16 ms·
The U.S. Will Surpass China as the No. 1 Country for Manufacturing by 2020
- jayjay71 10y agoA link to the full study pdf (1) and a link to a more interactive version of the data (2) (1) https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/manufacturing/us-gmci.pdf https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/... (2) https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/manufacturing/articles/global-manufacturing-competitiveness-index.html https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/manufacturing/arti...
- throwaway2016a 10y agoThank you for those links. One thing that jumps out from the links is it looks like the US has an absurdly high corporate tax rate but if you click through you see it is only high because there are few data points and China and India bring down the average. Very interesting.
- smaddali 10y agoWhile manufacturing may comeback to US, the employment in Manufacturing sector may not increase as much due to automation.
- maxxxxx 10y agoWe really need economic indicators that reflect conditions for most people, not just the top few. Indicators that are often used in the news like rising GDP, house prices and manufacturing output are pretty useless if only a few get benefits from them.
- maxerickson 10y agoWe should also start treating rising housing prices as a policy failure.
- bandrami 10y agoUnfortunately we taught a generation that housing was an investment platform rather than something you primarily get utility out of.
- dragonwriter 10y agoThat's been a common belief for several generations, not something that was taught to one recent generation alone.
- mywittyname 10y agoI disagree. Previous generations valued housing for its utility: it's a place to live. The land would be seen as an investment if it was used for farming. Gen-X came of age at a time where housing was viewed as an investment to make money on. The idea of buying a house with the promise of selling it later to make a profit is very modern. My great-grandparents and grandparents all owned one house and lived it in for the majority/entirety of their lives, so the value of he house was inconsequential to them. My parents and their siblings have mostly owned multiple houses. They never moved for pragmatic reasons, like relocating for a job. Instead, they took to the modern notion of "starter homes", where a family continues to move up to a better house by "using the profits" from the sale of their previous home.
- dragonwriter 10y ago> Gen-X came of age at a time where housing was viewed as an investment to make money on. Yes, because the idea was established when the leading edge of the Boomer generation was young adults and became dominant fairly quickly. So, it's been a common belief for three generations that have reached adulthold. Hence, my statement in GP.
- JBlue42 10y agoUgh, "starter homes". Someone saying that about their most recent purchase usually tells me all I need to know about them. American over-idealism at its finest.
- SomeStupidPoint 10y agoI always thought we should have several averages: Full data, cut off 1% at each end, 5% at each end, and 10% at each end. I think we'd get much more out of the A-1 or A-5 than the raw average. (Of course, the real answer -- like with the weather -- is that you need to use distribution information, not a single value.)
- dragonwriter 10y ago> We really need economic indicators that reflect conditions for most people, not just the top few. We have economic indicators that do that, such as median income and various distributional measures. They don't tend to get covered as much in the news because most of the people with power and influence don't like people paying attention to the stories they tell. But the same government agencies that publish the headline figures publish my more useful ones for assessing how most people are experiencing the economy.
- memracom 10y agoThe people who make money by moving plants offshore, are also behind the design of the economic indicators, knowing that if you can control what is measured then you are in charge of the conversation, and therefore in charge of the politics. That is what American oligarchs have been doing for the past 5 decades, distorting the entire system from top to bottom so that nobody can figure out what is going on. It's the same behavior of a pickpocket or a con artist.
- ecnal 10y agoYou heard it here first, everyone: economic indicators are actually just a plot by the manufacturing sector. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/ https://fred.stlouisfed.org/ Can you take a look and help me pick which of those 421,000 pieces of time-series data are the conspiracy ones so that I know not to look at them any more?
- lftl 10y agoDo you have any source or evidence even hinting at any of this or is it just standard conspiracy theory fare?
- bbctol 10y agoI've been finding this graph: https://tropicsofmeta.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/2007-real-manufacturing-output-and-employment-from-cleveland-fed2.gif https://tropicsofmeta.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/2007-real-... very helpful (y-axis is percentages of GDP and workforce.) Manufacturing never left the US, in terms of output, it's just that jobs did.
