...and, how do you preserve a manufacturing base?

I'm seeing a lot of posts about how Trump won't be able to return mfg jobs to the rust belt. I'm interested in hearing more about why you may think that making stuff is a lost cause. If you don't think it's a lost cause, but you think Trump will fail due to policies (or maybe not caring to try), what policies do you think would do the trick?

I think if corporate taxes are reduced to competitive world levels, development of our energy resources are allowed to occur with a minimum of red tape and the corporations can be allowed to repatriate earnings abroad at competitive tax rates, it would be a shot to the arm for us to make things in the U.S.

We already make a good bit of stuff here, and automation has replaced a lot of workers. However, we still need more mature industries to remain if for nothing else other than national security interests. Steel and auto manufacturing need to be preserved for national security reasons.

Interesting to hear more thoughts.

All manufacturers in the US, if they fully adopt a Lean Six Sigma strategy, then they should be able to compete pricewise with anyone.

Jobs are going to decline regardless. The transportation work force is going to peak and crash as quickly as the horse population circa 1910s. manufacturing is in only a slightly better position. Factories are coming back, but not the jobs.

(11-10-2016 02:36 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Jobs are going to decline regardless. The transportation work force is going to peak and crash as quickly as the horse population circa 1910s. manufacturing is in only a slightly better position. Factories are coming back, but not the jobs.

I appreciate the distinction between jobs and mfg base. The base is more important than mfg jobs IMHO.

(11-10-2016 02:31 PM)miko33 Wrote:  ...and, how do you preserve a manufacturing base?

I'm seeing a lot of posts about how Trump won't be able to return mfg jobs to the rust belt. I'm interested in hearing more about why you may think that making stuff is a lost cause. If you don't think it's a lost cause, but you think Trump will fail due to policies (or maybe not caring to try), what policies do you think would do the trick?

I think if corporate taxes are reduced to competitive world levels, development of our energy resources are allowed to occur with a minimum of red tape and the corporations can be allowed to repatriate earnings abroad at competitive tax rates, it would be a shot to the arm for us to make things in the U.S.

We already make a good bit of stuff here, and automation has replaced a lot of workers. However, we still need more mature industries to remain if for nothing else other than national security interests. Steel and auto manufacturing need to be preserved for national security reasons.

Interesting to hear more thoughts.

As a long time conservative and one-time globalist, I never thought I'd live long enough to say these things. I've morphed with age.

Here are a few of my thoughts on how we begin the process of recovering our manufacturing sector.

First, require countries that export products to the US but either place high tariffs on our products shipped there, or block them all together, to either lower those tariffs and barriers or face a similar policy against their products, immediately.

Secondly, do everything possible to make our products competitive with imports. Reduced taxes, and even subsidies if necessary could be considered. In the end, our government needs to do what other governments do to make their products competitive. Those governments that allow child or forced labor should have their imports banned until there's verification that those practices are no longer allowed.

The issue of currency manipulation I understand to an extent, but the complexities are above my pay grade as Obama would say.

I realize that the shortterm cost of the above policies would be inflationary to an extent and force many Americans to dig deeper for the products the want, but the alternative is more of this.





Those are images from Detroit. Chernoybl doesn't look much different.

(11-10-2016 02:55 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(11-10-2016 02:31 PM)miko33 Wrote:  ...and, how do you preserve a manufacturing base?

I'm seeing a lot of posts about how Trump won't be able to return mfg jobs to the rust belt. I'm interested in hearing more about why you may think that making stuff is a lost cause. If you don't think it's a lost cause, but you think Trump will fail due to policies (or maybe not caring to try), what policies do you think would do the trick?

I think if corporate taxes are reduced to competitive world levels, development of our energy resources are allowed to occur with a minimum of red tape and the corporations can be allowed to repatriate earnings abroad at competitive tax rates, it would be a shot to the arm for us to make things in the U.S.

We already make a good bit of stuff here, and automation has replaced a lot of workers. However, we still need more mature industries to remain if for nothing else other than national security interests. Steel and auto manufacturing need to be preserved for national security reasons.

Interesting to hear more thoughts.

As a long time conservative and one-time globalist, I never thought I'd live long enough to say these things. I've morphed with age.

