jump to navigation

Our Endlessly Self-Aggrandizing Elites: Statistics on the Collapse of Manufacturing in the US October 3, 2019

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, cultural marxism, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, sadness, scandals, self-serving, sickness, Society.
trackback

Aside from insanity directly related to the steadily increasing moral insanity of our creature, two ideas – factoids, declarations, I don’t know what you call them – have bothered more than almost any other throughout my life. I remember these things since I was a teenager and they’ve always bothered me.  The first is, it is inevitable that manufacturing be lost in the US to foreign competition.  The second one is a corollary to the first- because of this, we must of necessity become a service economy (an unspoken part of this second bit was, because of this, we must of necessity become a much poorer nation, because flipping burgers doesn’t pay like a CNC operator or ASME-code pressure vessel welder).

These twin declarations – shibboleths, is what they really are, shibboleths held as unyielding dogmas by the self-anointed elites in our society from industry to academia to media to government, who then try to convince us thattheir self-serving policies were actually forces of nature – always really bothered me because I always knew they were a form of lie.  They were lies because what was really being said was, “we elites choose, in large measure, to  send manufacturing overseas, to enact policies that make that transfer practically inevitable, and we thus impose this service economy whether you like it or not.”  Now, of course, there are many reasons of varying degrees of validity to explain why the US manufacturing base has been unbelievably gutted in the last 40 years, but especially in the last 20.  US wages are comparatively high, environmental and safety regulations (among others) impose onerous costs, taxes are sometimes high in some ways, etc.  But Ross Perot was right, NAFTA did lead to a giant sucking sound, and it was followed by an even larger sound going not south but east, to China and other locales starting after President Bush inexplicably gave preferential trade advantages to the murderous communist regime in China (oh, I know, if we just enrich the Chicom party bosses, and make them infinitely more powerful than they were in, say, 1980, they’ll be sure to become oh-so-amenable to our will!).

The point being, manufacturing has been lost due to some organic factors, certainly. Some loss was probably inevitable. But a very great deal of that loss has been a result of deliberate policies enacted at the highest levels of our political and economic system, policies that have enriched a very few at the expense of the very many.  Perhaps manufacturing was always going to decrease in the US as wages increased, but this much, this fast?  90+% of some industries eliminated in less than 40 years?

The list below represents some 10 million families wiped out in the space of a generation.  No wonder people are so enraged, and a revolutionary spirit seems to grow more and more insistent.

Note, while many industries outlined below are “old style” heavy industries like metal forming and steel production, some are not.  Aerospace, defense, and computer/microchip manufacturing make the list of industries founded in the US or once incredibly robust here that have been all but eliminated, and these last certainly in the last 25 years or so, not 40.

One delicious irony in the data below is that the industry that probably did a great deal to egg on, give cover for, and otherwise encourage political and cultural elites to gut manufacturing in this country – the media – have been hoisted on their own petard.  Newpaper printing and circulation is one of the 20 industries that have most collapsed over the past 40 years.

  1. Newspaper publishing and printing

475,800 people were employed in 1980, falling to 207,700 in 2017 (a 56% drop).

  1. Metalworking machinery manufacturing

370,300 people were employed in 1980, falling to 156,600 in 2017 (a 58% drop).

  1. Iron and steel foundries

208,500 people were employed in 1980, falling to 88,100 in 2017 (a 58% drop).

  1. Metal forging and stamping

183,300 people were employed in 1980, falling to 73,700 in 2017 (a 60% drop).

  1. Blast furnaces, steelworks, and rolling and finishing mills

682,200 people were employed in 1980, falling to 270,000 in 2017 (a 60% drop).

  1. Construction and material handling machines manufacturing

389,400 people were employed in 1980, falling to 152,400 in 2017 (a 61% drop).

  1. Water transportation

189,600 people were employed in 1980, falling to 74,000 in 2017 (a 61% drop).

  1. Household appliances manufacturing

185,800 people were employed in 1980, falling to 71,400 in 2017 (a 62% drop).

  1. Primary aluminum production

171,600 people were employed in 1980, falling to 64,100 in 2017 (a 63% drop).

  1. Metal mining

122,000 people were employed in 1980, falling to 45,200 in 2017 (a 63% drop).

  1. Computer and related equipment manufacturing

419,400 people were employed in 1980, falling to 146,600 in 2017 (a 65% drop).

  1. Guided missiles, space vehicles, and parts manufacturing

198,100 people were employed in 1980, falling to 66,900 in 2017 (a 66% drop).

