One of the largest unions is the United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW).   The new UAW president Bob King said in his acceptance speech that the UAW will “pound on Toyota until they recognized the first-amendment right to come into the UAW”.  Mr. King goes on to say that “We’re going to do whatever is necessary to insure that Toyota abandons its anti-union efforts,” This includes picketing Toyota dealers.  Mr. King wants to show the value of having UAW members as the workers by doing everything in his power to prevent Toyota from selling cars.   It is not like Toyota is moving production back to Japan.  Toyota is moving production to Mississippi.  The problem is that the jobs are not union jobs. 

It is not that the UAW has not tried to unionize works at Toyota, and other Asian manufacturer’s plant. In an article from 2007, UAW And Why Honda And Toyota Workers Are Not Interested, covered why workers at the non-unionized plants rejected the union.  In the case of the Toyota plant in Georgetown, Kentucky, it turns out that the workers are paid more and get better benefits then the average UAW automobile plant worker.  If higher pay and better benefits is Toyota’s strategy for keeping unions out of their plants, more power to them. 

The UAW has a product called union membership and it has a cost called union dues.  The product is designed to get the buyer, union member, higher pay and better benefits. In effect, union membership is like a job warrantee, and unfortunately for unions, more and more people do not think that they need the product.

The reason why I mention these two dealers specifically is because I asked them both the same question and got two different answers.  When I asked him if the problems at Toyota lead to increase in their foot traffic and sales I was told “no” by the Honda sales person, and “yes” by the Ford salesperson.  I admit my survey’s sampling size was small, but I thought their respective business would have definitely risen. 

 So why would Ford see an increase and Honda not?  I can think of a few explanations;  First, more Americans are reading my blog and are making a patriotic choice with their purchases.  Second, some consumer lump Honda, and other Japanese manufacturers, in with Toyota concerning safety.   Lastly, this is just a continuation of the sales momentum domestic manufacturers, lead by Ford, have been enjoying for the past several months. 

So is there any proof of an actual sales shift consistent with my two person survey?   Numbers from January show the U.S. trade deficit dropped.  A major reason, beside less oil imports, was a reduction in auto imports.   The trade deficit with both the European Union and Japan saw a significant drop, 56.3% and 27.3% respectively, in the monthly deficit.  Both drops were mostly attributed  to lower auto imports.

Overall, U.S. automobile sales have been mediocre at best, even for domestic brands.  What is good is that the domestic manufacturers are doing relatively better.  The surge in domestic sale comes at a good time for both the U.S. manufacturers and the economy.   The comparative quality of the domestic nameplates has improve a great deal over the past decade.  From initial quality to cost of ownership, domestic brands have, in many cases, overtaken their international competitors.  This has a twofold impact on sales.  First, there is great word of mouth for domestic nameplates.  When my daughter mentioned that she was looking for a car, one of her friends told her how much he loved his Ford Focus.  These factors will greatly increase the number of customers who return to Ford and GM for their next auto.   Another more important reason that this surge is important is that our economy needs it.  The increase domestic production needs has already started to add ten’s of thousand of manufacturing jobs back into our economy.  In addition, the reinstatement of over 600 “to be close” GM dealerships keeps thousands of more jobs which would have been lost.

There is a significant chance that we will have a double dip recession.   Just look at January’s trade numbers: As our imports dropped so did our exports.  It seems that only a few countries are producing more and/or consuming more in any significant way.  China continues undeterred with their global economic game playing, which will artificially improve their growth while subtracting growth from the rest of the world.   The financial crisis in Greece, even though their economy is relatively small, will drag overall growth in Europe down.   Although the worst might be over, there are still significant problems to solve.  As with the first recession, and even if there is no double dip, it is imperative that we re-double our efforts to buy American.  Our country’s standard of living depends on it.

Many of the comments put the blame for the problems squarely at the feet of the Bush administration and/or pronounced capitalism a failure.  Although some Bush policies might have exacerbated the problem, they certainly were not the cause of the problems.  As for the people that think capitalism is a failure, I am not sure what planet those people are from. 

Economic bubbles have the characteristic of inflating net worth.  The increase of net worth in the 1990’s, at 58%, is well above the average net worth increase of for the previous three decades, 35%.  Much of the 1990’s increase came at the end of the decade during the height of the bubble. If you ascribe the difference between the averages, the 1990’s vs. the previous thirty years, as artificial then the 1990’s really gave us an increase of about 22% in net worth.  That 22% increase is hidden in the loss of the net worth due to the collapse of the 1990’s bubble.  The 22% is lowest of the past four decades, but still not that bad.

I am not sure that capitalism could be considered a failure when our economy is still the world’s largest, our standard of living is exceptional, and most of the world’s population still wants to move here.  That is not to say our economy is trouble free.  We have a debt that is way out of hand, our country’s health care costs are out of line with the rest of the world, and as a country we spent the last decade plus putting more money into short term economic activity stimulators, such as housing, instead of long term economic stimulators, such as manufacturing.  To put it simply, we owe more than we should, we spend too much on our health care and our nation was more interested in building McMansions then manufacturing.  To be fair, this process started more than ten years ago. 

