What's new

The End of Chinese Manufacturing and Rebirth of U.S. Industry

Aepsilons

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
May 29, 2014
Messages
24,960
Reaction score
118
Country
Japan
Location
United States
There is great concern about China’s real-estate and infrastructure bubbles. But these are just short-term challenges that China may be able to spend its way out of. The real threat to China’s economy is bigger and longer term: its manufacturing bubble.

By offering subsidies, cheap labor, and lax regulations and rigging its currency, China was able to seduce American companies to relocate their manufacturing operations there. Millions of American jobs moved to China, and manufacturing became the underpinning of China’s growth and prosperity. But rising labor costs, concerns over government-sponsored I.P. theft, and production time lags are already causing companies such as Dow Chemicals, Caterpillar, GE, and Ford to start moving some manufacturing back to the U.S. from China. Google recently announced that its Nexus Q streaming media player would be made in the U.S., and this put pressure on Apple to start following suit.

But rising costs and political pressure aren’t what’s going to rapidly change the equation. The disruption will come from a set of technologies that are advancing at exponential rates and converging.

These technologies include robotics, artificial intelligence (AI), 3D printing, and nanotechnology. These have been moving slowly so far, but are now beginning to advance exponentially just as computing does. Witness how computing has advanced to the point at which the smart phones we carry in our pockets have more processing power than the super computers of the ’60s—and how the Internet, which also has its origins in the ’60s, went on an exponential growth path about 15 years ago and rapidly changed the way we work, shop, and communicate. That’s what lies ahead for these new technologies.

The robots of today aren’t the Androids or Cylons that we used to see in science-fiction movies, but specialized electro-mechanical devices that are controlled by software and remote controls. As computers become more powerful, so do the abilities of these devices. Robots are now capable of performing surgery, milking cows, doing military reconnaissance and combat, and flying fighter jets. And DIY’ers are lending a helping hand. There are dozens of startups, such as Willow Garage, iRobot, and 9th Sense, selling robot-development kits for university students and open-source communities. They are creating ever more-sophisticated robots and new applications for these. Watch this video of the autonomous flying robots that University of Pennsylvania professor Vijay Kumar created with his students, for example.

The factory assembly that the Chinese are performing is child’s play for the next generation of robots—which will soon become cheaper than human labor. Indeed, one of China’s largest manufacturers, Taiwan-based Foxconn Technology Group, announced last August that it plans to install one million robots within three years to do the work that its workers in China presently do. It found Chinese labor to be too expensive and demanding. The world’s most advanced car, the Tesla Model S, is also being manufactured in Silicon Valley, which is one of the most expensive places in the country. Tesla can afford this because it is using robots to do the assembly.

Then there is artificial intelligence (AI)—software that makes computers do things that, if humans did them, we would call intelligent. We left AI for dead after the hype it created in the ‘80s, but it is alive and kicking—and advancing rapidly. It is powering all sorts of technologies. This is the technology that IBM’s Deep Blue computer used in beating chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov in 1997and that enabled IBM’s Watson to beat TV-show Jeopardy champions in 2011. AI is making it possible to develop self-driving cars, voice-recognition systems such as Apple’s Siri, and the face-recognition software Facebook recently acquired. AI technologies are also finding their way into manufacturing and will allow us to design our own products at home with the aid of AI-powered design assistants.

How will we turn these designs into products? By “printing” them at home or at modern-day Kinko’s: shared public manufacturing facilities such as TechShop, a membership-based manufacturing workshop, using new manufacturing technologies that are now on the horizon.

A type of manufacturing called “additive manufacturing” is making it possible to cost-effectively “print” products. In conventional manufacturing, parts are produced by humans using power-driven machine tools, such as saws, lathes, milling machines, and drill presses, to physically remove material to obtain the shape desired. This is a cumbersome process that becomes more difficult and time-consuming with increasing complexity. In other words, the more complex the product you want to create, the more labor is required and the greater the effort.