- ThomPete 10y agoWhich is why salary as a percentage of GDP is at an all time low.
- adventured 10y agoThat's a dramatic exaggeration. It's at a low post 1960s (an era which produced a temporary fake high because the rest of the developed world had been blown up, so the US took over half of all global manufacturing, a boon for working-class wages). Go take a look at what labor pulled in per hour in 1890.
- ThomPete 10y agoThe labour cost as a percentage of GDP?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- rrggrr 10y agoThis chart is almost worthless as a measure of US Manufacturing capacity or production. Why? Because sizable orders to a handful of companies (eg. Boeing, GE, Lockheed, etc.) offsets and distorts the disappearance of thousands of medium and small manufacturers over the past two decades. Its tempting to attribute the associated job losses to automation, but one look at this table: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_manufacturing_companies_by_revenue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_manufacturing_... and its clear millions of similar jobs have shifted overseas.
- igravious 10y agoAnd due to other increases in productivity.
- blackbagboys 10y agoJust in time for Trump to claim credit
- z2 10y agoCouldn't one country's CEO be unreasonably bullish or bearish on their country's capabilities relative to others? Do they really know how far along foreign manufacturing schemes are evolving? Nobody is sitting on their hands here; "Made in China 2025" and Germany's "Industrie 4.0" are pretty strong desires to push into advanced production using IoT, smarter automation, and all that jazz. Anecdotally, in a factory visit near Shenzhen, the manager claimed that moving to an automated production line has been pretty easy. Some areas are kept manual only because the worker is cheaper, for now. Outcomes from competition are hard to predict. It's interesting that Deloitte predicts Germany "holds strong and steady at the number three position" in 2020 when their own survey has them jumping between 2nd and 8th within a couple of years.
- ageofwant 10y agoJobs that are vulnerable to automation are generally not worth keeping. That's no comfort to those loosing them though. Science fiction from the 60's painted a world where people would lounge around in their airships hopping between beaches, and mountains and parties while robots took care of everything and the lord scientists and engineers that gifted the wold with such plenty smiled benevolently down on the citizens of the Age of Plenty. Yea that did not happen, nobody thought about who would own those automatons, and lo, it was not us.
- bandrami 10y agoDid it not happen? Even poor people today have objectively much better living standards than rich people 100 years ago.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- ageofwant 10y agoA rising tide lifts all boats. Even poor people in 1960 have objectively much better living standards than rich people 100 years before, yet we work longer hours and have less security. What happens to you today if you loose your job tomorrow, and cannot find employment within 6 months ?
- bandrami 10y agoHuh? Working hours in 1960 were significantly less than in 1860. And working hours in 2016 were significantly less than 1916. Other than ramping up for war production I think hours worked has been monotonically decreasing.
- twblalock 10y ago> What happens to you today if you loose your job tomorrow, and cannot find employment within 6 months ? You'd be less screwed than you would have been 100 years ago in that situation, for sure.
- 10y ago
- throwaway2016a 10y agoI haven't been myself but my wife is a process engineer and had to go to China to install and train people on a new machine so this is only second hand... But one of the reasons China is so good at manufacturing is because everything is in one place (or at least clusters)... need 10,000 of an Integrated Circuit? The company that makes it is literally down the street. Need some raw materials? That's down the other street. I can't think of a place in the US that is like that. If we need parts we have to wait for them to ship. (often from China) It's not just a labor problem. It is my understanding to be competitive in manufacturing you need to be vertically integrated. And I think that is harder to do in the US. Although I hope it is true. I live in the US but I don't believe in inherit United States exceptionalism but I do feel like shipping goods by container ship is bad for the environment and bad for consumers. I'd much rather see things made locally.
- icefox 10y agoDon't know about these days, but Michigan/Ohio area with car parts comes to mind.
