Unique Maker Skills Academy launches in California

June 25th, 2019

On June 11th 2019,  I received a press release announcing the launch of the Vocademy Maker Skills Academy (MSA) — a one-of-a-kind, hands-on skills training program. This intensive program covers many of the vocational, career, and soft skills that are no longer taught in our schools. The kinds of skills thousands of employers are seeking. The program is available to anyone over the age of 16, with no prerequisites, transcripts, or GPA requirements.  The first ten-student MSA team starts July 8th, so enrollment is now open.

It is well documented that there is a massive skills gap in traditional and advanced manufacturing in America today. In past articles, I’ve mentioned that an estimated one to two million good-paying manufacturing jobs are going unfilled due to a lack of people with the right skills. There are also thousands of young adult makers looking for effective alternatives to college. The press release states: “An ideal solution has not existed …until today. This truly unique type program addresses the desperate needs of thousands of employers.”

In 2016, I wrote an article about Vocademy when it was essentially a traditional makerspace open to the public and beginning to offer skills training classes to high school students during the day. During that visit, founder and president Gene Sherman told me, “I started Vocademy because I had witnessed the demise of hands-on skills teaching in this country over the past 20 years. Schools have done away with these critical classes that taught practical life skills like woodworking and metal shop. These were the classes where people learned how to use tools and technology and develop the mindsets necessary to create new and amazing things.

When I saw ‘makerspaces’ springing up, I wanted to combine that type space with teaching the kinds of skills that were previously taught in ‘shop’ classes. I wanted to create a place for those who want to use their hands, in addition to their minds ? makers, inventors, and dreamers. I believe that if our country loses its ability to make and build things, we will have lost what made America great.

I wanted to provide access to these tools, but with proper and practical instruction on how to use them correctly and safely. I wanted a place that teaches the most state-of-the-art manufacturing techniques, not just traditional shop skills. I wanted to teach these important skills without the bureaucracy of academia because many more Americans should have the same opportunity to innovate, collaborate, learn, and create their dreams.”

 I visited Vocademy, located in Riverside, CA, on June 20th and interviewed Gene to find out more about the transformation from a makerspace to a skills discovery and training center.  Gene said, “Employers today are looking for those with a breadth of hands-on and soft skills. They want generalists and not specialists because the economy and workplace are changing at a rapid pace.  We have created the Maker Skills Academy to meet the needs of a career-centric workforce. Our goals are to teach real world skills, get our students career ready, and show them the amazing opportunities in the world of making. We’re looking forward to changing lives and creating the makers of the future. The program only takes six-months to complete. We do this by including over 90 fundamental classes in real-world subjects,” such as:

  • 3D Printing and Computer Aided Design
  • Laser Cutting and Engraving
  • Sewing and Textiles
  • Plastics, Vacuum forming, and Composites
  • Costume, Prop, 3D Papercraft, and Model Making
  • Fundamental Electronics, Soldering, Raspberry Pi and Arduino.
  • Robotics, Automation, and Hardware Programming.
  • Machine Shop Basics and CNC machining
  • Welding, Fabrication, and assembly
  • Wood Working.
  • Hand Tools, Power Tools, and support equipment 
  • Life and career soft skills for manufacturing, engineering, entrepreneurship and many other jobs

He emphasized that “by including the soft skills classes employers are seeking, the Maker Skills Academy is the perfect way to prepare for jobs in advanced manufacturing and other maker careers.

And unlike any other training programs or schools, MSA students will also have access to using our equipment every single evening to practice their skills, collaborate, create amazing resumes, and build capstone projects.”

.

As Gene led me on a tour of their facility, he explained, “Classes have minimal theory or history and lean heavily toward hands-on, practical skills learning. There are only eight to ten students per MSA team. We have a high instructor-to-student ratio for effective and intimate learning of skills. Our modern facility has over $500,000 of traditional and state-of-the-art manufacturing equipment.

During the tour, I saw that Gene had upgraded the 3D printing lab with all industrial machines rather than the hobby-type machines previously in the lab.  He had also upgraded to industrial sewing machines from the home-type machines he had previously, and there were now two cutting machines in the laser workroom. There were two new park bench projects in the fabrication workroom that the students had built themselves to utilize their metal fab and woodworking skills. He showed me the Little Free Libraries projects that are being placed in front of homes in neighborhoods, which are the capstone projects for the woodworking class.

Gene said that the Maker Skills Academy is perfect for those looking for:

  • a unique alternative to college, with real job and life skills
  • an ideal learning program to explore a multitude of maker skills
  • an effective pre-engineering program before entering university
  • an intensive course in maker skills for entrepreneurs or inventors
  • a set of job skills that will make STEM or maker careers future-proof

The website provides the following description of what is included in the Maker Space Academy program:

  • Six months of subjects and classes designed by industry experts and based on real-world needs of companies.
  • All raw materials, tools, and supplies the student will need for the classes in this program.
  • Six months of maker lab access with use of all equipment the student has been trained to use. 7-days-a-week, 5-10pm.
  • A Vocademy Maker Academy work shirt, basic measuring and hands tool set, a shop apron, and safety glasses.
  • An incredibly creative environment, surrounded by other makers, students, and engineers.
  • An Intellectual Property (IP) free facility. Student developed products or inventions are the property of the student.
  • A unique learning experience for anyone seeking to become more valuable to the world.
  • To develop an amazing set of skills for a career, personal enrichment, or for entering engineering schools.
  • Student graduates will receive Vocademy Certificates of Completion for every subject completed.
  • The opportunity to collaborate and work on your projects or ideas using modern and traditional industrial equipment.
  • To create an incredible resume full of projects, practical skills, and hands-on experience.

I asked what was expected of students, and Gene replied, “There are no mid-terms or finals. Students must commit to classes, self-guided learning, and the creation of projects. They sign a Commitment Pledge to put forth their best effort to ensure a successful learning experience. Students must be willing to continue self-guided depth learning and skills practice during maker lab hours and personal time. And, students are expected to complete a final capstone project for their maker portfolio/resume either solo or as part of a team.”

When I asked what his future goal is, he said, I want the Maker Skills Academy to be the choice of manufacturers for training employees, both existing and those being hired.  I want the MSA to be considered as the “Olympic training center” for manufacturing skills. I envision local manufacturers becoming partners with Vocademy for their employee training.”

I told him that I hope he realizes his goal because programs like his would go a long way in solving the skills gap and attracting the next generation of manufacturing workers.  It is critical that we get back to being a nation of “makers” as manufacturing is the foundation of the middle class, and our middle class has been shrinking for the last 30 years as we moved more and more manufacturing offshore.   

Tags: , ,
Posted in Education, Manufacturing, Training, Workforce Development | No Comments »

Congress Must Strengthen Buy America Act

June 4th, 2019

The Buy American Act was passed by Congress in 1933. It required the U.S. government to give preferential treatment to American producers in awarding of federal contracts. The Act restricted the purchase of supplies that are not domestic products. For manufactured products, the Buy American Act used a two-part test:  first, the article must be manufactured in the U.S., and second, the cost of domestic components must exceed 50 percent of the cost of all its components.

