Advertisement

June 19, 2013

American Manufacturing and Innovation

An article by Louis Uchitelle in the February 13, 2011 New York Times posits that the decline of American manufacturing will likely lead to a decline in American innovation. Alas, Mr. Uchitelle’s premise, shared, I think, by all too many of his readers, is dubious at best.

Mr. Uchitelle bases his “American manufacturing is in decline” premise on two misused, or at least misunderstood, statistics. First, he points out, correctly, that American manufacturing employment has been in a more or less steady decline since the 1950s. Second, he points out, let’s assume correctly, that manufacturing, as a percentage of gross domestic product, has also declined since the 1950s. Neither of these statistics addresses the real questions, to wit what has happened to the absolute value of American manufacturing output, or the relevant share of global manufacturing output, over the last decades? The answers to these questions might surprise you: the value of US manufactured goods (in constant dollars) has skyrocketed since the 1950s; and the American share of global manufacturing output has held more or less steady at around 20% since 1980.

What gives is simple: productivity. And productivity gains are, at the end of they day, the engine that drives wealth creation in any economy – well, any economy not based predominately on exporting increasingly scarce raw materials (think Saudi Arabia ).

This is not to say that displaced manufacturing workers – Mr. Uchitelle’s story plays off the recent closure of the last flatware manufacturing plant in the United States – do not pay a price in what to them is the only “real” economy – their own and their families. But it is to suggest that when considered at the scale of America as a whole, the “decline” of American manufacturing has been much overstated, and in fact has been accompanied by enormous increases in real manufacturing output and even bigger – and largely innovation-driven – increases in gross domestic product and income.

One more point (Mr. Uchitelle must have been having a bad day when he wrote his article): our intrepid reporter reports that while innovations like Apple’s IPhone may be designed in America, they are made in Asia. Sorry, they are assembled in Asia, but the large majority of components that make up an assembled IPhone are manufactured in places like the United States and Western Europe . And the value/cost of those components vastly exceeds the value/costs of the labor to assemble them in China.

The point of all this, I think, is simple, if perhaps a bit subtle. It’s not the value of the inputs that determines a nation’s wealth, it’s the value of the outputs. Doing more with less, whether we are talking about manufacturing or services, is a good thing, not a bad thing. And it is something that Americans still do quite well, thank you.

© MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP

About the Author

paul a. jones, of counsel, michael best law firm
Of Counsel

Paul Jones is Of Counsel to the Business Practice Group and Co-chair of the Venture BestTM team. Mr. Jones writes a blog found here: http://www.venturebest.com. His practice concentrates on representing emerging technology and life sciences companies in financing and other strategic transactions as well as general corporate matters. He also represents venture capital firms and other investors in emerging technology and other high impact businesses.

608-283-0125

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.