Here are a few of my thoughts on how we begin the process of recovering our manufacturing sector.

First, require countries that export products to the US but either place high tariffs on our products shipped there, or block them all together, to either lower those tariffs and barriers or face a similar policy against their products, immediately.

Secondly, do everything possible to make our products competitive with imports. Reduced taxes, and even subsidies if necessary could be considered. In the end, our government needs to do what other governments do to make their products competitive. Those governments that allow child or forced labor should have their imports banned until there's verification that those practices are no longer allowed.

The issue of currency manipulation I understand to an extent, but the complexities are above my pay grade as Obama would say.

I realize that the shortterm cost of the above policies would be inflationary to an extent and force many Americans to dig deeper for the products the want, but the alternative is more of this.





Those are images from Detroit. Chernoybl doesn't look much different.

I know the inflation could be a *****, but I don't know if it's the worst thing in the world. Sometimes I wonder if consumer goods prices being down really has allowed us to buy more things, or just allowed us to buy more instances of the same things.

I'm 45, and I remember a day when things like clothes, shoes, lawn mowers and televisions weren't basically disposable items. My mother was a homemaker, but she was a talented seamstress, and had a very nice side income stream as a kid mending people's clothes.

It can be hard to find someone to fix your lawnmower these days, and forget about having any consumer electronics repaired.

There's no doubt it would be disruptive, but I don't know if it's all bad or unendurable. It would open up some new (albeit minor) blue-collar opportunities in resale and repair channels as well I guess.

(11-10-2016 03:39 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  I know the inflation could be a *****, but I don't know if it's the worst thing in the world. Sometimes I wonder if consumer goods prices being down really has allowed us to buy more things, or just allowed us to buy more instances of the same things.

I'm 45, and I remember a day when things like clothes, shoes, lawn mowers and televisions weren't basically disposable items. My mother was a homemaker, but she was a talented seamstress, and had a very nice side income stream as a kid mending people's clothes.

It can be hard to find someone to fix your lawnmower these days, and forget about having any consumer electronics repaired.

There's no doubt it would be disruptive, but I don't know if it's all bad or unendurable. It would open up some new (albeit minor) blue-collar opportunities in resale and repair channels as well I guess.

Quality post Lou. And yes, you're right, most things are disposable these days. I recall my dad always phoning Mr. Claude to repair our TV. I asked his son some years later if he was still in that business and he said, no, when vacuum tubes went out of style so did the tv repair business.

My concern about the shape of our manufacturing sector is that in the event we ever are again challenged by someone like a Hitler, will we be able to respond with the know-how to get the job done. If all that technology is in the hands of others, we may be taken over without firing a shot.

It starts with people choosing to buy American made...

Then again, a poor nation can't afford its own goods and that's sort of the situation many people find themselves in.

(11-10-2016 02:36 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Jobs are going to decline regardless. The transportation work force is going to peak and crash as quickly as the horse population circa 1910s. manufacturing is in only a slightly better position. Factories are coming back, but not the jobs.

Some jobs will come back with the factories.

The days of factories having 3000 assembly workers are over. That died with automation and low-wage labor overseas. But many, many automated factories still have 200-500 workers, those are the ones you can attract back by the manufacturer instituting a lean manufacturing philosophy combined with JIT inventory method.

I work for a multi-billion dollar manufacturer based here in the US who switched to the Toyota Production System model that emphasizes lean manufacturing, JIT inventory, and Six Sigma values about 17-18 years ago. We spent hundreds of millions of dollars to automate and change our entire manufacturing structure. Not one of our 10,000 factory workers across 15 factories in the US was laid off because of it. Instead, we did away with hiring temp. labor because our factories were 100x more efficient than they were and could handle the peak demand workload with our existing full-time staff. We saw our profits increase 25% as a result, as well.

Most companies, instead of adopting a similar model, due to the start up costs, moved their factories overseas to where it was cheaper to keep their same structure running. Those are the guys we need to attract back.

(11-10-2016 04:13 PM)muffinman Wrote:  

(11-10-2016 02:36 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Jobs are going to decline regardless. The transportation work force is going to peak and crash as quickly as the horse population circa 1910s. manufacturing is in only a slightly better position. Factories are coming back, but not the jobs.