After the end of the Cold War and the end of the subsequent Gulf War in 1991, the provisions of the “Buy America Act” were eased to allow purchasing off the shelf commercial parts (COTS) from foreign countries by the Defense Department and other government agencies if they met the same fit and function of parts made to strict military specifications. Previously, parts, assemblies, and systems were required to be substantially made in the United States or in a NATO country, such as Great Britain, France, or Germany.

In the early 1990s, most commercial parts were still being made in the United States, with some outsourcing to the Philippines, Hong Kong, and Singapore, so this change was pretty safe. However, permitting commercial parts to replace Military Specification parts probably drove out of business the small companies that catered exclusively to the military and provided Traceability of Origin per Military Specifications for parts supplied to government agencies, military contractors, and subcontractors. This was all done in the name of cost savings.

Gradually over the last 26 years, the manufacturing of most commercial electronic components and microchips was transferred offshore, so that now they are fabricated in China, Vietnam, or South Korea. 

This is the root cause of counterfeit Chinese parts becoming part of the military/defense industrial supply chain.

The President has authority to waive the Act in response to the provision of reciprocal treatment to U.S. producers. Under the 1979 GATT Agreement on Government Procurement, the U.S.-Israel Free Trade Agreement, the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement, the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Central American Free Trade Agreement, and the Korea Free Trade Agreement, access to government procurement is granted by certain U.S. agencies for goods from the partner countries to these agreements.

It was reported by Reuters in January 2014 that “The Pentagon repeatedly waived laws banning Chinese-built components on U.S. weapons in order to keep the $392 billion Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter program on track in 2012 and 2013, even as U.S. officials were voicing concern about China’s espionage and military buildup.”

To address weaknesses in the defense supply chain and to promote the adoption of aggressive counterfeit avoidance practices by the Department of Defense and the defense industry, an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012  was adopted in the Senate and signed by President Obama.

Instead of implementing the requirements of the Act, it appears that DOD “entered a new phase… characterized by globalization of supply chains” according to Richard McCormack, publisher and producer of the Manufacturing & Technology News, May 20, 2015 edition.

McCormack reported on comments made by Bill Lynn, CEO of Finmeccanica North America and former Deputy Secretary of Defense from 2009 until 2011, at the April 29, 2015 meeting of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.

The defense sector and the U.S. military have “moved from being a net exporter of technology to a net importer,” Lynn stated, adding “When their R&D budgets are combined to total a scant $3 billion (or only 1.6 percent of revenue), the five biggest defense contractors — Boeing, Lockheed, Raytheon, L3 and Northrop — would not even make the list of the top 20 global companies that invest in R&D.”

Lynn told the meeting, “Those are things where the commercial industrial base is stronger than the defense industrial base and in many ways the key to maintaining our future [defense] technology edge is to be able to import those technologies into our defense industrial base… Since many of the underlying technologies now reside outside of the United States, DOD has to figure out how to deal with foreign corporations and state-owned enterprises that hold the keys to its success.”

McCormack noted, “The Department of Defense and its major contractors are now dependent on foreign manufacturers for many of the military’s most advanced weapons systems…The defense industry is a shadow of its former self, representing less than 3.5 percent of the U.S. economy, a position that continues to decline as defense budgets reach new lows with no chance of them growing faster than the economy.”

Lynn commented that “DOD is slowly catching up to the structural change caused by globalization of technology and supply chains. It is wrestling with the regulatory and procurement systems it has in place to monitor and conduct business with foreign suppliers, but it has little time to waste.”

Lynn stated “that changing perceptions about foreign involvement in the defense industry are similar to what happened in the U. S. auto sector…Americans and their representatives in Congress were skeptical about foreign nameplates. But as foreign auto companies started building technologies in the United States and hiring American workers, the tide turned… “

It is incomprehensible to me to compare what happened to the U. S. auto industry to what is happening to the U. S. defense industry. The whole purpose of the defense industry is to protect our national sovereignty and national security. How can anyone in their right mind want to make our defense supply chain vulnerable to the foreign country, namely China, that has a written plan to replace the U.S. as the world’s super power? The Chinese have stolen our technology to build up their own military power as evidenced by the uncanny similarity of China’s stealth fighter, the J-31and the Chengdu J-20 fighter jet to the F-35 Lightning II advanced fighter jet. 

Does anyone believe that we will get the parts and assemblies needed by our defense industry when China has decided we are so weak that we cannot stop their aggression in Asia? We are not even safe to have parts sourced in Taiwan, South Korea, the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, or Vietnam. These countries would all be targets for takeover by China once the Chinese lose their fear and respect for U. S. naval and air power.

Four of the last five sessions of Congress attempted to address this problem, but the following bills to strengthen the Buy American Act introduced in Congress failed to be enacted: 

H.R. 4553 (111th), introduced February 2, 2010

S. 2391 (113th), introduced May 22, 2014

S. 2167 (114th), introduced October 8, 2015.

At least, President Trump issued an Executive Order on Buy American and Hire American onApril 18, 2017, which set forth a policy to “maximize …use of goods, products and materials produced in the United States” through federal procurements.

This was followed by the introduction of the 21st Century Buy American Act (S.2196) on Dec. 6, 2017 by Sen. Chris Murphy, D-CN, and a similar bill, H.R. 4812 introduced in the House by Representative David Cicilline. D-RI.  Both bills aimed to strengthen existing Buy American standards, but after considerable support, both failed to be enacted. The legislation focused on five change areas.

  1. The cost of components test for non-commercial-off-the-shelf items would be modified to require that an item’s U.S. component costs exceed 60% of the item’s total costs for the item to be deemed “domestic.” From the current 50%
  2. The so-called “overseas exemption” regarding items procured for use outside the United States would be limited significantly.
  3. Agencies would not be permitted to apply a public interest exception unless it considers the short-term and long-term effects of applying such exception on employment within the U.S.
  4. A program to make or guarantee loans would be created for contractors seeking to manufacture certain items that are not currently manufactured in the U.S.
  5. Actions would be taken to increase transparency related to the use of exceptions

On May 2, 2019, Congressmen Dan Lipinski (IL-3) and Mike Bost (IL-12) “reintroduced the BuyAmerican.gov Act, which helps ensure that federal agencies adhere to Buy American laws and prioritize the purchase of American-made goods. The legislation, H.R. 2472, directs the General Services Administration to establish a website, BuyAmerican.gov, to collect and display information about each request by a federal agency to bypass ‘Buy American’ laws and purchase foreign-made products.  Once the law is approved, manufacturers and others will be able to use the site to identify contract opportunities and challenge pending ‘Buy American’ waivers sought by federal agencies.”

The press release stated, “In the last five years, federal agencies have spent $34 billion on goods manufactured by foreign firms.  The Department of Defense, the largest purchaser of manufactured goods in the world, has spent almost $200 billion on manufactured goods made by foreign companies since 2007.…This bill applies “Buy American” requirements to federal spending programs that are not covered under current law and closes loopholes in “Buy American” programs.

Under current law, federal agencies are exempt from following Buy American laws if American-made goods are unavailable or cost-prohibitive. Unfortunately, federal agencies are too often abusing this waiver authority and there’s no way to hold them accountable,” Lipinski said.”

Senators Rob Portman (R-OH), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Sherrod Brown (D-OH) introduced companion legislation the same day in the Senate.

This bill increases transparency related to waivers and exemptions to the Buy American Act, but it doesn’t address the other four issues that previous bills addressed.

Congress must act to strengthen the Buy American Act, not weaken it, eliminate the incentives for offshoring, and provide incentives for bringing manufacturing back to America. We must protect the supply chain for defense and military products and systems, so that the Defense Department can fulfill its primary mission of defending our country.

Tags: , ,
Posted in Country of Origin, Legislation | No Comments »

Urban Workshop Sets High Bar for Makerspaces

May 21st, 2019

·         Autodesk Fusion 360 Software -Free Fusion 360 software for Urban Workshop and for all members.

After the NACCE summit I attended on April 27th formally ended at 1:30 PM, I went on the optional tour of a nearby makerspace, the Urban Workshop in Costa Mesa. It is the largest makerspace I have visited in my travels around the country and is the largest makerspace in southern California.

“Urban workshop was born out of my engineering and manufacturing company called Automotive Technology Group Inc., which opened in 2001. Prior to the economic downturn, we were one of the top EV and hybrid vehicle engineering houses in the country doing advanced R&D for the large auto makers and smaller startups such as Fisker Automotive. We also did a small number of professional motorsports.

When the economy slowed, most of the engineering services and manufacturing dried up but the motorsport business swelled. The rich guys who were racing cars weren’t affected by the downturn of the economy so we did well. Around January 2013, I started doing STEM presentations to kids at local high schools and colleges to tell them about the race cars hoping to peak their interest in the sciences. I had heard about makerspaces and started asking some of the teachers their opinion about them. Jokingly, they started to introduce me as the guy who is opening “The Shop.”  I didn’t correct them, and before I knew it, people were showing up at ATG asking if this was “The Shop” and if it was open yet.

The Urban Workshop was founded by, and is privately owned by, Steve Trindade. During the tour, Steve told the story of how he started the makerspace, and later emailed me the following story:

“By January 2014, I had become very frustrated with the engineering services business due to customers not paying or going out of business leaving me holding the bag. Simultaneously, three to five people per week were stopping by to look for “The Shop.” That was when I decided to go for it. We wound down the projects we were working on, and signed a lease for a 5,500 square foot R&D space in May 2014.”

Steve said, “Our facility was basically built, painted, and set up by volunteers. People who walked in the front door and asked, is this “The Shop?”  I said, It’s Urban Workshop, but we aren’t open yet. Almost always they replied, can I help? I said yes, and put them to work.

In the end, we renovated the facility and got ready to open with nearly all volunteer help. Using all volunteer help, we set up the new facility and opened as Urban Workshop on July 2014. We had a similar experience with volunteer help when we moved into our current larger building in April 2015.

Since then, the business has grown significantly, and our membership is over 1,700. Our small business members do approximately $20M in annual revenue directly out of our facility, and collectively they have raised nearly $70M in angel and venture funding. In 2015, we added youth programing similar to the old school shop classes and now serve over 1,000 students age 10 to 16 years old annually.”

I was impressed by the kind of equipment and resources the Urban Workshop provides. It is a full-scale DIY workshop and makerspace meaning that it includes all aspects of engineering, prototyping and manufacturing equipment.  Steve said, “We have nearly $1M worth of equipment and because we used to be a professional services company, all of the equipment is current state of the art industry relevant equipment as opposed to the typical hobby level equipment you find in all other makerspaces. We teach classes on all the equipment and continue to add classes as fast as we can generate the course materials.

The equipment I saw on the tour included computers and software, large format plotters and printers, 3D printers, laser etchers, sheet metal fabrication equipment, manual and CNC machines, MIG and TIG welding, a vacuum forming machine, an autoclave, a silicone molding pressure pot, an extensive wood shop with a large CNC router, a composites fabrication shop, a vinyl cutter, sewing equipment, an electronics lab, and an auto shop with five auto lifts. 

On their website, the following companies are listed as commercial partners/supporters:

·         Epilog Laser Etchers – Educational pricing on equipment and extended warranty support to Urban Workshop

When I asked what “Making” meant to him, he said, “In one word, opportunity. Opportunity for our members to learn new skills, open a new business, fix something, help others, learn a new skill, make a new friend, complete a personal project or who knows what. It has been very satisfying to watch people come in the shop with one idea and end up making five more things they never thought of before on equipment they have never used before with the help of someone they met at Urban Workshop.”

·         Haas CNC Machines Educational pricing on equipment, extended warranty support, free computerized training and simulation station to Urban Workshop.

·         Autodesk HSMWorks Free HSMWorks CNC programming software for members to use on site.

·         SolidWorks– Free engineering software for members to use on site.

·         Laguna Tools – Educational pricing on equipment, software and extended warranty support to Urban Workshop.

·         National Instruements – Free Virtual Bench all-in-one test equipment and LabView software for members to use on site.

·         Ingersoll-Rand – Educational discount on machine tooling and fixtures to Urban Workshop.·        

Steve said, “The initial response to Urban Workshop was overwhelmingly positive, and the level of enthusiasm was incredible. The response continues to be great and the level of excitement and comradery continues to grow. Almost weekly a member comes to my office to thank me for opening the shop and enabling them to be able to make their dream project or start their new business. I knew this would be fun and satisfying, but I never imagined the extent that it would be so well received.”

One other observation he made is that whether you call it hacking, making, or tinkering, “the desire people have to use their hands is universal and fundamental. It is extremely satisfying to figure something out, address a problem or need one has or create something from scratch. I believe it has a therapeutic value and allows one to focus on something for a time without distraction. This is something that is unusual in these days of smart phones and social networking.”

In describing the projects his members are working on, he said, “Theyvaryjust as much as the members do. We have young professionals who are starting their own businesses all the way to the “burning man” crowd. It is impossible to nail it down and give a simple example. I have seen everything from ruggedized super tablets designed and manufactured in the shop to an Arduino controlled dog feeder and a talking Wi-Fi enabled Christmas tree. Urban Workshop’s membership is approximately 45% startups developing and manufacturing new products, 40% hobbyist, and 15% students. The hobbyists are the most diverse and work on home projects, vehicle restorations, boats, motorcycles, gifts, tons of wood working and cabinetry, arts and crafts, holiday decorations, cosplay, prop making, toys, and you name it.”

When I asked what his future plans are, he said, “Our long term the goal is to open additional locations. Currently, we are expanding our class offering to include many more project classes that will help guide people on the path of making. The youth program continues to grow, and additional levels will be added. Our most promising new product is the licensing of our operational procedures and class documentation to other makerspaces world-wide, providing operational training, and instructor training to enable them to prosper and help even more people.”

I’ve only visited one other makerspace about which I wrote, Vocademy in Riverside, that had a plan to expand to other locations, but its focus was on working with high schools to provide the career technical training that high schools used to provide.  With the depth and breadth of Steve’s business experience, he is more likely to succeed with his future plans than others. 