In additive manufacturing, parts are produced by melting successive layers of materials based on 3D models—adding materials rather than subtracting them. The “3D printers” that produce these use powered metal, droplets of plastic, and other materials—much like the toner cartridges that go into laser printers. This allows the creation of objects without any sort of tools or fixtures. The process doesn’t produce any waste material, and there is no additional cost for complexity. Just as, in using laser printers, a page filled with graphics doesn’t cost much more than one with text, in using a 3D printer, we can print sophisticated 3D structures for about the cost of a brick.

3D printers can already create physical mechanical devices, medical implants, jewelry, and even clothing. The cheapest 3D printers, which print rudimentary objects, currently sell for between $500 and $1000. Soon, we will have printers for this price that can print toys and household goods. By the end of this decade, we will see 3D printers doing the small-scale production of previously labor-intensive crafts and goods. It is entirely conceivable that in the next decade we start 3D-printing buildings and electronics.

In the next decade, we will see further advances. Engineers and scientists are today developing new types of materials, such as carbon nanotubes, ceramic-matrix nanocomposites, and new carbon fibers. These new materials make it possible to create products that are stronger, lighter, more energy-efficient, and more durable than existing manufactured goods. A new field—molecular manufacturing—will take this one step further and make it possible to program molecules inexpensively, with atomic precision. The materials we use for manufacturing and techniques for production will be nothing like the assembly-based processes that exist in China—and the U.S.—today.

Even if the Chinese automate their factories with AI-powered robots and manufacture 3D printers, it will no longer make sense to ship raw materials all the way to China to have them assembled into finished products and shipped back to the U.S. Manufacturing will once again become a local industry with products being manufactured near raw materials or markets.

So China has many reasons to worry, and manufacturing will undoubtedly return to the U.S.—if not in this decade then early in the next. But the same jobs that left the U.S. won’t come back: they won’t exist. What will the new jobs be? We can only guess. Autodesk CEO Carl Bass says that just as we have created new, higher-paying jobs in every other industrial transition, we will create a new set of industries and professions in this one. Look at the new types of jobs and multi-billion dollar businesses that the Internet and mobile industries created—these came out of nowhere and changed our lives, Bass says.

Carl Bass is one of the leading authorities on 3D printing and digital manufacturing, and I share his optimism that we will create an era of abundance. But I worry if we will create the new jobs fast enough and distribute the prosperity. Carl and I discussed this at Singularity University a few months ago. And I also discussed China manufacturing with The Economist China bureau chief, Vijay Vaitheeswaran. You can find these videos below.

The End of Chinese Manufacturing and Rebirth of U.S. Industry - Forbes
 
TROLL ALERT !!!

53881972.jpg
 
Actually, robots are going to take everyone's jobs. Why do you think oligarchs are investing billions to build robots? 3D printing is already here. Robots are coming very very soon.
 
@Nihonjin1051 If this is true, it will harm not only China, but also the US middle class. And it will be a death sentence for countries like Indonesia, and virtually the entire continent of Africa, which would have been next in line to benefit from manufacturing off-shoring.

For the rest of us, there is only one lesson: buy stocks. The owners of capital will reap the rewards of the automation revolution.
 
Last edited:
@Nihonjin1051 If this is true, it will harm not only China, but also the US middle class. And it will be a death sentence for countries like Indonesia, and virtually the entire continent of Africa, which would have been next in line to benefit from manufacturing off-shoring.

For the rest of us, there is only one lesson: buy stocks. The owners of capital will reap the rewards of the automation revolution.

@LeveragedBuyout ,

This is indeed a very surprising article to read. Considering the cost of redirecting manufacturing back to the United States , I wonder if this can be truly realized. My concern would be the length of time it would take to build manufacturing plants that were offshored to China and other developing nations. Quite alarming , actually.
 
@LeveragedBuyout ,

This is indeed a very surprising article to read. Considering the cost of redirecting manufacturing back to the United States , I wonder if this can be truly realized. My concern would be the length of time it would take to build manufacturing plants that were offshored to China and other developing nations. Quite alarming , actually.

