Global trade has been a vital part of this country since the 1600's. We imported what we needed through the mid 1700's. Most of what we exported through the mid 1800's was lumber, coal, whale products, some agriculture and live stock. By 1870 we were exporting gold, silver, copper, iron and some manufactured products. By the time Henry Ford had revolutionized mass production, we were exporting steel, oil, rubber, cars and aircraft; all of it made right here in the United States. At the end of World War II, we built and produced almost everything we needed and wanted. We were making radios, cars, synthetics, medicine and medical devices. We were exporting agricultural products grown and harvested on square miles of land, not just acres. If another country wanted it, we had it. By 1960, we were the manufacturer to the world.
Until the mid 1970's, except for oil, most of what we imported came from Europe and Japan. Luxury products such as cars, jewelry and furs came from Europe. As part of the recovery from WWII, we imported a few toys, some small electronics and very few vehicles from Japan.
The History channel series, "The Men Who Built America" gives a great history of manufacturing as we know it. The latter half of the 19th century created the middle-class, technologies and emboldened more entrepreneurs to start some of the largest corporations in the world. These corporations are not in the series, but it is not hard to conclude how, if it had not been for the entrepreneurial risks taken by the five men in the series, we would have a completely different economy.
With the largest mass and private transportation system in the world at the time, new manufacturing technologies, financial support and new inventions went to mass production for distribution across the country and into other parts of the world. Speed was the key, the faster it was made, the faster it moved, the faster it went to market then the faster companies grew. As manufacturers and retailers of all sizes had growth, so did America’s economy. Almost all of it "Made in USA", made with pride, hard work and pure unadulterated satisfaction. Households had more income; that income bought everything that was previously out of financial reach for most. From those manufacturing jobs, new businesses started, new industries were created which created more jobs and a growing economy. After the Great Depression and recovery, if people couldn’t find a job, they could create one for themselves, and hundreds of thousands did.
Manufacturing at one point accounted for almost 40% of employment; the financial, service & retail, agricultural and medical industries shared the remaining 60% - agriculture taking the largest share. Without exception, no modern job or industry could exist without manufacturing. Increasing domestic manufacturing to half of its peak in a 2 year period, enough direct and indirect non-government jobs would be created to lower unemployment to 4 - 5% in 3 – 5 years.
Manufacturing has always been and always will be the cornerstone of the U.S. economy. Where that manufacturing happens is just as important. The Chinese economy, now the fastest growing economy behind the U.S. is clear evidence of that. With most of that economic growth in China from manufacturing over $425 billion worth of American branded products, China will surpass the U.S. economy in 10 – 15 years, if not sooner.
In March of 2011 ABC News launched its "Made in America" series with the intent to highlight that manufacturing is still being done in the U.S. The series highlights small to large manufacturers that are still retaining a strong U.S. presence. Also highlighted was the fact that buying "Made in USA" was not as expensive as most consumers thought. In most cases the retail cost was less than 10% more than imported products.
A Forbes article says that ABC News and Diane Sawyer have it all wrong. Sorry, but that author has it all wrong. The author, Dan Ikenson, says that imports do sustain jobs; that's the only part of the article that’s partially true; the sustained jobs are service industry and other low paying positions. The author should have thought about how many jobs are really created by imports and how many are created by "Made in USA" rather than worrying if he would lose advertising revenue or not.
Another half fact that Ikenson says is that manufacturing employment peaked in 1979 and then started to decline from then on; what he doesn't say is that there were two major causes of that decline. In 1979 the U.S. auto industry was in the middle of an evolution. Japanese and European cars and light trucks were becoming favored by American consumers because of the better fuel efficiency provided over the American big three. Chrysler, Ford and GM and their respective subsidiaries were struggling with stagnant engineering and poor management. Employment declined due to lost sales because the imports were cheaper, smaller and had simpler engineering. The big three couldn't compete with the efficiency of the imports; both manufacturing and the consumer end product.