Some jobs will come back with the factories.

The days of factories having 3000 assembly workers are over. That died with automation and low-wage labor overseas. But many, many automated factories still have 200-500 workers, those are the ones you can attract back by the manufacturer instituting a lean manufacturing philosophy combined with JIT inventory method.

I work for a multi-billion dollar manufacturer based here in the US who switched to the Toyota Production System model that emphasizes lean manufacturing, JIT inventory, and Six Sigma values about 17-18 years ago. We spent hundreds of millions of dollars to automate and change our entire manufacturing structure. Not one of our 10,000 factory workers across 15 factories in the US was laid off because of it. Instead, we did away with hiring temp. labor because our factories were 100x more efficient than they were and could handle the peak demand workload with our existing full-time staff. We saw our profits increase 25% as a result, as well.

Most companies, instead of adopting a similar model, due to the start up costs, moved their factories overseas to where it was cheaper to keep their same structure running. Those are the guys we need to attract back.

Good stuff.

There has to be a reasonably happy medium. They days of union workers making $50/hr to play cards on a forklift are right to be gone, but it doesn't have to be as bad as it is.

I very much like the idea of incentivizing companies to do what you describe rather than move overseas, or to bring operations back. And I have no problem with taking a bite out of companies that would rather move an antiquated system to the third world than invest at home like that.

Well, as I confessed earlier, I was once one of the biggest globalists you could find. I was wrong to a large extent. We sold our souls for the baubels we could find at Walmart and it's cost a lot of fine, hard working Americans their jobs and futures.

I hope Trump can right some of those wrongs. Hillary was in no way prepared to even try.

(11-10-2016 04:23 PM)Lou_C Wrote:  

(11-10-2016 04:13 PM)muffinman Wrote:  

(11-10-2016 02:36 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Jobs are going to decline regardless. The transportation work force is going to peak and crash as quickly as the horse population circa 1910s. manufacturing is in only a slightly better position. Factories are coming back, but not the jobs.

Some jobs will come back with the factories.

The days of factories having 3000 assembly workers are over. That died with automation and low-wage labor overseas. But many, many automated factories still have 200-500 workers, those are the ones you can attract back by the manufacturer instituting a lean manufacturing philosophy combined with JIT inventory method.

I work for a multi-billion dollar manufacturer based here in the US who switched to the Toyota Production System model that emphasizes lean manufacturing, JIT inventory, and Six Sigma values about 17-18 years ago. We spent hundreds of millions of dollars to automate and change our entire manufacturing structure. Not one of our 10,000 factory workers across 15 factories in the US was laid off because of it. Instead, we did away with hiring temp. labor because our factories were 100x more efficient than they were and could handle the peak demand workload with our existing full-time staff. We saw our profits increase 25% as a result, as well.

Most companies, instead of adopting a similar model, due to the start up costs, moved their factories overseas to where it was cheaper to keep their same structure running. Those are the guys we need to attract back.

Good stuff.

There has to be a reasonably happy medium. They days of union workers making $50/hr to play cards on a forklift are right to be gone, but it doesn't have to be as bad as it is.

I very much like the idea of incentivizing companies to do what you describe rather than move overseas, or to bring operations back. And I have no problem with taking a bite out of companies that would rather move an antiquated system to the third world than invest at home like that.

Yep, Im also for giving companies the incentive to make them switch as well. I'm also for apply a tariff to large companies that move production overseas just to save on a old-school way of manufacturing.

Many people think this is just about factory jobs, but that just not the case. Factories need suppliers to provide them raw materials with a short lead time, they need people to build and maintain their equipment and machines, they need industrial robotics companies to build their robots. The need shipping and logistics companies to take their product to market.

When you bring build a new factory, your not just creating 300 jobs for the factory workers themselves, you're creating another 100 jobs (example #) that supply that factory and take their products to market.

Moving factories back to the US, whether is 10 employees or 1000, is always a good thing.