Posted in General | No Comments »

Makerspaces Play new Role in Career Technical Training at Community Colleges

May 8th, 2019

The National Association for Community College Entrepreneurship held a Makerspace Ecosystem Summit titled “Make/Shift” in Irvine on April 24-26th, and I was able to attend the last day.  I learned that in 2016,”the California Community College Chancellor’s Office, Workforce and Economic Division funded the $17 million CCC Maker Initiative for three years under the  Doing What Matters for Jobs and the Economy  framework.  It was the first statewide initiative to grow a system of community college makerspaces and included funding for 800 internships.

After a rigorous application process, 24 “California community colleges were awarded grants to establish makerspaces — do-it-yourself centers where students have access to technology that allows them to create, invent, learn and share ideas. Each of the selected colleges was awarded from $100,000 to $350,000 per year for up to two years.” The makerspace at Mt. San Jacinto Community College in Menifee that I visited last October on MFG Day was one of the funded makerspaces.

“Makerspaces —also known as fablabs — are places in a community where people get together to learn and invent using technology such as 3-D printers, computer-aided design (CAD) software and manufacturing equipment that might otherwise be unaffordable for an individual to purchase.” The California Community College (CCC) “Maker initiative is aimed at strengthening the workforce by inspiring students to learn by doing, teaching in-demand skills for jobs in science, technology, engineering and math fields, partnering with employers to provide internships…”.

The makerspace grants were planned to coincide with a program by the CCC “to promote its more than 200 career education programs as affordable training for good-paying jobs.” The CCC is the largest provider of workforce training in the U.S. with 114 campuses across the state serving 2.1 million students per year. Its career education programs are developed in partnership with local industries and taught by instructors with direct work experience.

At the first session on Friday, Willy Duncan, Superintendent and President of Sierra College said that while the initial funding has ended, he is committed to continuing the good work and getting follow up funding for the makerspaces. He emphasized that entrepreneurship in 4th Industrial Revolution is being led by entrepreneurs disrupting existing technologies.  He said that the Fourth Industrial Revolution is interacting with other socio-economic and demographic factors to create a perfect storm of business model change in all industries, resulting in major disruptions to labor markets. It is a fusion of new technologies and talents.

The skills needed are more complex and cut across disciplines. Artificial Intelligence, Industrial IoT, automation, and robotics have the potential of creating new jobs, but will widen the skills gap.” He referenced the Future of Jobs Report, which states that automation will accelerate skills shift and social and creative skills will be more important — 42% of skills will change and  

75 million jobs could be displaced. The less you make now will put you at risk for being displaced.

He mentioned that a study by the USC Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism on Third Space Competencies stated that “third places” are places where you can connect to unlock innovation, drive collaboration, and develop talent.  He recommended that educators need to create third places within makerspaces. He said, “A mindset of agile learning will be needed on the part of workers in the future.  Project-based learning is the hallmark of makerspaces, and students who struggle in traditional leaning may excel in project-based learning. The future will require life-long learning to continually acquire new skills.”

Mr. Duncan said we need to figure out how to revamp learning to stay relevant. It can’t take years to change. Collaboration is critical to implementing change and learning how to lead “from the middle.”

Partnerships through collaboration within the College as well as within the community

Amy Schultz – Dean of Continuing and Technical training at Sierra College said that they partnered with Hacker Labs to create their Makerspace and said their makerspace has an advanced manufacturing. lab with Haas CNC equipment. Partnerships succeed when each partner benefits so it can be sustained.

Dr. Cathy Kemper—Pelle, President of Rogue Community College, in Grants Pass, OR said they partnered with local community to create a makerspace in the downtown area of the city. They bought an old manufacturing building and converted it into large Makerspace, and students are participating in Invent Oregon.

Cabrillo College in Aptos, near Monterrey Bay, partnered with local Goodwill for creating internships for makerspace students and held a joint internship fair.

Dr, Carlos Turner-Cortez. San Diego Continuing Ed. said that their Center provides noncredit training classes that are free.

Some insights from the session were:

  • Artificial Intelligence is allowing companies to develop new products at a faster pace
  • Transportation is going autonomous and vertical at the same time
  • Mode of teaching is being disrupted by online learning and compressed learning
  • Try non-credit training if you want to innovate

Next, I attended the breakout session, Building a Strong Workforce – A TED talk panel discussion – The Future is Happening Now – Cari Vinci of InVINcible Enterprises

In Ms. Vinci’s presentation, she noted that the goal of 70% of students is to go to college, but 75% are undecided about a major.  In the 21st Century workplace, only 23% of future jobs will require 4-year college degree, 34% will require an associate degree or some college, 34% will require a High School diploma or less, and only 11% will require an advanced degree. Today’s education isn’t meeting the needs of the workplace.  A Gallup poll showed that the role of higher education needs to be “purpose-based education.” A mindset of lifelong learning and an understanding of what’s going on globally will be necessary. The new ”Power Skills” for technical skills is to learn what robots and Artificial Intelligence can’t do yet. Students need to acquire the 21st Century Power Skills to ensure success.  Her Playbook for Teens helps students become the CEO of their life and find their career sweet spot.  Community Colleges and makerspaces are catalysts to connect the dots through internships, apprenticeships, and entrepreneurship.

Panelist Andy McCutcheon, Dean of the School of Humanities and Maker Space, College of the Canyons, shared that their MakerSpace is part an integrative learning model that encourages the development of 21st century technical and professional skills while connecting students with community and career paths. Their MakerSpace offers unique opportunities for helping students to connect classroom content and theory with real world problem solving while exploring career opportunities within and beyond their majors and foster connections that may lead to work-based learning opportunities like internships and apprenticeships.  MakerSpace 100 is a project that has placed 25 COC students with two local community partners, JPL’s Mars Rover Team and the Santa Clarita City Hall “Green Streets” team. Students are working in teams to develop solutions related to a NASA payload project and the Sustainable Santa Clarita project gaining important workplace experience while earning college credit and being paid through the CCC Maker Grant.

Panelist, Sarah Boisvert has over 30 years’ experience in advanced manufacturing and is the author of the book, The New Collar Workforce. She is the co-founder of Potomac Photonics, Inc. a laser machine tool company, which she and her partners sold in 1999. Since “retiring”, she founded Fab Lab Hub, located in Santa Fe, NM, which is a member of America Makes, the National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute. Ms. Boisvert highlighted the re-emergence of manufacturing and briefly presented a blueprint of how to leverage this new, new manufacturing in colleges. She explained that the new collar workforce is a combination of entrepreneurial, design, fabricators, business, and other skills that is turning the traditional workforce training model on its head. She said that where blue collar assembly line positions are being replaced by robots, a new collar job is being created to maintain and control the systems. She said that the evolution of traditional blue-collar jobs into new digitally minded jobs that work symbiotically with robots and intelligent technology will be the key to exponential growth, and many new collar workers are attending vocational schools and community colleges rather than attaining traditional four-year degrees.

