I think we might have our work cut out there!
.-= Andrew´s last blog ..June contributors =-.

Certainly, the prospect of the American manufacturing sector giving up and simply withering toward a slow and painful death would be most unfortunate.

Far better it would be if competitive forces from Asia acted as an impetus to spur innovation and efficiency gains within the American manufacturing environment, and a viable American sector is able to operate alongside a booming Asian sector. That way, American consumers would benefit from being served by an improved American sector as well as the skills of Asian manufacturers.

Andrew’s last blog post..June contributors

I can certainly see your point of view and under absolutely no circumstances would I question the validity of the nature of your concerns or those of other readers in this regard.

That said, I would have thought that most of this is not so much of a problem but rather part of the healthy process of engagement international trade in the modern environment of the integration of national economies within the global economy.

On one side of the coin, Asia has come of age in terms of its manufacturing capabilities, and in areas such as the manufacture of electronic equipment, it is inevitable to some degree parts of the manufacturing base within your country will slowly move eastward over time.

But on the flip side, your country seems to be reaping huge rewards from the emergence of economies in Asia and elsewhere. Having taught as an English instructor in Korea for the past four years, I only need look at the vast array of opportunities which Americans and other westerners are snapping up working in public schools, higher education and in private training academies to appreciate the extent to which the development of these economies is opening up opportunities for Americans and those in the broader western world.

That’s not to mention that many of the teaching materials created being used here in Korea are imported from America, or that the bulk of the international media in terms of films, tv shows and outlets for news and current affairs are dominated by American media sources.

And then there are all of the areas like financial services, pharmaceuticals and military equipment and expertise, just to name a few, where demand for the output of firms from America and other developed western economies should continue to expand as these economies continue to develop over time.

So whilst I do not for a second question or doubt the validity of the concerns which you raise, I do not think it is altogether an unhealthy process that American consumers increasingly benefit from the technical capabilities of developing Asian countries whilst Asian consumers and businesses in return continue to reap the benefits of American expertise and experience in areas which America looks likely to continue to excel for the foreseeable future.

Andrew’s last blog post..June contributors

For teaching youngsters about getting your hands dirty there is a wonderful program called US First. It was created by the inventor of the Segway two wheeled vehicle, Dean Kamen. US First has as it’s goal to help high school students to interact with professional engineers. The goal is to create a robot to compete interactively with other high school US First programs.

Manufacturers like Delphi Automotive have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to support this program. Active professional engineers volunteer their time and energy to teach and work with youngsters in this program.

I think there is still hope for America’s future.

ken’s last blog post..Do You Live in the Chicago Area? Robo Basho!

The Democrats are about to ram through Congress the most onerous, business destroying (at least in the United Sates) piece of fantasy based legislation in American history, and you’re worried about the Chinese making Kindle batteries?

Back in 1930, Congress created the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, ostensibly to fight the depression by imposing tariffs on thousands of imported goods. This set off a trade war when other countries retaliated. The result was an exacerbation of the depression.

Cap and trade is merely a repetition of Smoot-Hawley in that Congress, in the midst of an economic crisis, is enacting legislation which will seriously undermine American business. Cap and trade will exact a tax from American businesses and industries for carbon emissions. The legislation aims, ostensibly, to force American business and industry to invest in inefficient so-called “green” technologies, which inefficiencies will further increase costs. Meanwhile, will the Chinese or Indians create their own versions of cap and trade? Not likely.

And what is the response of our contemporary politicians when they are warned about cap and trade making American goods too expensive to be competitive? Tariffs, which will increase the cost of imports. Do you think that might set off a trade war as occurred in the thirties?

And for what reason are we about to enact this cap and trade business killer? Why anthropogenic global warming, of course. A theory propounded by a charlatan named Gore, running around the world like Chicken Little, predicting our imminent demise. Meanwhile, skepticism about Gore’s pseudo-scientific certainty continues to mount (see today’s Wall Street Journal article: The Climate Change Climate Change). That skepticism has, apparently, not reached the halls of Congress where the push for cap and trade continues apace.

But, of course, cap and trade is not about combating global warming at all. The Obama administration needs the billions in additional tax dollars which cap and trade will plunder from business, industry, and the taxpayers. How else to finance the takeover of the medical sector?

You are currently examining various facets of the medical sector, with presumably, the goal of increasing its efficiency and effectiveness. You had better get that project done soon. Once the government creates a national health service like that of Great Britain, I doubt if anyone in the medical arena will be looking to hire you to increase its efficiency or cost effectiveness. Hey, do you imagine that anyone from Amtrak will be contacting you soon to study ways to improve its service?

In your response to Fred Schlegel, you pondered whether to write your senators and congressman. Do you think so?

Zeke

Part of the problem is that although it is “obvious” to many executives, making the move to retain manufacturing in the U.S. means that they will have to take a short term profit hit. And doing that, unfortunately, is a career limiting move in most organizations.
Going back to the systems thinking movement from the late 80s and early 90s, we have system that is caught in a negative reinforcing spiral. We have some good people in a bad system and, therefore, they will fail. Now if only we had some people in Washington who could think long term and were willing to act for the “betterment of the whole.” Is that too much to ask?

Hmmm, maybe I need to start be writing my Senators and Congressman.