- organsnyder 10y agoStill a lot of truth to this. Here in West Michigan, there are tons of auto parts manufacturers, both "boring" manufacturing (plastic molding, etc.) and emerging tech.
- afarrell 10y agoPreserving this cluster was the reason for the auto bailout, correct?
- organsnyder 10y agoYes, that was a big part of it. If even one of the Big Three had failed, the ripple effects would have crushed the entire industry, as well as the region. The resulting failure of many suppliers (due to them losing ~33% of their business overnight) would have crippled the surviving auto companies as well.
- bandrami 10y agoI'm pretty sure our manufacturing output exceeded China's for most of the oughts, also. The myth that "we don't make things here anymore" is, well, a myth. We just don't employ people to make things anymore.
- maxerickson 10y agoThe article is talking about competitiveness rather than output. Competitiveness is the thing that has (for example) Apple making things in China.
- losteric 10y agoIt's a well founded myth based on an extremely high percentage of consumer goods produced overseas. I can't find hard data on this, but anecdotally it's very hard to find things made in the US unless it's a high end store. Chinese manufacturing filled the burst in consumer demand for budget-level products...
- bandrami 10y agoTrue, but that's a relatively small part of the economy to begin with. We make most of the heavy plant in the world, so we're essentially building the factories China uses to make the plastic crap we buy.
- mistermann 10y agoHow might one know the truth about this, what could I read?
- dx034 10y agoAre you sure about that? I'm pretty sure that German machinery exports are higher than those of the US. Couldn't find numbers but remember that Germany was #1 in that segment for quite some time, would be surprised if the US is now leading.
- beachstartup 10y ago> anecdotally it's very hard to find things made in the US unless it's a high end store manufacturing output is measured in dollars, not 'amount of stuff' except in very specific cases. producing fewer but more expensive high end goods (like what the US makes) can still result in more output.
- codez4lyfe 10y agothank you donald trump
- mercurysmessage 10y agoWhat, exactly are you thanking him for? You know that they will all be automated jobs right? That is where manufacturing is going. You can love a corrupt egomaniac all you want, but you should wake up and smell the coffee, you sound like a shill from your amazingly defensive two comments.
- dang 10y agoPlease don't respond to a bad comment by making the thread even worse.
- mercurysmessage 10y agoOK. I'll refrain from replying to comments like this from now on.
- crimsonalucard 10y agoHe's not president yet. He hasn't done anything.
- r34yll2k 10y agoChinese are jumping off the job.
- squozzer 10y agoUpon what data and assumptions is this prediction based? How will this help Joe Six-pack?
- paulyg 10y agoIt won't help Joe Six-pack. And your questions make me think you did not read the article. The manufacturing output will increase due to automation & other improved techniques. My fave quote from the article: > So while it's understandable the state of manufacturing is of concern to presidential candidates, those who say they can bring back lost jobs in the sector either don't know what they are talking about, or are being disingenuous.
- pm90 10y ago> So while it's understandable the state of manufacturing is of concern to presidential candidates, those who say they can bring back lost jobs in the sector either don't know what they are talking about, or are being disingenuous. Or both, in case of the current president-elect.
- mistermann 10y agoHow can you be disingenuous if you don't know what you're talking about?
- aaronblohowiak 10y agoI think the sky is red but I tell you today it is teal -- I am lying about something I misunderstand
- mistermann 10y agoDoes "lying" not imply one knows the truth?
- 10y ago
- johncole 10y agoWorst graphic ever.
- rahimnathwani 10y agoI read the article and skimmed the full study and was left scratching my head: - What exactly do they mean by 'Competitiveness'? - Why so much focus on labour costs, when manufacturing cost is increasingly driven by large capital investments (especially in China, where low interest rates and government encouragement have expanded capital investments for years) - Why all the talk about R&D expenditure. Is that really a driver of manufacturing competitiveness (whatever that means) or manufacturing output? - How do they expect (on page 46) China's consumption to rise to 46% of GDP by 2025, if GDP will rise at 6.5% per year during the period? Such a shift would require consumption to go up by ~10% per year.