I'm going to steal an image from my other thread:

BCG-manufacturing-cost-index-590x427.png


Source: Yes, trade with poor countries has cost US jobs

The labor cost gap between the US and China will continue to narrow, as US wages stagnate and Chinese wages rise, and automation is increasingly utilized. The cost of constructing new factories will be offset by the savings in shipping costs and electricity costs. Besides, building a factory (capex) is a balance sheet item, and labor costs and energy costs are P/L items (COGS), so it would not be a significant barrier to US companies to invest in new factories if it boosts earnings.

What I was getting at in terms of Indonesia and Africa is that if we take away the labor cost component (which is what automation will eventually do), then the countries with the lowest energy costs will become the lowest costs manufacturers, and this will include North America and Russia. Indonesia looks attractive as a manufacturing base at the moment, but with shipping costs and regional instability in the cards, I would bet on more manufacturing returning to the US rather than shifting there.

On a related note, all of the advanced economies will probably also gradually reduce their energy costs as well with renewables and smart grids, putting even more pressure on the developing world. See my other thread:

Do bank analysts dream of electric cars?

Given the investment priorities of the developing economies, it's likely they will be very late to this game, and developed economies will be the primary beneficiaries.
 
3D printing drugs – New technology to revolutionize medical industry
Published time: August 22, 2014 13:51
Get short URL


000_par7819930.si.jpg

AFP Photo / Jean-Philippe Ksiazek

Health, Medicine, Nanotechnology,Science, USA
Scientists believe they have come up with a way to print drugs, using a 3D printer. They say they can create a capsule, which can be swallowed, and it will also allow doctors to alter a dosage according to the specific requirements.

A team of researchers, from the Louisiana Tech University, believes they have come up with a solution to find a biodegradable material, which could be used to contain everyday drugs, as well as chemotherapeutic compounds for those needing cancer treatments. The 3D printer would be able to create the capsule, meaning that medicine only needs to be inserted before it is sealed, Science Daily reports.

"After identifying the usefulness of the 3D printers, we realized there was an opportunity for rapid prototyping using this fabrication method," said Jeffery Weisman, who is a doctoral student in Louisiana Tech's biomedical engineering program. "Through the addition of nanoparticles and/or other additives, this technology becomes much more viable using a common 3D printing material that is already biocompatible. The material can be loaded with antibiotics or other medicinal compounds, and the implant can be naturally broken down by the body over time."

Weisman believes that one of great advantages of the new technology will be its ability to tailor the contents of a drug for particular needs. This could mean a dose of antibiotics could be made stronger or weaker, depending on the requirements of the patient. It would also mean hospitals or pharmacies would not have to wait for deliveries from pharmaceutical companies. As long as they have the drug in question, they can create the dosage in the medical facility, or drug store.

"One of the greatest benefits of this technology is that it can be done using any consumer printer and can be used anywhere in the world," Weisman said.

Dr. David K. Mills, who is a professor of biological sciences, also added that there are other uses that 3D printers could have in the medical industry. The vast majority of antibiotic implants, which are put inside someone undergoing an operation to ensure there is no risk of infection are made out of bone cements. Bone cements, which are normally used to anchor joints, such as a hip or knee, have to be mixed by the surgeon and are non-biodegradable, meaning the implant has to be removed once the operation has been completed. The researchers now believe that these antibiotic implants can be made out of bio-plastics, which can be broken down by the body, thus meaning no additional surgery is needed.

"Currently, embedding of additives in plastic requires industrial-scale facilities to ensure proper dispersion throughout the extruded plastic," explains Mills. "Our method enables dispersion on a tabletop scale, allowing researchers to easily customize additives to the desired levels. There are not even any industrial processes for antibiotics or special drug delivery as injection molding currently focuses more on colorants and cosmetic properties."

So far 3D printers have been used to create the outer shells for devices such as hearing aids. Phil Reeves, who is an expert in the 3D printing industry, says that there are currently around 10 million hearing aids in circulation and that this is a conservative estimate, according to Forbes.

The great advantage of using a 3D-printed hearing aid is that it gives the user much greater comfort, as it can be adjusted to the exact measurements required. This would simply not be possible if it was mass produced in a factory.