The final session featured a discussion of sustainability and funding insights from Foundation leaders:

Stephanie Bowman, Manager, HP Foundation – she said that the HP Foundation provides HP Foundation provides core business and IT skills training free of charge for start-ups, students, and small businesses through HP LIFE (Learning Initiative for Entrepreneurs)  Each module takes one hour and you get certificate when complete. They have awarded $23 million in grants in 42 countries. The mission of the HP Foundation is to make life better for undeserved and underrepresented communities by providing technology-related learning experiences and opportunities.

Rachel Burnnette, Program Officer, Lemelson Foundation (Portland, OR) – she said that the Foundation uses the power of invention to improve lives, by inspiring and enabling the next generation of inventors and invention-based enterprises to promote economic growth in the US, and social and economic progress for the poor in developing countries. The Foundation has provided or committed more than $185 million in grants and Program-Related Investments in support of its mission. They run their funding through Venturewell.

I’m very glad to see that community colleges are taking the lead in providing career technical training to bridge the widening gap of job skills for the 21st century workplace. Makerspaces are uniquely poised to foster real world connections between theory and practice and between the classroom and what a student might want to do with his or her life.  What concerns me is that many of the 24 California Community Colleges may wind up struggling to keep their doors open at a time when colleges across the state are looking for ways to cut costs in response to the statewide shortfall caused by a new funding formula. New programs without ongoing funding may be the first to go as districts tighten their belts. I can only hope that private foundations like those mentioned above and collaborative industry partnerships will alleviate the funding gap.

Jelani Odlum, Michelson 20MM Foundation (Los Angeles) – she said the Foundation supports innovation in education and higher learning initiatives. The Foundation’s founder, Dr. Gary Michelson,  has several hundred patents for his company. She explained that the vision for their Spark Grants program is to introduce an innovative just-in-time grantmaking process to fill urgent needs for education organizations that are well-aligned with their key target outcomes. They seek to fund highly impactful initiatives that would not be possible if they needed to wait through a traditional grant decision timeline.

Tags: ,
Posted in General | No Comments »

The High Cost of Trade Deficits

April 9th, 2019 
 
 

Free trade has resulted in enormous trade deficits in goods for the United States for over 40 years. Our last year of a positive trade balance was 1975. At best, free trade has benefited large, multinational global corporations that have manufacturing facilities located in other countries. At its worst, it is the primary source of our trade deficit and loss of good paying manufacturing jobs.

Even with the tremendous resources we have, what was once the world’s largest manufacturer of products has accumulated $14.379 trillion worth of deficits in goods for all countries since 1991.

A fact sheet generated by the Coalition for a Prosperous America for 2018 show ten countries account for 97% of our trade deficit: China, Mexico, Japan, Germany, Ireland, Vietnam, Italy, India, South Korea, and Malaysia. Our trade deficit with China alone was $419 billion, representing 47.9% of our trade deficit.  Since 1991, we have accumulated over $9.144 trillion worth of trade deficits with just the top four countries. If we had fair trade, we would not have these constant trade deficits.  The drastic effect China has had on our trade deficit is demonstrated by the fact that in 2001 when China joined the World Trade Organization, we had a total $412 billion deficit in goods, but in 2018, we had a $879 billion deficit in goods. 

 

For every $1 billion of trade deficits in goods, it’s been estimated that 6,000 – 7,000 jobs are lost, at about $80,000/job. This means that 8 – 10 million more Americans willing to work could have a comfortable middle-class job in America. Instead, we lost 5.8 million manufacturing jobs from the year 2000 to 2010. 

 

In terms of purchasing power, workers’ wages in the U.S. have been stagnant since the 1970s. The significant collapse in the income of average Americans can be attributed to the vast decline of jobs in the U.S. manufacturing sector. This is the reason average U.S. wages have fallen over time, especially since 2001. From 2001 – 2013, the average U.S. wages fell by 3.5%. In contrast, as Chinese workers flocked to cities for manufacturing jobs, wages have grown substantially, averaging an 11 percent increase per year from 2001 to 2015. 

 

According to the Pew Research Center, 61% of American households were part of the middle class in 1971, but by 2015, only 50% of Americans were part of the middle class. “In 2002, China’s middle class was only four percent of its population. A decade later, this number had climbed to 31 percent, constituting over 420 million people. In contrast, in 1999, only 2% of the Chinese population was a part of the middle class, but by 2013, 39% of the Chinese population was in the middle class.

 

Since China joined the World Trade Organization, the bi-partisan, 12 member U. S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC) has been required to submit annual reports to Congress. These reports document China’s non-compliance with the WTO and the effect it has on the U. S. economy.

For example, the 2007 report included a case study of the local impact of trade with China on North Carolina. The USCC report stated “the accelerating decline in North Carolina’s manufacturing employment is due in large measure to increasing competition from imports mostly from China . . . The combination of China’s 2001 admission to the World Trade Organization (WTO), which gave it quota-free access to U.S. markets for its textile and clothing exports, and the subsequent U.S. grant of Most-Favored (Trading) Nation status that lowered most tariffs on Chinese imports, battered North Carolina’s textile and apparel industries, and they never recovered.”

Because a greater proportion of North Carolina’s workforce had manufacturing jobs than any other state, North Carolina’s workforce was more vulnerable to competition from imports than the workforces of other states. North Carolina’s manufacturing economy was made even more vulnerable by its concentration in the import-sensitive sectors of textiles, apparel, and furniture. North Carolina is one of the southeast states that had a large number of textile companies, and as a result, North Carolina has been the most impacted state in the nation by layoffs due to trade. Between 2004 and 2006, almost 39,000 North Carolina workers were certified by the Trade Adjustment Assistance program as having lost jobs to trade, more than 10 percent of the U.S. total of 387,755. 

According to the Social Science Research Institute (SSRI) of Duke University in North Carolina, there were 2,153 textile and apparel plants in North Carolina employing 233,715 people in 1996. By 2006, the apparel industry had experienced a 70% decline in jobs and 55% loss of plants. The textile industry by comparison had only lost 63% of jobs and 32% of plants from 1996 to 2006. 

The loss of these well-paid manufacturing jobs in North Carolina’s textile industry may have resulted in families losing their homes and/or being forced to relocate to other areas of the country to find jobs. Taking lower paying jobs in their own communities may have resulted in families no longer being in the middle-class income range. And, those who have not been able to find any work or only part-time work may have even dropped down to the poverty level.  It is not just people losing jobs and not being able to find other employment that pays as well as their former jobs, “hundreds of small towns throughout North Carolina impacted by plant closures are dying.”

Remember that it takes taxes paid by three to four working Americans to pay for the unemployment benefits of a non-working American. The cheaper China price of goods that we import instead of producing here in the U. S. results in a cost to society as a whole. We need to ask ourselves:  Is the China price worth the cost to society?  I say a resounding NO! We need to stop shooting ourselves in the feet. We need to stop benefitting the one percent of large multinational corporations to the detriment of the 99% percent of smaller American companies.

China, Germany, Japan, and many other countries have built their currency value around making certain all of their countrymen have a good job, even if that destroys America’s work force. As a result, these countries have maintained constant trade surpluses with the U. S. for many years, which would not have happened if we had fair trade.