The second was consumer electronics, while we were enjoying miniaturized electronic novelties, behind the scenes, Japanese manufacturers were buying up U.S. electronic companies and slowly closing those manufacturing facilities here and utilizing more efficient facilities in Japan. Even the computer industry growth in the mid 1990's and the dot com sector in the early 2000's couldn’t repair the economy. Computer manufacturing went offshore and the dot com bubble burst with 5 years of gaining a foothold in the U.S.
Mr. Ikenson then says that if we concentrate our spending on "Made in USA", people who work in and with imports will lose their jobs. Maybe, but we need to look at what jobs would be effected. The men and women who work at the ports, rather than off-loading ships with American branded imports would be loading ships with exports. Road and rail transportation workers, instead of bringing imports from the ports to the retailer or distributor would then be carrying products from domestic manufacturers to the ports for export. Every supporting industry would add jobs as a result of increased discretionary spending. Every indirect job and industry grows and many new ones start. When middle income Americans work, they pay taxes, they buy products and use services, they buy homes and cars and they support 98% of the U.S. economy.
His justification for supporting imports over domestic production is his family vacations to Disneyland, in that he attempts to claim that Disneyland couldn't exist without the made in China junk sold in the Disney gift shops, and all of those minimum wage workers across the country would suffer. Suffer from what, better paying job opportunities? Until a little over a decade ago, those jobs were entry level first jobs for high school students, today, those jobs are now held by those who formerly worked in factories earning as much four times minimum wage.
Another passenger on the "we hate American workers" bandwagon is Geoff Colvin, senior-editor-at-large with Fortune.com. Mr. Colvin is another detractor of reality and hater of "Made in USA" and attempts to convince us that, with more technological advances in manufacturing, fewer employees are needed; especially in a "free market" economy. He further tries to tell us that, because of technological advances, manufacturing employment will never recover to its former glory, granted, he could be partially correct in that assessment. Expressing his short-sighted view and lack of knowledge of manufacturing; he doesn’t take into consideration is that technology is not self-replicating.
In the late to mid '70s the panic in the auto industry was "robots will take over our jobs!" it turned out that a lot of those who lost their jobs to the robots, got jobs building those very same robots. Again, from raw material to finished robot, there was human intervention. From designers, engineers, welders, maintenance staff, mills and recyclers that produce the metals and other direct support industries. Depending on the product, one manufacturing job will support 4 – 10 other jobs, either directly or indirectly.
Although he does provide some facts and historical data, he fails to follow-up with reason and logic. He tries to say that our decimated manufacturing sector has actually grown rather than shrink. At the end of 2010, the last full year prior to the publication date of his opinion, the U.S. had a global trade deficit of almost $635 billion, which was about $135 billion greater deficit than 2009. It is possible that he was referring to the stock market growth during that period, had he been referring to tangible production, he would have known about the trade deficit which is a clear indicator that non-food consumer product manufacturing in the U.S. was and still is, decimated.
Another point Mr. Colvin attempts to make is that investments into these companies create jobs; although he doesn't specify what types of investments. Traded stock, as previously stated, is not an indicator of employment or corporate growth. Increased stock value, again, is based on the amount of corporate welfare received and money laundering in the stock market due to financial losses and offshore expenses. Other investments could include private retirement programs such as 401(k)'s, which grows or shrinks with the stock market. These types of investments could not create enough employment opportunities for our national economic recovery, especially in the current environment.
Mr. Ikenson and Mr. Colvin have clearly expressed the view given by many of the members of Congress; U.S. manufacturing is a waste of energy, time, money and resources. It is this view that has prevented real economic growth for the U.S.
We don't need statistics to tell us that "Made in USA" create more jobs than imports. How many more jobs are created or sustained from "Made in USA"? That is an easy answer. Go to your favorite department store; find something "Made in USA", then find an identical product made offshore. From raw material to your house, how many Americans helped make both products?
ABC News; Made In America
Dan Ikenson; With Made In America, ABC News Gets Trade Story All Wrong
Geoff Colvin; Obama Looking for Jobs In All The Wrong Places
History Channel; Men Who Built America