Meanwhile, in February 2012, the BBC reported how a woman in the Netherlands was given a replacement jaw, made out of titanium powder, which had been created by a 3D printer.

Layerwise, the company who helped design the product said:

"Once we received the 3D digital design, the part was split up automatically into 2D layers and then we sent those cross sections to the printing machine," the company added.


>>>>

List of pharmaceutical companies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
3D printing drugs – New technology to revolutionize medical industry
Published time: August 22, 2014 13:51
Get short URL


000_par7819930.si.jpg

AFP Photo / Jean-Philippe Ksiazek

Health, Medicine, Nanotechnology,Science, USA
Scientists believe they have come up with a way to print drugs, using a 3D printer. They say they can create a capsule, which can be swallowed, and it will also allow doctors to alter a dosage according to the specific requirements.

A team of researchers, from the Louisiana Tech University, believes they have come up with a solution to find a biodegradable material, which could be used to contain everyday drugs, as well as chemotherapeutic compounds for those needing cancer treatments. The 3D printer would be able to create the capsule, meaning that medicine only needs to be inserted before it is sealed, Science Daily reports.

"After identifying the usefulness of the 3D printers, we realized there was an opportunity for rapid prototyping using this fabrication method," said Jeffery Weisman, who is a doctoral student in Louisiana Tech's biomedical engineering program. "Through the addition of nanoparticles and/or other additives, this technology becomes much more viable using a common 3D printing material that is already biocompatible. The material can be loaded with antibiotics or other medicinal compounds, and the implant can be naturally broken down by the body over time."

Weisman believes that one of great advantages of the new technology will be its ability to tailor the contents of a drug for particular needs. This could mean a dose of antibiotics could be made stronger or weaker, depending on the requirements of the patient. It would also mean hospitals or pharmacies would not have to wait for deliveries from pharmaceutical companies. As long as they have the drug in question, they can create the dosage in the medical facility, or drug store.

"One of the greatest benefits of this technology is that it can be done using any consumer printer and can be used anywhere in the world," Weisman said.

Dr. David K. Mills, who is a professor of biological sciences, also added that there are other uses that 3D printers could have in the medical industry. The vast majority of antibiotic implants, which are put inside someone undergoing an operation to ensure there is no risk of infection are made out of bone cements. Bone cements, which are normally used to anchor joints, such as a hip or knee, have to be mixed by the surgeon and are non-biodegradable, meaning the implant has to be removed once the operation has been completed. The researchers now believe that these antibiotic implants can be made out of bio-plastics, which can be broken down by the body, thus meaning no additional surgery is needed.

"Currently, embedding of additives in plastic requires industrial-scale facilities to ensure proper dispersion throughout the extruded plastic," explains Mills. "Our method enables dispersion on a tabletop scale, allowing researchers to easily customize additives to the desired levels. There are not even any industrial processes for antibiotics or special drug delivery as injection molding currently focuses more on colorants and cosmetic properties."

So far 3D printers have been used to create the outer shells for devices such as hearing aids. Phil Reeves, who is an expert in the 3D printing industry, says that there are currently around 10 million hearing aids in circulation and that this is a conservative estimate, according to Forbes.

The great advantage of using a 3D-printed hearing aid is that it gives the user much greater comfort, as it can be adjusted to the exact measurements required. This would simply not be possible if it was mass produced in a factory.

Meanwhile, in February 2012, the BBC reported how a woman in the Netherlands was given a replacement jaw, made out of titanium powder, which had been created by a 3D printer.

Layerwise, the company who helped design the product said:

"Once we received the 3D digital design, the part was split up automatically into 2D layers and then we sent those cross sections to the printing machine," the company added.


>>>>

List of pharmaceutical companies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Dear, look into Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Abbott Laboratories, Merck & Co, Bayer, Bristol & Myers, Eli Lilly --- and their research into bionanotechnology as well as medical research. They lead the world in said fields. And they're all -- you guessed it -- American corporations.
 
These technologies include robotics, artificial intelligence (AI), 3D printing, and nanotechnology.