- maxerickson 10y agoHow do they expect (on page 46) China's consumption to rise to 46% of GDP by 2025, if GDP will rise at 6.5% per year during the period? Such a shift would require consumption to go up by ~10% per year. Perhaps a relative reduction in exports? When costs go up in China the goods that can be profitably produced elsewhere tend to increase.
- ThomPete 10y agoThe focus on labour cost is, I believe, because China have been suppressing it's own currency to stay competitive. But it's just a guess as I am only reading through the article and the study as we speak.
- netheril96 10y ago> because China have been suppressing it's own currency to stay competitive. Had been. China's currency is facing pressure to depreciate nowadays, and the Chinese government is having a hard choice between propping the value of CNY and preserving its reserves of dollars.
- edblarney 10y ago"Why so much focus on labour costs" Because the other things you mentioned - i.e. 'capital investments' - China does not have a huge advantage in. Yes, they have 'government participation' but US companies have access to capital, low interest rates, yada yada.
- newswriter99 10y agoThis was posted back in March, right? Is it a "year-end round-up" of stories or something? Because if so, this story is kind of dry. Aside from the tiny hyperlink to the Deloitte study, there's NO data in this at all. What's the deal?
- jaekwon 10y agoWe're not even using the right metric system, so our export abilities are crippled, right? I remember trying to find parts for my 3d printer in the US.
- 0xcde4c3db 10y agoMost stuff is at least secondarily labeled in metric units. In many cases the metric measurement is actually the authoritative one in the specifications and contracts, even when it's in smaller print or parentheses on the package.
- analog31 10y agoTry McMaster-Carr. Virtually everything is available in US and metric units. There is less variety of things like metric fasteners, because designs have improved to use fewer weird parts. Since almost everything is designed in CAD and manufactured by CNC these days, the real distinction between US and metric units has practically vanished. A dimension is a floating point number.
- yc-kraln 10y agoWho cares? China has more middle-class citizens than the US has citizens. Manufacturing does not move the needle on people's quality of life.
- throwaway2017ab 10y agoWhat a joke ! Why is this even on hackernews ? Does anyone even know the economics of manufacturing and why China is on top of this ?
- KON_Air 10y agoAnglo-Saxons think they can retreat to their shell and prosper again. Great news. Because it never ends badly.
- edblarney 10y agoSince when did Anglo-Saxons ever live in a shell? Since when (post-Renaissance) did Anglo-Saxons not prosper?
- cynosurelabs 10y agoI totally agree with that!
- norswap 10y agoBut is it good news?
- LargeCompanies 10y agoMaking America Great Again...
- dx034 10y agoAccording to the report [1], the US is already at 99.5% competitiveness of China. It's not a big shift they project. Don't really see why many companies should shift their production if they haven't already. [1] https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/manufacturing/us-gmci.pdf https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/us/Documents/...
- threeseed 10y agoNo Trump will cement the US's inevitable trend towards mediocrity. Manufacturing are not the jobs of the future. They are too easy to automate and will far too easily flow to cheaper countries with lots of young, skilled people e.g. China, India. What should be happening is a massive skills and education investment in the US combined with some sort of basic income.
- LargeCompanies 10y agoThat was written Sarcastically
- didibus 10y agoWe could just all stop buying made in China. Seriously, all these things are laws of economics. You can't bypass them, as they are natural laws. Economics is the study of human motivation. Motivation is what dictates what we do and don't, it rules our actions. If you wanted to have an impact, be conscious about your actions, pay that extra cost and buy local if you care so much, and don't buy at all if there's no local options.
- herbst 10y agoI live in europe. I'd assume 80% of the things i own are mostly made in china. Maybe 19% are made within the EU and 1% everywhere else. I cant recall a single product i own that was producted or even manufactured in the U.S. therfore i have a hard time believing that title.