(11-10-2016 02:55 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(11-10-2016 02:31 PM)miko33 Wrote:  ...and, how do you preserve a manufacturing base?
I'm seeing a lot of posts about how Trump won't be able to return mfg jobs to the rust belt. I'm interested in hearing more about why you may think that making stuff is a lost cause. If you don't think it's a lost cause, but you think Trump will fail due to policies (or maybe not caring to try), what policies do you think would do the trick?
I think if corporate taxes are reduced to competitive world levels, development of our energy resources are allowed to occur with a minimum of red tape and the corporations can be allowed to repatriate earnings abroad at competitive tax rates, it would be a shot to the arm for us to make things in the U.S.
We already make a good bit of stuff here, and automation has replaced a lot of workers. However, we still need more mature industries to remain if for nothing else other than national security interests. Steel and auto manufacturing need to be preserved for national security reasons.

As a long time conservative and one-time globalist, I never thought I'd live long enough to say these things. I've morphed with age.
Here are a few of my thoughts on how we begin the process of recovering our manufacturing sector.
First, require countries that export products to the US but either place high tariffs on our products shipped there, or block them all together, to either lower those tariffs and barriers or face a similar policy against their products, immediately.
Secondly, do everything possible to make our products competitive with imports. Reduced taxes, and even subsidies if necessary could be considered. In the end, our government needs to do what other governments do to make their products competitive. Those governments that allow child or forced labor should have their imports banned until there's verification that those practices are no longer allowed.
The issue of currency manipulation I understand to an extent, but the complexities are above my pay grade as Obama would say.
I realize that the shortterm cost of the above policies would be inflationary to an extent and force many Americans to dig deeper for the products the want, but the alternative is more of this.

Tech, with regard to your first point, in most cases those other countries aren't imposing high tariffs on imports from the US. They may have no tariffs at all. What they are doing is collecting a consumption tax. If you have a national consumption tax, then you get to charge it on all imports. So if they have a 20% consumption tax, then they get to collect it and bump up the price 20% upon arrival. As long as we don't have a national consumption tax, it would be a violation of international law for us to impose a similar policy against their exports to us, as you suggest. Further, if you have a national consumption tax, when you export something you get a rebate of all embedded consumption taxes. With a 20% tax rate that would amount to something in the range of 15% "subsidy" on exports. Again, under international law, as long as we don't have a consumption tax, we can't do it. Starting in 1971, we actually tried rebating embedded income taxes through something called a DISC (Domestic International Sales Corporation). It was shot down by the GATT panel in 1976, but was revived with somewhat different rules after that. If we adopted a national consumption tax, then we could do unto others as they have done unto us. Without it, we can't.

With the revenue stream from the consumption tax, we could then go about reducing (or possibly even eliminating) our corporate and individual income taxes.

Those two steps would greatly alter the economic calculus in our favor.

There are more things to be done, but those would be two good starters.

(11-10-2016 04:42 PM)muffinman Wrote:  Many people think this is just about factory jobs, but that just not the case. Factories need suppliers to provide them raw materials with a short lead time, they need people to build and maintain their equipment and machines, they need industrial robotics companies to build their robots. The need shipping and logistics companies to take their product to market.

When you bring build a new factory, your not just creating 300 jobs for the factory workers themselves, you're creating another 100 jobs (example #) that supply that factory and take their products to market.

Excellent point, and rep points for you sir.

(11-10-2016 04:45 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Tech, with regard to your first point, in most cases those other countries aren't imposing high tariffs on imports from the US. They may have no tariffs at all. What they are doing is collecting a consumption tax. If you have a national consumption tax, then you get to charge it on all imports. So if they have a 20% consumption tax, then they get to collect it and bump up the price 20% upon arrival. As long as we don't have a national consumption tax, it would be a violation of international law for us to impose a similar policy against their exports to us, as you suggest. Further, if you have a national consumption tax, when you export something you get a rebate of all embedded consumption taxes. With a 20% tax rate that would amount to something in the range of 15% "subsidy" on exports. Again, under international law, as long as we don't have a consumption tax, we can't do it. Starting in 1971, we actually tried rebating embedded income taxes through something called a DISC (Domestic International Sales Corporation). It was shot down by the GATT panel in 1976, but was revived with somewhat different rules after that. If we adopted a national consumption tax, then we could do unto others as they have done unto us. Without it, we can't.