Our loss of economic focus on manufacturing was encouraged by economists telling us of the “innovation economy” and economic policy encouraging us to spend instead of save.  Unfortunately, as I documented in one of my first posts on this site, the “innovation economy” is a myth.  Since we were not saving our nation had to borrow from the rest of the world.  Combining this with the misdirection of resources caused our nation to see its manufacturing, and other, jobs to leave and never come back. 

In the end, I would not call this past decade “lost”.  I would call it more of an “obfuscated” decade.  By that I mean it is unclear how bad, or good, the decade was.  I use the old saying “nothing is as good as it looks or as bad as it seems” to describe this past decade.    What is clear, however, is that we must learn from the events of the decade and improve our economy in this next decade.

I know it is unrealistic to ask people to go 100% “Made in America”, but it does not hurt to try.  I realize some families will want that iTouch, PS3, or some item that can only be imported.  I have a suggestion for those families; put off that purchase and switch to one of the many items that have domestic alternatives.   Whether you are buying socks, handbags, ties, jeans, a coffee maker, or a vacuum cleaner there are “Made in America” choices.  Even in electronics you can often find a domestic alternative.  If you have to have a product that is foreign made, then see if it is assembled here and/or the company does its R&D here.    Using the iPod, as discussed in my post “The Innovation Myth”, it is better that some of the money, more than just to the retailer and importer, stay in the United States then leave our economy.

Putting off that foreign purchase and focusing on domestic items helps our economy now, when we need it most.  When the economy gets better, then make that foreign purchase.  That way you help our economy now and also give holiday joy, to people you will never know, by creating a job for another American.  Also, please talk to your friends, neighbors and co-workers to do the same.   It is especially critical now because America, and most of the world, is purchasing less.  Each domestic purchase matters.

As the name implies, Made In USA Certified Inc. certifies that the content of products that are labeled as “Made in the U.S.” are truly “Made in the U.S.”.  As the company’s website points out, it is legal for a company to label a product “Made in America”  even when components are from other countries, this is because they can include Mexico and Canada in their calculation of domestic production.  Some Central American countries can also be counted.

Made In USA Certified Inc. also certifies other aspects of the business.   Some companies have their R&D in another country and/or outsource parts of their operations.  Where the majority of the “office” work is done does not affect whether a product can use the “Made in the U.S.A.” label.  This means that “Made in the U.S.A.” on a box does not always mean the same thing.

Julie Reiser, the President and Founder of Made In USA Certified Inc., is working to address this lack of a true standard with the “Made in U.S.” tag manufacturers put on their boxes.  Her company requires that a product “must be certified as having all or virtually all of their core components manufactured in the U.S.”  In addition, there is an added requirement that a products assembly be exclusively be done in the U.S.

Every week there are articles about product recalls due to inferior safety standards and controls in other countries.  These types of problems are less likely to happen with domestically.  From baby formula to dog food, other countries do not have the standards, and oversight, that we do.  That is why Made In USA Certified Inc. is even more stringent when it comes to consumables.  If something is to be ingested, whether by a human or an animal, Made In USA Certified requires that the core components are 100% U.S.A. made.  Being certified as virtually 100% U.S.A. made provides that additional level of comfort knowing that your products are truly safe.

Currently, the Made In USA Certified Inc. label can be found on packaging and websites of many companies.  There are two companies I want to identify.  The first is Tough Traveler. They design and manufacturer baby carriers, luggage, backpacks and more.  The other company is Franklin Clocks. Franklin Clocks offers a complete range of Clocks and Time Systems for Commercial, Educational, Government, Health Care and Industrial applications.

Most of my readers are already aware that manufacturing jobs are critical for our nation’s economy.  Having products certified to be fully “Made in the U.S.” ensures that more jobs are created domestically and that our economy benefits the most.  An added bonus is safety.

Companies like Made In USA Certified help raise the awareness of the importance of U.S. manufacturing, something we should all be working towards.  So now, if I have a choice between a “Made in the USA” product and a “Made In USA Certified” product I can make a more informed decision.  That way I can be sure that my purchase does the most possible good for our economy.

Two specific cases are the burdensome national debt in the U.S. and the steel bubble in China.  While the U.S. stimulus is probably why we are seeing some life in the economy, many components of the stimulus did not provide the best bang for the buck.  In China, while some of the stimulus was used to increase domestic consumption, a significant portion of the stimulus was used to keep manufacturing humming even though there was little demand.

In the U.S. stimulus, money went to many initiatives that had little impact on the rest of the economy.  For example, the $2 million earmarked for swine odor research in Iowa.  As a stimulus, this project was an ineffective use of money and should have either been used in a better way or just not spent.  On the other hand, money spent on improving the country’s infrastructure has great value.  Local jobs are produced that require a resource such as steel and cement which creates other jobs.  Add to this the economic value of a better infrastructure and you get the most out of every dollar.  Admitted, the percentage of money that went to projects similar to the swine odor research was small, but that is not the point.  The point is that the benefit of the marginal projects did not justify the potential future damage.

