Fed Locally

Much has been written on the decline of manufacturing in America. Whether this be due to the rise of tech and service sectors, the innate sweat-shop-loving avarice of capitalism, or the increasing encroachment of foreign competitors (China), it must be said that the state of American manufacturing is not what it once was and there is evidence to show that what we have is continuing to be lost.

This is something I know my esteemed colleague (or blogeague) will disagree with me on – but I believe that manufacturing must be the foundation of any economy. My colleague’s attitude has basically been ‘we lost it, we are never getting it back.’ Well I view that as defeatist and actually damning to the United States’ position as a world power. An economy cannot stay afloat in the long term on a sea of insurance, credit card debt, stock, lawsuits and software.

There are two main reasons why manufacturing is needed. The first reason is employment. It seems like not a week goes by when you don’t hear news of another factory closing its doors or another company downsizing its American workforce. Not every American is going to go to law school, let’s face it. People will always need what manufacturers manufacture, and as long as those industries remain on US soil, it will provide steady employment for many.

The second reason is the fundamental nature of manufacturing – that is, actually creating a wanted, tangible thing out of materials that possess inherent value. Every $1.00 in manufactured goods generates an additional $1.37 worth of additional economic activity - more than any other economic sector. Also, manufacturers have been doing approximately ¾ of private sector research and development. As we continue to lose our base, we will continue to lose the patents and innovations that give America an edge.

I remember when the Dot-Com bubble burst. Venture capitalists and other investors were throwing millions of dollars into CONCEPTS and IDEAS. I know some of these former start-up people. At most, a unique algorithm existed along with a website. It was like a gold rush of thought. However, there were no real goods… no real products involved, only services or the promise of service. Granted, the Internet in 2006 is very different than the Internet in 2000. Old theories of what was possible have been laid to rest and individuals have discovered more sober-minded ways of generating money through websites. Now we hear talk of the ‘housing’ bubble preparing to burst, with the downsides of risky adjustable mortgages and “exotic” loans coming back to bite.

In North Carolina, where I live, manufacturing holds a 23% share of the state economy. That places us tied for fourth with Ohio, behind Indiana (30%), Oregon (28%), and Kentucky (26%). Now our country as a whole is approaching a time where we will lose the critical mass of production that makes us a World Leader, and we will not be able to get it back. If factories close and jobs leave the country in North Carolina, what exactly is going to replace 23% of the state economy? Are we going to swipe more tech-jobs from Silicon Valley? Are we going to boost tourism and hope to attain the money that citizens of other states are making? Now think about that on a national scale.

It was only until World War II that the United States finally escaped the Great Depression. Under Roosevelt, war spending doubled the Gross National Product… and America afterwards enjoyed a period of incomparable economic supremacy. Of course, rationing and social programs contributed, but war spending was far greater than any New Deal spending.

Stalin said, “I want to tell you, from the Russian point of view, what the President and the United States have done to win the war. The most important things in this war are machines. The United States has proven that it can turn out from 8,000 to 10,000 airplanes per month. Russia can only turn out, at most, 3,000 a month. England turns out 3,000 to 3,500…The United States, therefore, is the country of machines. Without the use of these machines…we would lose the war.”

I do not profess to be a genius of economics. Economics can at times be as much about philosophy as it can be about facts. But all economic theories will be judged by their outcome. I think it is fairly obvious to see the importance of maintaining, and in fact, energizing our manufacturing base. Today, intra-industry innovation must take place and manufacturers must work to make themselves more efficient in order to contend with rising costs and the appeal of moving overseas. Globalization is all well and good, but let’s have a little bit of self-preservation here, a little bit of economic nationalism! Of course, pure capitalism is not going to solve the problem. Our federal and local governments, both executive and legislative, are responsible for protecting and encouraging the manufacturing base in this country.

- Hamilton

Partisanship in Congress is increasingly becoming a problem. I blame the moderates. Not the moderate Congressmen, the Blue Dog Democrats, etc. Moderate voters. There may be flaws in the system we have in America, but there is an easy way to fix it: voting. The far right and far left are able to control the different parties not through lies and deciet, but because they care enough to register in advance, know who they want in office, and show up and vote at every election.

They don’t need to be told they can change the world. No one has to scream at them to “Vote or die”. They don’t complain that one vote never changed anything. They don’t analyze the exact percentage their vote counts in a national election. They don’t throw their hands up and shrug that “my vote really doesn’t matter”.

What they do is vote. They add one drop to the ocean, and one grain of sand to the beach. If every moderate and rational and reasonable person decided to throw caution in the wind and just care enough to find someone who best fit their vision for this country, not just for President, but for Senator and Representative and State representation, then we could all be better off and happier with our government.

There are a million reasons not to bother, we may even debate them here from time to time. But there is one reason to bother: It can and does matter.