  1. Cutlery, hand tools, and general hardware manufacturing

143,900 people were employed in 1980, falling to 46,500 in 2017 (a 68% drop).

  1. Coal mining

263,100 people were employed in 1980, falling to 62,500 in 2017 (a 76% drop).

  1. Radio, TV, and communication equipment manufacturing

588,900 people were employed in 1980, falling to 136,000 in 2017 (a 77% drop).

  1. Primary metal industries, other than iron, steel, and aluminum

251,200 people were employed in 1980, falling to 54,000 in 2017 (a 78% drop).

  1. Footwear manufacturing

160,600 people were employed in 1980, falling to 32,500 in 2017 (an 80% drop).

  1. Yarn, thread, and fabric mills

568,300 people were employed in 1980, falling to 107,600 in 2017 (an 81% drop).

  1. Apparel and accessories manufacturing

1,149,300 people were employed in 1980, falling to 206,900 in 2017 (an 82% drop).

  1. Knitting mills

178,100 people were employed in 1980, falling to 17,700 in 2017 (a 90% drop)

It ain’t just manufacturing any more.  Engineering and other white collar fields are being increasingly hit – through straight up job loss or wage stagnation – due to foreign competition or a flood of cheap immigrant labor.  Very few people have what it takes to be an entrepreneur.  Very few are able to satisfy the demands of extremely intellectually challenging and creative fields.  What the “other 80%” are going to do, 50 years from now, is quite terrifying.

Something tells me we won’t get to that point, however.  I think the wheels are going to come off this society before then, the singularity will never, could never, happen, and instead we’re going to go through a brief period of intense decay followed by widespread collapse.

Meh, this is me just mostly spit-balling, but those numbers represent a tragedy of almost limitless proportions.  So sad.

If only there were an alternative.

Comments»

1. Michele Lovell Kerby - October 3, 2019

Are you saying you think we need a dictator?

Tim - October 3, 2019

We have 544 dictators in DC in official capacity now. Factor in the deep state and it balloons to thousands! “Democracy” is an abject failure.

George III was a pussy cat compared to our thousands of “democratic” tyrants.

Tantumblogo - October 4, 2019

Indeed. No “tyrannical” monarchy of the 18th, 19th, or even 20th century ever imposed even slightly the kinds of onerous burdens on citizens and industry that have been imposed under “democracy.” I increasingly think Ferrara is right, “democracy” is a method used to get the people to impose rules, taxes, and other burdens on themselves they would never accept from some autocrat.

Tim - October 5, 2019

That’s because the autocrats where mostly sane and smart. Even the bad ones knew how far to push the letter. The truly good ones ruled in a manner as a father should rule his home…..for the good of the whole over individual whims.

Tantumblogo - October 3, 2019

Only if it’s me.

Tim - October 3, 2019

I’ll be your vice-dictator!

Tantumblogo - October 4, 2019

Well that comment goes to show how people have been conditioned in this country to automatically discount as bad any strong leader who may lead his country with great prudence and moral fiber but who doesn’t possess the magic talisman of “democracy.” Was Salazar an autocrat? Probably. But did he rule his country incredibly wisely and well, maintaining moral standards far longer than most of his contemporaries and dramatically improving the material well-being of his people? The answer on all counts is yes.

I bet many souls would happily trade a Salazar for the chaos we have today.

Tim - October 5, 2019

Not me, the reason I was with Trump from the escalator moment, despite his many flaws, is because he is a strong fighter which is what we need on our side after decades of “decorum” which got us nowhere. We finally have a President who’s brought his own gun to the liberal knife fight!

Tim - October 5, 2019

2. Juniper55 - October 4, 2019

Heavy industry is the backbone that provides the structure for all other industries. With no heavy industry, no light industry and service jobs follow. When the factory goes, all other jobs go with it.

3. Camper - October 5, 2019

The american economy is geared to high wage, high technology work. Combined with the environmental regs, steel making and knitting won’t last.

4. Tim - October 5, 2019
5. Michele Lovell Kerby - October 6, 2019

Tim, Trump isn’t strong. People who have worked with him compare the job to babysitting a four-year-old. He doesn’t understand the job of the presidency and doesn’t want to. He runs things as a sort of chairman of the board, with others doing the actual work of the job. He doesn’t understand, and doesn’t want to understand, that a president’s powers have legal and constitutional limits. This is what you’re mistaking for strength.