 

It is impossible for the U.S.to remain competitive if our currency is not fairly valued. In order to move manufacturing jobs back to the U.S., we need to move our currency value down by at least 27% because the currency of Germany and Japan are undervalued by about that same amount.  China has rigged its currency between 15%-40% below its fair value since joining the WTO, and this gives a subsidy to their imports to the U.S. and imposes a direct cost on U.S. exports to China.

Devaluing our currency would allow many more products that we import from overseas to be made here. Unfair trade practices of currency manipulation, government subsidies, product dumping, and state-owned enterprises have allowed China to buy our raw materials and our low-cost energy to become the largest producer in the world of paper, aluminum, and steel even though labor costs are small compared to the cost of raw materials, energy, and transportation.

We need to focus on eliminating our trade deficits and achieving balanced, reciprocal trade in all future trade agreements. The last thing we need is to increase our trade deficit more than it already is.

 

In addition, we need to continue on the path of returning more manufacturing to America by reforming our tax policies and making regulations less onerous to manufacturers, without compromising our commitment to protect our environment. This is the only way that we will be able to simultaneously reduce our trade deficit and the national debt.

Tags: ,
Posted in Currency Misalignment/Munipulation, Manufacturing, Trade Policy | No Comments »

Congress Must Protect Inventor Rights

April 2nd, 2019

Ever since the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act was passed by the 112th Congress in 2011, inventors have been discouraged to innovate by failing to secure the exclusive rights to their inventions through a patent.

It was bad enough that the Act changed patent law from a “first to invent” to “a first to file” for patents. It also created new and easier ways to invalidate an existing patent. Prior to this, to invalidate a patent required going to a judicial court with a jury and its various protections offered to the holder of a property right. The Act created procedures for an administrative court, the PTAB (Patent Trial and Appeals Board), that does not have the same protections.  PTAB has become a nightmare for inventors because it allows infringers to challenge the validity of patents in the PTAB. Some inventors have faced hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal expense and annihilation of their patent rights in unlimited third-party patent validity challenges. Serial petitions are common with valuable patents suffering a dozen or more attacks with costs typically being in excess of $350,000 for each PTAB defense.

Some inventors have endured up to a decade and spent tens of millions of dollars in legal expense to obtain a final judgment in court against infringers of their patent.  Even then, inventors have not been not compensated fairly or sufficiently to prevent infringement of their patent rights.

For example, in the Amazon documentary, Invalidated: The Shredding of the U.S. Patent System,  Josh Malone, the inventor of Bunch O Balloons, stated that his court case against Telebrands has cost over $20M.  It also documented how Dan Phillips, inventor of the Bionic Wrench, has been fighting Sears in court since 2012. A judge recently tossed out the jury verdict that held Sears liable because of their bankruptcy. I understand his appeal process will take several more years. (Note:  The full version is available now on Amazon and iTunes)

It’s not just China that is stealing our technology; it is U.S.-based corporations stealing technology from inventors right and left. Google, Apple, Amazon, Telebrands and other big corporations are getting away with profiting from pirated product. Why should large corporations be allowed to steal inventions and block access to the legal system for private inventors and small businesses? How can a small business survive if it takes a decade and millions of dollars in legal expense to protect intellectual property rights? 

According to Randy Landreneau, President of US Inventor, Inc., “Current policies and case law focus instead on patents as monetary assets held by corporations, injecting extremely high cost and risk to enforcing any single patent and making patent enforcement a ‘game of kings.’ Big corporations play the game by hiring dozens of lawyers, hoarding hundreds of patents, and pouring millions of dollars into litigation. Inventors cannot play that game and need a viable path to enforce their patent rights because PTAB rulings have canceled claims in 85% of issued patents. This is disheartening and discouraging to inventors and startups in our community.”

He added, “In the rare instance that the PTAB permits an inventor to keep his patent, there is no monetary recovery. This means the inventor has nothing to offer a law firm to take the case on a contingency basis. Pro bono defense is not available either. Inventors with valuable inventions have virtually no chance of keeping their patents in the PTAB.”

Last year three bills were introduced to Congress to protect inventors rights, but these bills never got out of committee for a vote on the House floor:

H.R.6557, Inventor Protection Act – “To amend title 35, United States Code, to restore patent rights to inventors, and for other purposes.” It was designed to restore patent protection for inventors by reversing a generation of laws and regulations. 

S.1390, Stronger Patents Act of 2017 – A bill to strengthen the position of the United States as the world’s leading innovator by amending title 35, United States Code, to protect the property rights of the inventors that grow the country’s economy.

H.R.6264 – Restoring America’s Leadership in Innovation Act of 2018 – A bill “to promote the leadership of the United States in global innovation by establishing a robust patent system that restores and protects the right of inventors to own and enforce private property rights in inventions and discoveries, and for other purposes.”


In order to foster the development of American manufacturing, Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the Constitution states that the Congress shall have the power “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”

This enabled America to become the world leader in innovation, driven largely by this simple yet profound promise to inventors of the exclusive right to their discoveries. Without secure patent rights, inventors are starved of time and capital required to explore and develop new technologies. Today, the United States faces an escalating innovation crisis as we are forced to rely on outdated or imported technologies. Congress must act quickly to restore reliable patent rights for inventors.

As a mentor for San Diego’s CONNECT Springboard accelerator program for a few years and a director on the board of the San Diego Inventors Forum, I work with inventors designing new products or break-through technologies. Local inventors have the opportunity to compete in the San Diego Inventors Forum annual invention contest for best new consumer product or best new technology. All contestants must have applied for at least a provisional patent before they can participate. The future success of their product or technology is contingent upon their having a patent they can protect from infringement. Their ability to raise the financial investment they need to bring their product to the marketplace depends upon their being able to protect their patent.

Why is this important? Because most new technologies, especially break-through or disruptive technologies, come from individual inventors who either start a company or license their technology to companies that are more able to take them to the market. It is critical for inventors to be able to have some assurance that the rights to their patents will be reviewed in a consistent manner so that they will be able to secure investors and get their product into the marketplace.

Inventors must be equipped and motivated to apply their knowledge and creativity to solving problems.  In order to encourage inventors to share their discovery in exchange for a time-limited exclusive right, patents owned by the original inventor must be protected from the policies that target assets held and traded by non-inventors.

The United States must retake the lead in the next wave of technological innovation in areas like quantum computing, artificial intelligence, and medical diagnostics. Protection for discoveries is these fields is the absolute best way to promote progress in science and useful arts in our modern day.

US Inventors started off The Inventor’s Project in February by co-hosting an open house on Capitol Hill with the Congressional Inventions Caucus. A bipartisan group of Congressional members and staff attended. As a result, the Inventions Caucus will continue to grow and support the mission of educating Congress on the importance of innovation and small inventors and promote the Inventor Rights Resolution.

SUMMARY OF THE RESOLUTION

Our patent system is in crisis. Recent changes to patent laws and Supreme Court decisions have adversely affected inventors such that the requirement in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution of “securing for limited times to inventors the exclusive right to their discoveries” is no longer achieved. It is nearly impossible to stop an infringer from using an invention without permission, or to make them to pay for the damage caused when they do. The undersigned inventors call on Congress to pass legislation to address these critical issues.

PTAB

The USPTO Must Stop Taking Back Patents from Inventors

INJUNCTIONS

Courts must prohibit the use of a patented invention without permission

PROFITS

Infringers must not profit by using an invention without permission

We must stop the America Invents Act from gradually destroying the American Patent System. We need to encourage our own Congressional Representative to co-sponsor or support an Inventor Rights Act to restore our rights as inventors in this Congress and reinvigorate the famous American innovation system.  Join us by signing the Inventor Rights Resolution

Tags: ,
Posted in Inellectual Property, Legislation, Patent Reform | No Comments »

Are Tariffs Reducing the National Debt and Federal Deficit?

March 6th, 2019

There is increasing evidence that Trump’s tariffs are working to expand American manufacturing and create jobs.

According to the February 11, 2019 U.S. Manufacturing Technology Order Report press release of The Association for Manufacturing Technology, “The year- end order total for 2018 was $5.5 billion, up 19 percent from the annual sum for 2017…’We finished a fantastic run up in manufacturing technology orders during 2018, with most analysts looking for good growth in units and modest growth in revenue in 2019,” said AMT President Doug Woods.”

In an Op-Ed for The Hill on February 12, 2019, Michael Stumo, CEO of the coalition for a Prosperous America, wrote: “There’s no doubt that America’s manufacturers are currently rebounding. The tariffs that President Trump imposed a year ago on steel, aluminum, solar panels and washing machines have already created more than 11,000 new jobs.”

In 2016 when he was a candidate, Trump told the Washington Post that he could make the U.S. debt-free “over a period of eight years.” Thus, the question is:  Are Trump’s tariffs reducing the Federal budget deficit and paying down the national debt?

For clarity, the Federal budget deficit is the annual difference between what the federal government takes in as revenue and what it spends for expenses. The U. S. has run a federal budget deficit every year since 2001 by spending more than it raises. The national debt is the total amount of money that has been borrowed and not yet repaid.  

At 7 PM on March 6, 2019 when I finished writing this article, the national debt was $22.109 trillion, and the Federal budget deficit was at $846.945 billion according to the U. S. National debt clock website (it registers an increase every second.)  In a CNN Business article by Lydia DePillis, on January 4, 2019, “The US national debt stood at $21.974 trillion at the end of 2018, more than $2 trillion higher than when President Donald Trump took office, according to numbers released Thursday by the Treasury Department.” On the other hand, the national debt nearly doubled under Obama’s eight-years as President going from $10.626 trillion when he was sworn on January 20, 2009 to $19.947 trillion when he left on January 20, 2017.

A Bloomberg article by Mark Niquette on January 17, 2019, states, “According to data from U.S. Customs and Border Protection, more than $13 billion in duties imposed by the Trump administration were assessed on imported goods as of Dec. 18…Customs and Border Protection collects the tariffs based on the price paid for shipments and the tariff rate in effect, and duties are charged when shipments are released into the U.S. The assessed amount now tops $13 billion, with $8 billion coming from the duties on Chinese goods…The duties are deposited in the U.S. Treasury.”

Thus, although President Trump claims that the tariffs are being paid by China and other countries, the tariffs are actually being paid to the U. S. Treasury by companies that import products.   

As I wrote in my last article, tariffs were a large source of revenue for the U.S. government for over a hundred years. However, in 1913, the 16th Amendment established Congress’s right to impose a federal income tax, and tariffs have represented a smaller proportion of receipts ever since. 

According to an article on the Center for Strategic International Studies website, “As of 2017, 47.9 percent of revenue came from individual income taxes, 35 percent from payroll taxes, 9 percent from corporate income taxes, 5.6 percent from other taxes, and 2.5 percent from excise taxes (taxes on specific goods like gas).”  Their projections for 2018 were that of the “$3.34 trillion in revenue in FY 2018, just $40.437 billion of that is projected to come from customs duties, representing 1.21 percent of the government’s total expected receipts.”

Since nearly half of tax revenue comes from individuals, the growth of high-paying manufacturing jobs as American manufacturing expands will generate more tax revenue and lower budget deficits.  Most people are unaware that it takes four to five persons paying taxes to pay for the unemployment benefits for one out of work person. Therefore, more people working and paying taxes lowers the Federal government’s expenses for unemployment compensation.  In turn, more people working stimulates the economy through their increased spending and consumption.

In fact, economic growth and the tariffs have helped make up for the decline in corporate tax revenue as a result of the reduction of corporate tax rates from a high of 34 percent down to 21 percent. A Breitbart article by John Carney on January 9,2019 states, “Revenue from taxes on corporate profits declined by $9 billion or 15 percent due to the deep cuts in corporate tax rates…The decline in corporate tax revenue, however, was nearly entirely offset by a rise in tariff revenue. These jumped by $8 billion, largely because of new tariffs on steel, aluminum, and Chinese imports imposed by the Trump Administration last year.”

Carney wrote, “Fiscal year i2019 will be the first to fully incorporate the tax cuts passed by Congress and signed by President Donald Trump in 2017. The first quarter’s numbers show that tax receipts have not declined but are in fact rising, albeit at a slower pace than spending. Which means that thanks to the economic acceleration of 2018, tax cuts are close to achieving the Trump administration’s projection that they would pay for themselves.”

We know that President Trump has proposed a 25 percent tariff on $200 billion of imports from China and another 25 percent tariff on all cars and car parts.  Even if the proposed tariffs get up the projected $140 billion, it would still be a long way from making up for the projected budget deficits to pay down the Federal budget deficit, much less start to pay down the national debt.

However, saving the American steel and aluminum industries, fostering the expansion of our domestic manufacturing industry, and preventing the loss of more manufacturing being transferred offshore to China is still reason enough to impose the tariffs on steel and aluminum and justify the additional tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods.  

Tags: ,
Posted in General | No Comments »

Tariffs Benefit the American Manufacturing Industry

February 13th, 2019

Most people are unaware that for over 150 years, the American government protected the development and growth of its manufacturing industry with high tariffs, ranging from a low of 5% to as high as 50% in some cases. The first tariffs were imposed by the Tariff Act of 1789, whose purpose was to raise money for the new federal government, slash Revolutionary War debt and protect early-stage American industries from foreign imports.

Prior to achieving its independence, Americans were dependent on goods imported from England, France, and Holland, so it was critical to develop their own manufacturing base to maintain independence as a country in the event of future wars.

These protectionist policies enabled its fledgling manufacturing industries to grow until the United States became the preeminent industrial nation in the 20th century.  American manufacturing dominated the globe for over 70 years.

After World War II, the U.S. switched from protectionism to free trade in order to rebuild the economies of Europe and Japan through the Marshall Plan and bind the economies of the non-Communist world to the United States for geopolitical reasons.

To accomplish these objectives, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was negotiated during the UN Conference on Trade and Employment, reflecting the failure of negotiating governments to create a proposed International Trade Organization. Originally signed by 23 countries at Geneva in 1947, GATT became the most effective instrument in the massive expansion of world trade in the second half of the 20th Century.