With the revenue stream from the consumption tax, we could then go about reducing (or possibly even eliminating) our corporate and individual income taxes.

Those two steps would greatly alter the economic calculus in our favor.

There are more things to be done, but those would be two good starters.

Good post. I told you much of this stuff is above my pay grade. Having said that, it's a no-brainer that losing all those manufacturing jobs was bad and doing what we can to bring them back (and we can bring many of them back) will be good.

Step 1) Eliminate the corporate income tax
Step 2) Allow repatriation of money with little to no tax penalty
Step 3) Reduce regulatory burden
Step 4) Stop giving big tax breaks to big companies opening big operations if you're not also going to give big tax breaks to SMALL companies opening SMALL operations. Stop giving freebies to behemoths and ****ing over the little guys who were in your backyard all along.
Step 5) Repeal ObamaCare and reform free market healthcare to reduce costs to businesses AND individual businesses enormously.

Produce things that third-world countries lack the human capital to produce: Pharmaceuticals, aircraft, automobiles, machines, computers. That includes investing in R&D and clinical trials for the next generation of these things.

If you look at the manufacturing Germany has added over the last 10-15 years, it's not things like pots and pans and blue jeans that they're making.

(11-10-2016 05:15 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  Produce things that third-world countries lack the human capital to produce: Pharmaceuticals, aircraft, automobiles, machines, computers. That includes investing in R&D and clinical trials for the next generation of these things.

If you look at the manufacturing Germany has added over the last 10-15 years, it's not things like pots and pans and blue jeans that they're making.

We need to quit worrying that Cambodia is sewing up our Nikes and start figuring out how to compete with Germany for the good jobs that we really want.

(11-10-2016 05:15 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  Produce things that third-world countries lack the human capital to produce: Pharmaceuticals, aircraft, automobiles, machines, computers. That includes investing in R&D and clinical trials for the next generation of these things.

If you look at the manufacturing Germany has added over the last 10-15 years, it's not things like pots and pans and blue jeans that they're making.

We defenitly need to mimic what Germany has been doing. They have been able to maintain that 20% workforce in manufacturing for years and years now.

We have dropped won to 8%, if we could get it back up to 20%, talk about a American Economic Boom that would happen.

(11-10-2016 05:04 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Step 1) Eliminate the corporate income tax

We don't actually have to eliminate it completely. Reducing it to a very low level compared to world standards would pretty much address the issue here. I've proposed 15%.

Quote:Step 2) Allow repatriation of money with little to no tax penalty

If the corporate tax rate is 15%, this happens pretty much automatically because of the way our tax system works.

Quote:Step 3) Reduce regulatory burden

Absolutely. And this not mean dirty air or dirty water or unsafe working conditions. It means cleaning up the red tape and redundancies built into the process so that we can get better answers faster. Of course, that means a bunch of fat cat bureaucrats lose their jobs. Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch. I would actually do three things:
One, sunset review for every agency every 10 years.
Two, all new rules subject to review and approval of congress before taking effect.
Three, transfer adjudication of disputes from ALJs who report to the executive director of the agency to separate Article III Administrative Law Courts in each federal judicial district.

Quote:Step 4) Stop giving big tax breaks to big companies opening big operations if you're not also going to give big tax breaks to SMALL companies opening SMALL operations. Stop giving freebies to behemoths and ****ing over the little guys who were in your backyard all along.

It's not so much that we give big tax breaks to big companies. The biggest tax break in our system, by far, is that we follow international law and allow profits to be taxed in the country where earned. Since everywhere else has a lower corporate tax rate than we do, that means that gives the advantage to those companies big enough to be multinationals. That obviously produces a better tax deal for big companies.

Quote:Step 5) Repeal ObamaCare and reform free market healthcare to reduce costs to businesses AND individual businesses enormously.

Adopt Bismarck. Pay for it with a consumption tax, less a Boortz/Linder prebate/prefund. Make the prebate/prefund and Bismarck health care the federal welfare safety net, and transfer all the focused and means-tested programs to the states, who can pay for them with the savings from having Medicaid taken off their plate by Bismarck.