Tim - October 6, 2019

WRONG…..”democracy” is a failure because it gives equal voice to evil. A good monarch would squash that, error has no rights. You give yourself away as a consummate americanist. That was condemned by Leo XIII.
Trump is far from perfect but he is taking the fight to the evil democrats and RINOs. We need a fighter, not “bipartisanship”. That’s just code for give the libs their way. If your hero Hillary was elected in 2016 we would all be in Catholic reeducation camps by now. The American experiment is an abject failure. All Catholics should want a good Catholic monarch. If Trump is not reelected we are doomed. Even if he is January 20, 2025 and beyond is a mighty scary prospect no matter who takes over. Back to “decorum” and to Hell with what is right.

Michele Lovell Kerby - October 6, 2019

The world has changed considerably since Leo XIII. Even then much of what he said was only practical in a world that was rapidly passing away, with little to help Catholics to be faithful in the world in which they found themselves.At any rate, I don’t consider myself an americanist but I do try to be a realist.

For whatever it’s worth, Ms Clinton is hardly my hero. Out of two wretched candidates she was the least objectionable, that is all.One of her advantages over Trump is that she generally works within the system. Given the system we have, there would be no way she could set up reeducation camps, or anything similar, even if she wanted to. Trump, om the other hand…

Our system is based on bipartisanship and doesn’t work without it, but I’ll pass over that since you want to destroy it anyway. Especially so because there is a question I would love for you, or anyone else to answer. If we were to have a Catholic monarch, how would we ever get there from here?

Indeed, this is why Leo XII’s efforts made little impact. Short of global catastrophe, there is simply no way back to monarchy for a pluralistic republic. Authoritarian dictatorship, yes. We are in some danger of that now, but there is no way Trump or his family will ever be Catholic anything. His only religion is to pander to a base that is mostly protestant, and will stay that way. And Trump would be no “sane and smart” dictator either. He would be like the tyrants he admires, his way or no way. That is what we “evil liberals” want to prevent.

Tim - October 6, 2019

You are a modernist by definition.
Leo XIII and all Catholic Truth is relevant and binding in any age. Catholics do not adjust to the world and the times….they are required to accept Catholic Truth or perish eternally.

To say Hillary was the better of the 2 proves that you are NOT Catholic. She is a rabid abortionist and just from that she is disqualified to be the local dog catcher. Also, you give yourself away as a feminist by your use of the term “Ms.” which is an evil construct of the radical feminists who hate God, family and men.

Catholics are not “bipartisan”… there is Truth and that’s it. One of the reason Trump is better is that he is tearing down our corrupt on evil masonic system. You must have freemasonic leanings. In some of Hillary’s hacked emails from Wikileaks she is discussing the programs being set up to put Catholics into reeducation camps.
Sorry, facts are not on your side….but then again, you are a liberal masquerading as a Catholic.

I’d say “pandering” to protestants, while not ideal, is better than pandering to Satanists. You need to study the Faith, your ignotance of Truth is truly astounding.
God bless you.

Michele Lovell Kerby - October 6, 2019

Modernism has many different definitions, so I suppose whether or not I’m one depends on how one defines it. I don’t consider myself to be one. As for the writings of Leo XIII, saying these weren’t effective is quite different from disagreeing with Catholic Truth. Leo XIII favored monarchy, but he never laid out any method as to how the United States could set it up. Perhaps he didn’t know how it could be done. I only doubt that anyone else knows how to either.

As for the choice between Ms (or Mrs., I don’t particularly care) Clinton and Mr. Trump on abortion, I believed, as I still do, that the climate of the country would not allow the abolition of this evil. So I voted for the lady on other grounds, as I’m sure many others did. For whatever it’s worth, I would say that her physical condition more than her position on abortion eliminates her as a viable choice for the position of local dog catcher.

I can’t find a reliable source for the Clinton person wanting to put Catholics in reeducation camps. It’s moot anyway, because at least for now a president can’t do that.

I never said Catholics are bipartisan. I said the U.S. government is set up to be such. And it’s only meant to be a workable system for a people to govern themselves, not to establish Truth.

Now lets talk some historical facts. I’m no historian, but I’ve studied a bit. I could elaborate, but the facts, shorter version, are these: At the time the Constitution was written, Enlightenment thought was very popular. Freemasonry and the Constitution both developed during the Enlightenment. Both were heavily influenced by Enlightenment thinkers. But the men who wrote, argued over and otherwise made our system what it is were a varied group. Some were Masons, some were not. Yes, the Constitution was influenced by some of the same thinkers as was freemasonry. But that doesn’t make our government masonic any more than the beliefs Mitt Romney shares with Catholics makes him a Catholic.

