LyrArc Article Gist
Peter Goodman who covers the consequences in the lives of ordinary people of the industrial changes going on around us, gives this report from Michigan. He shows how today's Michigan, was home to Henry Ford's automobile plants that made it a major part of the industrial revolution in the US after 1910, when Ford's first assembly line manufacturing was set up in Highland Park, Detroit. Industrial growth till 1960 made the US the leading industrial nation in the world. Followed by Japanese imports and auto manufacturing shifting to Asia and Mexico, that led to deindustrialization and neglect in Michigan and the midwestern US.  Key aspects of resurgence today is coming from lessons learned in the period of deindustrialization. From labor and management not working together, from huge pension obligations and costs that had to be overcome, that made existing wage and cost structures uncompetitive with Asian manufacturing. Labor concessions in the last decade have made a rearrangement of cost structure possible, yet along with the financial crisis of 2008 further worsened worker incomes. The first steps of a return for Michigan to its role in the early industrialization of America, the new labor contract negotiated in 2023, the support of president Biden and the government, the investment in the new technology of electric car manufacturing by Ford, General Motors and Stellantis. Goodman shows how the state, federal government, community colleges and other educational institutions training workers and students, and car companies are working together to promote interests of workers and communities. There is uncertainty created about the fewer parts in the electric car manufacturing process, automation advances, and fewer jobs. Yet the process is a transition over many years and this is accepted by the Biden administration and by the industry as it responds to slower demand for electric cars in 2024. This provides the time to bring up new training programs for workers, enable the funding of new research into battery technologies that would bring down the cost and make electric car prices accessible to the wider population. Uncertainty and fears about the transition are counteracted by the effort the Biden administration is making to bring up all manufacturing and to make large investments in American manufacturing.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
GM will invest $3 billion in electric car production in Michigan. The Orion Assembly plant near Detroit  will produce electric pickup trucks- renovation costing $2 billion and bringing 1500 jobs. A new battery cell factory near Lansing would bring $2 billion in investment in 50-50 joint partnership with LG Energy Solutions creating 1200 jobs. Ford is investing in other states, with $11 billion investment in building 3 battery plants- 2 in Kentucky, one in Tennessee near Memphis. Tesla is investing in Austin, Texas. GM says it is revamping existing factories to save $10 billion through 2030. The new GM investments are part of $35 billion in spending on electric cars through 2025.  For the US as a whole these investments change the look of the auto industry from one that in the past put factories in China and Mexico for gas and diesel vehicles. The shift to electric is now being taken as an opportunity by the Biden administration to encourage auto companies to make a new beginning and speedily build the future electric car base in the homeland itself. So that American workers and families come first in the great American tradition. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Matthew Slaughter of the Tuck School, Dartmouth, says that the principle of comparitive advantage should determine what America exports and imports. Under comparitive advantage each country concentrates its energies on the particular goods and services that it does better than other countries. Free trade operates under the idea of comparitive advantage, but in practice it is quite different than its textbook economic counterpart. It is constantly changing as new countries or industries in different countries try to upset the existing pattern. Under a textbook example Airbus should not exist because Boeing was the most efficient manufacturer upto that time, and new entrants in a industry are nurtured for years with support from the governments of their countries. And in some situations the governments may exclude certain companies or industries from support such as Komatsu and construction equipment in postwar Japan, and Infosys and software outsourcing in India, and still survive and grow. Under comparitive advantage Japan should still be importing construction equipment from Caterpillar in the US, and there would be no serious competition in that industry. This would work to the detriment of the principle of competition in free trade which is just as important to free trade as the idea of comparitive advantage, with new entrants in an industry upsetting the old way of doing things and creating price/quality improvements. Slaughter simply pulls back off the shelf the old idea of comparitive advantage without seriously considering its real life aspects. Without dealing with trade distortion from currency manipulation, from the impact on jobs, without considering the continuing critical role of manufacturing in developed economies to provide the standards of living for a large middle class, and creating the kind of society that people of developed countries aspire to. He mentions GE's Immelt and the President's Council on Jobs, but makes no effort to engage Immelt 's statement in his recent op-ed article in the Washington Post, that the concept of transitioning from a export-oriented economic powerhouse to a services led consumption based economy could be done without loss of jobs, prosperity and prestige, was fundamentally wrong. He has only one line for manufacturing's role in America's economy. This line says knowledge intensive industries such as education and software are just as important as manufacturing, but fails to mention that manufacturing has received less attention in recent decades. In so doing he is discounting his own profession of concern for the high rate of joblessness in the U.S., and the need for a new focus on manufacturing in the U.S. to reverse that trend. By saying that imports are not a sign of failure but can raise standards of living, and leaving it at that, Slaughter does not acknowledge that consumer debt that US consumers have taken on in the process certainly affects future prospects for the US economy. And he makes no mention of the need for rebalancing the world economy, which is exactly how free trade should work ideally. Countries that have high imports export more to rebalance the world trading system, as currency valuations are allowed to adjust makig their exports more attractive. By not taking into account the realities of free trade, and the need for practical measures to rebalance without policy induced distortions by state run economies, Slaughter ignores the idea of free trade that works as it should and for all countries. The irony is that Immelt's own committment to jobs and competitiveness has been questioned in online blogs and most recently by an editorial in the Wall Street Journal on January 26, 2011, titled "The Misallocators." That editorial refers to the outsize role of GE Capital in GE's earnings during the past decade, and the lack of credibility of a focus on competitiveness and jobs that this creates for GE. It mentions the loss of 34,000 GE jobs in the US during the last decade. ...