Just a little bit of common sense demolishes the theory in the OP.

The "problem" is not that American jobs have gone to China, but that American jobs have gone, period. Replacing Chinese jobs with robots (in America) will not bring back American jobs since the work will be performed by robots (not Americans). Sure, there may be some revival of jobs, but the numbers would be a fraction of the earlier numbers.

The issue for America is to create jobs for its people and, as long as an American worker remains expensive, companies will find alternatives. Whether that alternative is in China, Mexico or robots, that American job is not coming back without some serious cutback in pay scales.
 
Dear, look into Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, Abbott Laboratories, Merck & Co, Bayer, Bristol & Myers, Eli Lilly --- and their research into bionanotechnology as well as medical research. They lead the world in said fields. And they're all -- you guessed it -- American corporations.

they lead the way in propaganda, no one needs their drugs. Can they heal ebola? nope
 
The article is wishful thinking. The fact is that all the talk of an resurgened US manufacturing is just that talk. US manufacturing hasn't grown all that much in recent years. US manufacturing barely recovered to the pre 2008 levels. The basis for their optimism about the future lies with two things cheap energy and new technology (3D printing). The cheap energy comes from hydraulic fracking which is a bubble in itself. Those fracking companies are high on credit and low on profits. They are able to stay in business because of the 0% interest rate policy. Once interest rates rises a lot of these companies will have to go bust. The second is 3D printing. Despite all the hype the 3D printer makers in the US aren't making the kind of profits that is expected from them. That is already a sign of trouble. And in the end the winner of the 3D printing revolution will be China. Mark my words in the next 2, 3 perhabs 4 years China will become the largest user and producer of 3D printing machines. The US companies will then need protectionist measures from Washington DC for them to stay in business just like the solar panel makers. And on top of that in the medium to long run the US has to deal with its massive asset bubble's in its economy. That is stocks, bonds and houses. Just another oversight in this article.
 
let's hope.
or at least bring the job's to Mexico. I rather Mexican make my stuff than the Chinese :coffee:
more work in Mexico means less illegal immigrants.
 
Just a little bit of common sense demolishes the theory in the OP.

The "problem" is not that American jobs have gone to China, but that American jobs have gone, period. Replacing Chinese jobs with robots (in America) will not bring back American jobs since the work will be performed by robots (not Americans). Sure, there may be some revival of jobs, but the numbers would be a fraction of the earlier numbers.

The issue for America is to create jobs for its people and, as long as an American worker remains expensive, companies will find alternatives. Whether that alternative is in China, Mexico or robots, that American job is not coming back without some serious cutback in pay scales.

Bringing back industry to the United States would help develop greater job opportunities for Americans as well as help to spur greater opportunity in robotics companies in the United States. The underlying point of the article is that it would keep the capital within the United States. I would also like to point out a concept in Economics known as The Multiplier Effect, which states that each new manufacturing job will lead to about three more jobs around it , thus creating even more opportunity in American communities.

The solution to the United States' situation is to fill the middle class with more jobs and one of the besty ways to do that is through revitalization of American manufacturing. The United States cannot remain purely a service-oriented economy, it needs to make things.

I can't think of a successful example in history of an economy built solely on services. Let’s say I work in a restaurant and you work at a movie theater. I pay to see a movie in your theater, and that gives you money to come eat dinner in my restaurant. And that can go on for a while. But if one day you decide to eat in ... then I can’t go to the movies ... and the whole thing collapses.

We’re just staring at each other. And in some ways, that’s what’s happening right now. But if we make things, then we add value and change the equation. When a manufacturer makes something as basic as a light bulb, then the employees can afford a night out—to eat at a restaurant and go see a movie ... .and make their way to the middle class.

But I want to be very clear: I’m not saying we should turn inward or move business away from other places.This is not about our country versus other countries. We have a global economy, and the factories abroad will keep humming along, driven in part by a rising middle class around the world. But as you’ve heard today the next generation of production will need to be built closer to its consumption. And that creates an opportunity for all of us. With our global role, as America does better, the rest of the world will too.



Best Regards,
@Nihonjin1051
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom