September 1, 2010
Our Central Planning Government Now Focusing on Manufacturing
The plan started in July as the "The National Manufacturing Strategy Act" (more information here).The goal of the legislation was to "create a manufacturing strategies board that would thoroughly analyze the nation’s industrial base, develop short and long-term goals for the manufacturing sector to meet and provide the president with recommendations on how to achieve those goals on a national level."
A great quote from Rep. Dan Lipinski summarizes the central planning thought process; “The industry has lost 2.1 million jobs since the start of the recession, and faces tougher competition from abroad than ever before. We’ve got to act now to prevent more jobs from migrating overseas and to provide the right environment for our manufacturers to prosper.”
The head of the Alliance for American Manufacturing also added his communist sediment. " Scott Paul, Executive Director of the Alliance for American Manufacturing, testified that would focused and centralized policy goals in the manufacturing sector is hardly a radical idea. According to Paul, the United State’s very first industrial policy was developed in 1791 by Alexander Hamilton. From that time through World War II, the U.S. effectively utilized some form of centralized industrial policy. In the age of globalization, lowered trade barriers and free trade agreements, however, America’s industrial policy fell to the wayside."
For one, I would love to know what the United States was manufacturing in 1791 to justify a "centralized manufacturing sector policy goals." I also enjoy how trade is to blame for the problems in the manufacturing sector. Apparently, foreign entities do not buy American made products (forget that Buick is the #1 selling car brand in China) and that foreigners do not invest or hire workers in America (forget Suzuki, Kia, Toyota, Honda, or the fact that from 1918-2006 the U.S. was the largest beneficiary of foreign direct investment every year except one).
Last month, the bill culminated in the signing of the Manufacturing Enhancement Act. I enjoy how "strategy" was removed and "enhancement" was added to make the government look less involved.
When I looked at the actual bill, I was stunned. It was full of a bunch of duty extensions and suspensions of a variety of products. Then I thought about the description of the bill:
"The National Association of Manufacturers said the new law will help create jobs, cut costs for businesses and consumers, and boost U.S. exports. The industry trade group said studies show the bill would increase production by $4.6 billion and support 90,000 jobs."
Popular This Month
TRUE PROGRESSIVISM: A LESSON FROM TEDDY ROOSEVELT I've noticed in the health care debate that liberals are constantly digging up Te...
Milton Friedman discusses the problem with government support of companies through subsidies. Think about the consumer and choice. Do they...
DISCLAIMER: Before anyone reads this article, I want to make it crystal clear that I am not defending the current actions of the Federa...
I know this is old news by now, but last week, the GOP proposed an alternate budget to what the Obama administration is proposing. Paul ...