pushing job related to the housing industry from the early 2000s to about 2008, then that went away.
Actually where we're hurting is in the mid-skilled white collar jobs. It takes so much more education to even compete for those jobs these days when before high school graduates who could read, write and do math decently could do them, and college graduates could easily get them. The closest we came in recent years was during the housing boom - it was easy to become a mortgage broker or some other kind of paper pushing job related to the housing industry from the early 2000s to about 2008, then that went away.
"When I grow up, I want to be an ineffective middle manager." - funny; I never hear that much from kids. More efficiency on the floor translates to less people need to supervise also. Lots of businesses that streamlined during the downturn found that like many of us they really did have more in the middle than needed. I don't think that is coming back either.
Seriously, the old ways are gone. We need to create new industry and new ways of doing things. Our government was really stupid to not invest more in space exploration; think of all the things we could be discovering, mining and manufacturing out there had the technology been pushed further along. Imagine if being an astronaut only required a clean bill of health and a desire to go...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
Germany has been very successful at maintaining its manufacturing sector, and keeping skilled people employed, in spite of automation. They're also very good at educating people for those manufacturing jobs. If they can do it, the US should be able to do it. There's no excuse, really.
On the other hand, Germany did outsource unskilled manufacturing; much of the garment trade, for example. They built factories in Russia in the early 2000's, to take advantage of the cheap labor there. What they've retained are the skilled manufacturing jobs, making precision industrial instruments, and that sort of thing.
Here is the problem, based upon numbers from the American Enterprise Institute; the U.S. manufacturing output alone roughly equals that of Germany, Korea, Italy, Russia, Brazil and India at, $1.993 trillion and $2.038 trillion respectively. China, the world leader, is given an output figure of $2.5 trillion. But here is the kicker, China's manufacturing sector workforce is somewhere in the area of 100 million workers while the U.S. manufacturing workforce is around 12 million, which means that the U.S. is actually exceeding China is levels of productivity, in no small part due to automation. What that tell me is that even if we wanted to reach 1950 era manufacturing jobs, 26.4 million jobs, we would have to more than double our manufacturing output and then some.
Which raises the question, who is going to buy all this stuff?
If the shift is to return manufacturing to the U.S. then someone has to lose and there in lies the problem. By shifting jobs back to the U.S. we deprive emerging markets, China, India, and Africa from making the money for the stuff that we would be manufacturing. Not doesn't mean that there are enormous potential for sales in those markets, just not enough to return the U.S. to the glory days of USSteel, the Big Three, GE etc because of increase automation in the manufacturing industries. In short, the USS Manufacturing sailed a long time ago.
*Please don't hold me to the accuracy of the numbers quoted. They are rough approximations and their accuracy could be debated depending on how the figures were arrived at, but for the use of giving us a general idea of the problem I think they'll do.
Lower relative wages and higher quality products, compared to our competitors. It's happening in the US, slowly; more quickly in Germany. Over the last 20 years, the price of a modest BMW has dropped considerably in relation to a comparable quality of Toyota or Honda.
"When I grow up, I want to be an ineffective middle manager." - funny; I never hear that much from kids. More efficiency on the floor translates to less people need to supervise also. Lots of businesses that streamlined during the downturn found that like many of us they really did have more in the middle than needed. I don't think that is coming back either.
You need middle jobs for middle people. I think a lot of people would be happy if there were a lot of jobs paying between 40 and 70,000 that required median level skills and intelligence. There used to be paths to that but it's becoming more like winning a lottery. I make about $50K and I had over 70 competitors in my applicant pool from what they tell me. Am I supposed to believe that I got that due to my innate greatness over 70 others? Maybe I beat out my 3 direct competitors with interview skills, but that other 70 who all had more or less the same qualifications? I (and the other 3 finalists) beat them out by sheer luck by making the cuts based on arbitrary criteria to cull the field to a manageable size.
So what will average people do? The median American is... well average in terms of skills and intelligence. Should they all be relegated to low-paid service jobs?
The thing is, if you can keep well-paying manufacturing jobs, like Germany did, you can preserve the welfare state. Because people are earning high, and paying taxes into the system. Once you lose that category of jobs, your system starts to unravel.
I'm not sure how lawmakers think the US economy is going to do decently, let alone thrive, when companies are replacing US workers with cheap imports they can pay less for the same work. Congress really should do something about that. Corporations are wrecking the economy. Et tu, Disney? For shame!
There is a Dark Force operating the great gears of Washington DC. They don't dislike America. They despise it.
They have tentacles reaching into every nook and cranny of the mainstream media, Hollywood, CERN, AIPAC, intelligence apparatus, military-industrial complex, Bilderbergers, Wall Street, Congress, and the White House.
"When I grow up, I want to be an ineffective middle manager." - funny; I never hear that much from kids. More efficiency on the floor translates to less people need to supervise also. Lots of businesses that streamlined during the downturn found that like many of us they really did have more in the middle than needed. I don't think that is coming back either.
Everyone has gone "Lean", "Sigma Six" or whatever the latest successor is to those concepts; and yes that means a large portion of "middle" jobs are gone and aren't coming back.
This is one of the reasons for the high unemployment for middle aged (those say from 45 to 60 or so) persons. Many held positions in middle management, supervisory or other such positions that have been phased out.
Changing technology and resulting productivity gains means you often need less workers. That translates into a change in the hierarchy chain. You don't need a supervisor reporting to a junior VP who in turn reports to an executive VP and perhaps a few others before reaching the top.
If a company's accounting department has been shrunk from 50 employees down to three (thanks to technology) you don't need a layers of lower supervisory or middle level for that matter.
Yep, it would be like the pipeline that so many conservatives want; several jobs for initial construction that quickly disappear and any long term employment uptick would be very small.
Funny that for some who obvious do not work heavy construction and just read liberals propaganda you failed to ask where is all the massive infrastructure and jobs from 800 billions dollars taxpayers funded. Do you have any idea how a pipeline operates at all? Obviously no. I have to say when Chinese peasant got a screwdriver to turn ;he can do it as well and cheaper than a American; just plain fact.Those jobs at US rates are not coming back. As one famous business man has said at this point many US persons are so lacking in skills needed that its cheaper to just pay them than risk the liability and cost in creating jobs they can do not needed at all.
Last edited by texdav; 07-30-2015 at 09:02 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