- Burr

I for one am growing tired of groups such as the ACLU claiming that requiring proof of citizenship at a polling place would place an unfair burden on certain people groups. Indeed, the ACLU thinks it is discriminatory to require somebody to prove their citizenship when registering to vote and when voting. Can ANYBODY explain to me how requiring proof of citizenship or photo identification would put anyone at a disadvantage?

A law was just thrown out in Ohio based on this, and controversy has long been surging in Southwestern states (read: Hispanic immigrants.) What is the lesser of two evils… encouraging somebody to show/obtain/drive home and get a driver’s license/social security card/passport/etc. or allowing non-citizens to vote in an American election?

If racism is the issue, is it not racist to assume that certain people groups would be oppressed by being asked to provide proof of citizenship? How much more basic can you get? You need neither a car nor the desire to drive to acquire photo ID from your local DMV… and there are multiple forms of acceptable proof. I do not think it is asking too much of the American people to have some form of proof that they are citizens of this country in their home, and I do not think it is asking too much to have the American people produce said proof at infrequent elections.

I fully understand the argument that it would be offensive to be asked by a random poll worker to prove citizenship based on your external appearance or physical characteristics. Here is a simple solution! Have every single person who registers to vote or shows up at a polling place prove that they are a citizen! Ensuring the integrity of the voting system is more important than both an inconvenience and the potential to hurt an individual’s feelings.

I personally take great pride in voting, and would not be at all put off by having to prove my identity. I have to do worse each time I get on an airplane, and I fly a lot more frequently than I vote!

- Hamilton

Why are Republicans blaming Clinton for North Korea testing their nuke? Why not blame George Bush Sr. for the War in Iraq?

International politics are about as complicated and intricate as you can hope to find in the realm of human interaction. It seems to be the common perception from all quarters that this fiasco is really all about China and its rise on the world stage. No matter how super this superpower is, its influence over world affairs is not and has never been complete.

How about focusing on what our response should be? Stopping the proliferation of nukes is probably the most immediately important task that the US and the world has. I don’t think I am going out on a limb when I say everyone across the spectrum wants this situation resolved without an arms race in the Pacific.

- Burr

The bill to raise the federal minimum wage- one of the “first 100 hours” legislation promised by the new Democratic majority in the House- passed with a vote of 315-116.

First lets get some facts about minimum wage jobs out of the way- from the Dept. of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics (link): 1.5% (1.9 million) of the total work force makes the federal minimum wages or lower. Of these workers, over a quarter (26.1 or 0.5 million) are age 16-19. The vast majority of these workers (60.1 or almost 1 million) have “Food preparation and serving related occupations”. As of 2007, the minimum wage is at least a dollar higher in 34 states.

This is how I read the whole situation: First, minimum wage laws affect a small percentage of the work force. Most of the people getting at or below are waiters and waitresses, and there are exceptions carved out for tipped workers. If we want the law to have any impact, getting rid of those exceptions would do more than just raising the minimum wage. Second, it could be argued that if you raise the minimum wage, you’re fighting illegal immigration. The reason there are “jobs Americans don’t want” is because the company’s that offer those jobs aren’t willing to make them appeal to Americans by paying them more. If they are forced to raise wages, more Americans might want them. Finally, there is the unresolved issue about the relationship between minimum wage and inflation. Does raising wages just make everything more expensive and leave everyone right where they started?

My conclusion: Minimum wage laws could make sense to fight illegal immigration…but would probably be one of the most inefficient ways of doing so. Better ways are out there. I’m reluctant to go the libertarian way and say economics forces should take care of everything. I just don’t trust them to do this, as those meatpacking plant raids have shown, letting the market take care of things would exacerbate the problem. Most states have minimum wages above the federal standard. Minimum wages should reflect the cost of living, and that can vary widely from state to state. States, not the federal government, should take charge of minimum wage laws. This means the sixteen states that have the federal minimum wage or below should actively determine what a “living wage” means in their state, and act accordingly.

- Burr

Yesterday, USA Today reported that tobacco giant R.J. Reynolds (second largest in America) has agreed to a U.S. ban on certain flavored cigarettes that are ‘marketed to youths’, according to officials and lawmakers.

The tobacco giant settled the broad investigation of domestic sales of the flavored products without paying any penalty. The company agreed to stop identifying cigarettes with candy, fruit, desserts or alcoholic beverage names, imagery or ads, according to a statement from New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer. The company will also stop using scented promotional material, including scrach-and-sniff samples. “Selling candy, fruit and sweetened, alcohol-flavored cigarettes is downright irresponsible, given the appeal of these products to youth,” Spitzer said. “The attorneys general, together with the public health community, will not tolerate Reynolds’ shameful ploys to introduce our children to smoking and to lure them into a lifetime of addiction to its deadly products.”