By “Satanist” I guess you mean liberals. A liberal may be a Satanist, as may a conservative, but it’s no more an automatic thing than it is for a conservative. A president is supposed to pander to no one but to represent the interests of all American people, whether or not he agrees with them politically.

Tim - October 6, 2019

ERROR HAS NO RIGHTS.

Please become Catholic for your own sake. You currently are not with the views that you are sharing.

Michele Lovell Kerby - October 6, 2019

Thank you for your concern.The Catholic Church is a very large barque, with all kinds of people in it. I believe differently than you do, but in the end all any of us can do is have faith and pray for God’s mercy. Please pray for me. You’re in my prayers.

Tim - October 6, 2019

How can Catholics believe “differently”? Abortion is murder but you give a murdering woman a pass on that heinous crime because you don’t like Trump’s mannerisms.

We can differ in opinion in non-consequensual matters,
but you cannot disagree on abortion or supporting proabortion politicians or on Leo XIII’s condemnation of americanism or the 10 Commandments, etc., etc., etc.

Your own words condemn you of being an overt modernist and americanist and liberal. By definition you are not Catholic. You must be Novus Ordo….which is not Catholic. Flee from error and save your soul!

Michele Lovell Kerby - October 6, 2019

Abortion is a highly consequential matter and for whatever it’s worth my beliefs on it are the same as yours and other Traditionalist Catholics. don’t give anyone a pass on abortion, but it would seem most of the country is disposed to do so. Therefore my beliefs don’t make much difference. The only difference between you and I on abortion is that I don’t believe Trump’s contributions to the pro-life movement justify his shortcomings as president.

I don’t care about Trump’s mannerisms. I do care very much when he sneakily tries to expand his powers beyond that which is allowed by constitutional law. He shows no signs of being able to wield the powers of a dictator in a morally responsible manner. Rather the opposite.

For reasons too lengthy to go into here I don’t consider myself either a modernist or an americanist. Due to some experiences in early childhood I don’t care for the Extraordinary Form. But my dislike is entirely personal. I wholeheartedly support Summorum Pontificum. Indeed, I wish that the EF were even more available because I would like to see if my adult self would view it favorably.

I suppose I am Novus Ordo. But even Benedict XVI and St. John Paul II seemed to believe that Novus Ordo Catholics were still Catholic. That’s good enough for me.

Tim - October 7, 2019

A Catholic who votes for a proabort is in mortal sin objectively. If you voted for Hitlary you are in mortal sin.
Your opinion don’t mean squat.

Whether or not you consider yourself an americanist or modernist is irrelevant. You are objectively.

1st and for most there is not “forms” of Mass. The Traditional Mass is the True Mass and the Novus Ordo is a protestant liturgy that attempts to ape tge True Mass. The Novus Ordo is not Catholic.

Spare us the childhood psychobabble about the True Mass. Whatever your problem is GET OVER IT and grow up. My childhood was hardly ideal but I was given the grace to overcome it. Stop being so childish and embrace Truth.

Michele Lovell Kerby - October 7, 2019

Tim, I respect you and your opinions. That being said, a number of duly elected Popes of the Roman Catholic Church disagree with you and I think I’m safer following their views.

I’m tired of writing and particularly weary of writing about my opinions, so I’m going back into lurking mode now. May God bless us all.

Tim - October 7, 2019

Oh, yeah, all Vatican 2 popes have taught error and today’s “canonizations” tragically are suspect because of JP2 turning into a prom queen contest instead of an exhaustive examination of the candidate’s life.
“Facts are stubborn things”….John Adams.

Tim - October 7, 2019

Popes that contradict their predecessors and Holy Scripture and Tradition are objectively in error and it is foolhardy to follow them into the pit. Quit papolatry and obediolatry as they will be your ruin. If you think my opinions are wrong then you shouldn’t respect them. I can’t respect yours as they are against Catholic Truth.
You have been duped by your V2/Novus Ordo overlords. Come to the Light of Tradition and never look back.

c matt - October 7, 2019

He doesn’t understand, and doesn’t want to understand, that a president’s powers have legal and constitutional limits.

In this regard, he is merely following the lead set by his predecessors back to Abe Lincoln.

Tim - October 7, 2019

Excellent observation. I would go back even further….say Andrew Jackson. This charge doesn’t even need go back more than the immediate predecessor. Obama set the mark for that level of abuse.

6. Tim - October 11, 2019

Michele, if you’re out there lurking check this out:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: