Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280
^^^ Its really simple in my mind:
- Manufacturing is going to come back to the USA and already is (2.5 years consecutive growth)
Exactly, the death of American manufacturing is greatly exaggerated. People talk about manufacturing in America and mean low skilled manufacturing, like clothing. Why do I need clothing manufactured in the US. Low skill, low pay, low margin=no thank you. If you read the New York times article, they spend an awful lot of time talking about Foxconn but America cannot be like Foxconn. They also talk about flat panel manufacturing in South Korea and state that the clusters in South Korea make it efficient for new manufacturers to locate there. Building these connections is how economic development happens and what we should focus on. Not silly political diatribes.
Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280
- Chicago is uniquely situated not just in the USA, but in the world as a manufacturing center.
- Eventually the dam will break and industry will pour back in the USA and will go to the most logical and efficient location.
- That location is Chicago due to its railroad dominance, strong existing manufacturing base, and central location.
Here is where I see a problem. The above statement is true, industry will increase in the USA and will go to the most logical and efficient location. The question is: Is Chicago that location. Chicago is located for trade with the Northeast, Canada and Europe-(through the Northeast). Raw materials would flow from the great lakes and river centers to Chicago, manufactured to finished goods and then shipped to the Norhteast. Southeast and west coast areas were afterthoughts.
Once these partners lost focus in favor of Gulf shipping and Asian economies, Midwest markets were not fast enough to respond which meant they lost critical advantages leading to the eventual collapse of Detroit's dominance and a decline in Chicago's manufacturing. The current BMW commercial that seems to imply that South Carolina is a bizarre place to put a plant is stupid to me. Even without right to work, which for the most part I find to be a political red herring, South Carolina makes perfect sense. Easy access to Northeast and Southeast markets, while at the same time tapping in to BMW's global supply chain through an Atlantic seaport seems like the logical place to put a plant. The question is not why did BMW choose South Carolina but why would it choose anyplace else.
To combat these new advantages of South and West markets, what is necessary is to make sure that Chicago does not develop disadvantages in trade again. To do this, we need to build greater access to markets and supply chains. We should not be afraid of great access to Mexico or Asian ports because this will give manufacturers access to greater markets. Also, the problem with Chicago's railroad infrastructure is it has always been centered on the east. It is a disadvantage to have so many rail routes to Detroit. Increasing rail routes to West and South locations is necessary. Furthermore the past 10 years of decreasing access to Canada is a significant detriment to manufacturing in the Great Lakes and it is necessary to open the border.
Trade with Canada is a major selling point for the Great Lakes but long border crossing and security minimize this advantage.
I could go on about how rapid industrialization of West Africa could help Great Lakes trade or increasing technology infrastructure could help create competitive advantages and so forth but I am way off topic. Feel free to delete, if it is too far off.