Friday | June 29, 2007

Post-Sputnik

A few weeks ago I had a pretty profound conversation with Phillip Lane of New America Energy at the Design Show held at the Cleveland Institute of Art. Phillip is working on a very provocative electric car concept and had a small car factory in the City of East Cleveland. Cool stuff. The car is a beautifully designed vehicle that holds great promise and appeal. What struck me from the conversation was a quick comment from Phillip about how "post-sputnik, there has been only one national policy on manufacturing....to outsource it to other countries." My father is a machinist and for many years he had a steady job at one firm. For the past ten years he has moved from one job to another. He is an amazing craftsman and the instability in the country's manufacturing base has prompted personal reflection.

 Now, I have been blessed with a job that puts me on the front lines of development in Cleveland, and it strikes me daily how robust the manufacturing sector once was in Cleveland. Name one neighborhood in the city that does not have at least one old manufacturing facility literally in the neighborhood. Hell, I live in an old knitting mill that has been converted to gorgeous living space. But, I suspect this region would much rather have the economic output of the factory to modern apartments (a region should anyway). Consider this:

 -City of Cleveland was once the printing capital of the world (most of the buildings along St. Clair and Superior Avenue were printing factories - i.e. - Tower Press Building);

 -City of Cleveland was once the clothing capital for the U.S. - the signs of this are everywhere - just look at the painted sign on the building on the corner of W. 9th and Lake (clothing manufacturing and warehousing);

 -The City of Cleveland and its manufacturing base fed the heavy industries found in Detroit and Pittsburgh (these three cities - Cleveland, Pittsburgh and Detroit - built the U.S., one would think we would get move love), and;

 -Consider all of the manufacturing skill and master tradesmen we have lost in this region because we have not invested and or protected our manufacturing base. Skill merits a high wage and when a region begins to lose its craftsmen wages begin to fall (in many cases in dramatic fashion).

Given that there will probably not be a national manufacturing policy in the near future, we should at least attempt to craft one locally. We cannot affort to lose our last remaining manufacturing base. It is imperative, even for the local and region technology industry to have a stong, growing manufacturing base in the Cleveland area. This goes on beyond national security - truth is the U.S. should have the manufacturing capabilities to protect the defense industries at least - but speaks to the wealth of the country and, for us here in Cleveland, our proud city.

Posted by Tech Czar at 11:45:13 | Permanent Link | Comments (3) |
Comments
1 - "a national manufacturing policy?" This sounds like something a socialist Democrat would say. Do you think government is the solution to the problem? Private industry either exists or doesn't exist because there is a market for it. The level of wages depends upon that market, also. When the level of wages are artificially inflated neyond what the market can support, either cheaper workers are sought or the market will cease to exist. Unionism, the concept that workers "own" their jobs in perpetuity and should be paid higher and higher wages without regard to market demand for their labor, is why there are no more factory jobs in Cleveland. The manufacturing base has been outsourced because the level of wages in America became too high, relative to wages in other countries, for American industry to remain in business. This has lead our corporate and national leaders to become globalists who don't give a damn about where our products are manufactured, as long as they're manufactured profitably. Cheap foreign labor is what's driving globalists like George Bush to collude with Vincente Fox (when he was still President of Mexico) and Paul Martin (when he was Prime Minister of Canada) to eradicate U.S. borders and combine America with Mexico and Canada in a North American Union in which all three countries would share each other's labor pool and economy. It's the end of the world as we know it. (Comment this)

Written by: Anonymous at 2007/06/30 - 23:10:18
2 - I'd have more respect for you if you were writing this from your office in city hall. For good or bad the people of the City of Cleveland elected a mayor. Your dreams are admirable and wonderful, but that's all they are without people like you to turn them into reality.
The view is always better from the cheap seats. You should have stayed and helped to make things better. (Comment this)

Written by: Anonymous at 2008/01/04 - 08:40:28
3 - I have been involved off-and-on in the manufacturing sector for more than 30 years. I can tell you that the the amount of bad management making bad decisions that I've witnessed explains a great deal in what has gone wrong in American manufacturing. Prior to the early 1980s, our economy was designed (for better or worse) around a Sales approach -- make a superior product and sell it. Then came the Marketing approach and the beginning of America's downfall -- make any product desirable to the consumer through any means possible. In the meantime, other countries continued to press forward with higher quality and cost containment. It did not take long for American companies to lose out. But this hasn't stopped the Marketing approach from continuing, even while there is growing backlash against it in areas such as fast foods, the hip-hop (anti-social and demoralizingly) dominated music industry, and our fashion industry -- all who are obsessed with profit over ethical boundaries and social responsibility.

Our current president did create a manufacturing czar a few years ago. What happened to that office, I do not know. Our current administration has been a disaster, against proactive progress in alternative energy (one can ignore the the pittance of funding given as mere gestures), against technology advancement, against better educational funding, ad nauseum.

What we need is not a national manufacturing policy. What we need is a dramatic reform in how government offers funding for innovation -- innovative and promising technology, innovative research, and innovative talent. We have let down our current and future engineers by allowing our innovation technologies to be choked by old-time and gigantic self-interest PACs influencing various areas of government to nonchalantly ignore promising technology that would threaten to set new paradigms.

Bad decisions within corporations (big and small) and within government are responsible for our current state of economic turmoil. And so many of those bad decisions were made in the name of short term profit, in the name of market share and stock options, without regard for longevity, without regard for synergy, and without regard to social responsibility.

John Doughtry (ApotheosisMusic@Gmail.com)
 (Comment this)

Written by: Anonymous at 2008/01/04 - 11:35:23
Write a comment