China is estimated to have loss over 20 million jobs due to the global recession. Since they could not afford additional job losses, stimulus money went into keeping steel, and other, plants operating and people working.  The end result is that China is now producing more steel then ever and they have nowhere to sell it.  Steel industry analysts do not expect world demand to reach 2007 levels until 2012.  What China is doing is maintaining excess capacity and compounding the problem by producing an excessive stockpile, which only exacerbates the excess capacity problem.

In the end, the U.S. and China will have to deal with their own problems due to their stimulus packages.  What it means to the global economy ten years from now is anyone guess.

Whenever somebody argues against something using racist comments it always makes me wonder whether they are against the issue or the person/people. This makes me wonder how many “Teabaggers” are there for the issues and how many are there to protest again the President.

The problem is exacerbated by the fact that some people and organizations are either turning a blind eye to or, even worse, encouraging the racist component of the “Teabaggers”.  In a Pew Research Center for the People & the Press report, http://people-press.org/report/543/, a recent poll indicated that only about a quarter (26%) now say that news organizations are careful that their reporting is not politically biased, compared with 60% who say news organizations are politically biased. 

Even if the overall percentage of racist protesters is small, it has a broad, and often detrimental, effect on public opinion, politics, and our economy.  When a commentator on a cable news channel says that 1.7 million people (really only about 65,000) “Teabaggers” protested, some people will be swayed to go along with the crowd.   Politicians, whose job is to pander to their bases, will get a distorted view of what the populous wants.  The two political sides will get more polarized in their views, and the chances for the two sides working together to produce real change diminishes.  This hurts our economy in the long run since it reduces the effectiveness of an already slow moving process. 

Take healthcare reform.  Everyone, from a majority of individuals to most business groups, agree something should be done, but no real collaboration is being done.  In the end, something that is critical to our economy, and specifically our manufacturers, will either be left alone or changed in a trivial way.  More manufacturing, and other, jobs will leave our shores never to come back.  It should not be so hard to find a solution to a problem that everyone agrees exists.

Your Google Adsense code should be here, but you forgot to edit the plugins/adsense.php file and replace the code there with your own.

A country’s government is there to serve their citizens based on the country’s style of government.  Different styles of government have a different set of pros and cons, but for the most part governments work to make life better for the majority of their citizens.  Sometimes governments go too far in their efforts and loss sight of what their overall goal is. 

Although I could pick from about a half a dozen countries that are either already jumping the shark, or are about to, I am going to focus on France.  France has long been a country on the cusp of jumping the shark.  Unfortunately, I think that they have now  jumped the shark. 

In documented in an article in Industry Week, France Threatens Boycott on U.S. Auto Parts Maker Over Plant Closure, the government of France is trying to force a company to sell a piece of their business to a French group in order to prevent the closing of a parts plant in France.  In the case of the Molex plant in southern Villemur-sur-Tarn, the company has decided that for many reasons, including safety and lower costs, the production needed to be moved to plants in the United States.

It is one thing to financially back a deal, or even take an equity stake in a business, but to threaten to do damage to a business if they do not agree to a deal is something more prone to criminal organization then a government.  Obviously the deal being offered to Molex was not good enough for them to sell that piece of the business.  As a business, Molex has both a right and a responsibility to do what is best for the business.  France does not have the right to use extortion to force a company to do a financially suspect deal.

Just by threatening a boycott, France has jumped the shark.   Let’s hope that they see their error and jump back.  If not, our government has to do its job or they might be jumping the shark.

I previously posted about pent up demand for automobiles and my belief that Americans want to start buying again. With the recession reaching the bottom, the CARS program was the little nudge needed to get many potential car buyers to buy. From a domestic manufacturing perspective, the CARS program is a great success. My only major issues with the program are that the individual rebates are too large and there was no additional incentive to buy hybrids.

The CARS program is needed for many reasons. The most important reasons are to get the automobile selling, in significant numbers, again and to incent buyers to buy more fuel efficient vehicles. People did buy, as shown by the fact that the program “sold out” in only a couple of weeks. As for improving fuel efficiency, the Transportation Department reported that for the first 80,000 rebate application the average fuel efficiency of the new vehicles was about 61% better than the average for the vehicles they were replacing.

A big plus for domestic companies is that out of the above applications, 47% were for GM, Ford or Chrysler. This is great since it is better than the 45% those companies had over the past few months. The real good news is that 60% of the new vehicles were cars, which the imports tended have an even larger share. In any case, over 50% of the vehicles sold for this program were manufactured in the United States.

Did the government give too big of an incentive? Yes. Although this is not really a domestic manufacturing issue, should the incentive be scaled to provide more of an incentive to hybrids? Yes. I can live with these flaws? Yes. The vehicles are selling again and the incentive goes to individual families. Overall the program stimulates the economy, reduces the need for imported oil by about 85,000 barrels a month, and the vehicles are safer for the driver and occupants. Finally, there is a useful program that helps more than just Wall Street.
Your Google Adsense code should be here, but you forgot to edit the plugins/adsense.php file and replace the code there with your own.