GATT’s most important principle was trade without discrimination, in which member nations opened their markets equally to one another. Once a country and one of its trading partners agreed to reduce a tariff, that tariff cut was automatically extended to all GATT members. GATT also established uniform customs regulations and sought to eliminate import quotas.

By the 1970s, Japan’s economy was flourishing to the point that Japan became a major exporter to the U. S. for consumer electronic goods such as cameras, stereos, radios, and TVs. During the 1980s, Japan further expanded its U. S. market share with automobiles and machine tools for the manufacturing industry, such as mills, lathes, and turret presses.

Germany focused on high-end products in all of the same markets as the Japanese, so that American products faced stiff competition at the low end and high end.

Manufacturing employment in the U. S. reached a peak of 19.5 million in 1979, and slid down to 17.3 million by 1993 from the effects of job losses from increased imports from Japan, Germany, and other countries because of free trade policies and lower tariffs.

By 1995, when the World Trade Organization replaced GATT, 125 nations had signed its agreements, governing 90 percent of world trade.

Another major blow to the American manufacturing industry took place when the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was negotiated under President Bill Clinton and went into effect in January 1994. The agreement was supposed to reduce market barriers to trade between the United States, Canada, and Mexico to reduce the cost of goods, increase our surplus trade balance with Mexico, reduce our trade deficit with Canada, and create 170,000 jobs a year. Twenty years later, the fallacy of these supposed benefits is well documented.

According to the report “NAFTA at 20” released in 2014 by Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch, “More than 845,000 specific U.S. workers have been certified for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) as having lost their jobs due to imports from Canada and Mexico or the relocation of factories to those countries.”

In 1994, GATT was updated to include new obligations upon its signatories. One of the most significant changes was the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO.) The 75 existing GATT members and the European Community became the founding members of the WTO on January 1, 1995. The other 52 GATT members rejoined the WTO in the following two years, the last being Congo in 1997. Since the founding of the WTO, a number of non-GATT members have joined, and there are now 157 members.

The loss of jobs accelerated after President Clinton granted Most Favored Nation status to China in the year 2000, and China was able to join the WTO. As a result, the U. S. lost 5.9 million manufacturing jobs from 2000 to 2010, and manufacturing employment dropped from 17.3 million down to 11.4 million in depth of recession in February 2010. In addition, an estimated 57,000 manufacturing firms closed.

On January 31, 2017, the Economic Policy Institute released a report, “Growth in U.S.–China trade deficit between 2001 and 2015 cost 3.4 million jobs,” written by Robert Scott.

Scott stated, “Due to the trade deficit with China, 3.4 million jobs were lost between 2001 and 2015, including 1.3 million jobs lost since the first year of the Great Recession in 2008. Nearly three-fourths (74.3 percent) of the jobs lost between 2001 and 2015 were in manufacturing (2.6 million manufacturing jobs displaced).”

Why were so many jobs lost? A large percentage of the people who lost jobs were in industries decimated by Chinese product dumping and below market pricing; i.e., textiles, furniture, tires, sporting goods, and garments. In addition, American manufacturers chose to outsource manufacturing offshore as the U.S. Department of Commerce data shows that “U.S. multinational corporations… cut their work forces in the U.S. by 2.9 million during the 2000s while increasing employment overseas by 2.4 million.”

Thankfully, manufacturing employment increased to 12.8 million by December 2018 as shown by the chart below. This was the result of a very slowly improving economy, reshoring (returning manufacturing to America), and increased Foreign Direct Investment (foreign manufacturers setting up plants in the U.S.) Notice that it took six years to increase by 904,000 under the Obama Administration, and it’s only taken two years to increase by another 441,000 jobs under the Trump Administration. While an increase of 1.4 million jobs is good news, at this rate, it would take about 30 years to recoup the 5.8 million jobs we lost from 2000 to 2010.

 

We need to accelerate the growth of manufacturing jobs, and that is what the tariffs imposed by President Trump are designed to do.  In the only few short months since the tariffs went into effect, I’ve seen the following headlines about job growth in the past week:

“U.S. Steel Corp. Restarts Texas Plant That Closed in 2016,”  IndustryWeek, February 5, 2019

“Tariffs Helping US Manufacturers Add Jobs, Says Group,” IndustryWeek, February 7, 2019

“US Steel Resumes Construction on Idled Facility,” IEN, February 11, 2019

On December 04, 2018, the article “Contrary to popular belief, Trump’s tariffs are working” by Jeff Ferry, Research Director for the Coalition for a Prosperous America (CPA), stated,  “The tariffs have contributed to this growth directly and indirectly. Directly, we’ve catalogued some 11,000 US jobs that are being created by companies in the four tariffed industries, and that’s not including any of the Section 301 industries. Since that 11,000 tally in August, more investments and jobs have been announced, like the massive $1.5 billion steel plant to be built by Steel Dynamics, which will create some 600 new jobs in the southwest. Solar Power World lists a dozen solar companies now investing in US production of solar modules.”

“At CPA, we built an economic model looking at the effects of the tariffs on the US economy from 2018 through 2021. We found that the tariffs boosted US economic growth, adding $9 billion to GDP this year. Further, our growing economy leads to growing US imports each year. In other words, by boosting our own economic growth, we buy more goods from our trading partners, not less.”

If we want to protect our national security and maintain our national leadership in the 21st Century, we cannot continue down the path of increasing trade deficits and increasing national debt by allowing countries with predatory trade policies to destroy the American manufacturing industry.  I support the new path the Trump Administration is forging by developing and implementing a national strategy to win the international competition for good jobs, sustained economic growth, and strong domestic supply chains.

 

Tags: , ,
Posted in Economy, Manufacturing, Trade Policy | No Comments »

Tax Cuts Act Hurts Small Corporations

January 30th, 2019

When we attended the Christmas party for one of the small fabrication companies we represent in December 2018, the owner announced that employee bonuses would be less this year because his corporate tax rate went up from 15% to 21%. As manufacturers sales representatives, we wondered if other small corporations were being similarly hurt.

When President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on December 22, 2017, business and economic experts lauded the reduction in corporate tax rates as one way to help American companies be more competitive in the global marketplace. The National Association of Manufacturers and the U. S. Chamber of Commerce had long complained that the U. S. had the highest corporate tax rate in the world at 39.1 percent, which the Tax Foundation explained was “a combination of our 35 percent federal rate and the average rate levied by U.S. states.”

Doing research, I found an article titled “Trump’s Tax Plan and How It Affects You” on The Balance website.  I learned that the Act permanently cut the corporate tax rate from a progressive rate of 15 percent to as high as 35 percent down to a flat tax rate of 21 percent beginning in 2018, the lowest since 1939. Besides C corporations, the corporate tax rate also applies to LLC’s who have elected to be taxed as corporations. This rate does not apply to S corporations, partnerships or sole proprietorships, which are taxed at the personal tax rate, ranging from 10% to the new limit of 37%.

Most people didn’t realize that while the previous tax rate for corporations started at only 15%, and went up to 35 percent, the average “effective rate was 18.6 percent,” according to a 2017 report by the Congressional Budget Office.

At the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council’s website, it states that “according to the Census Bureau’s Statistics of U.S. Businesses for employer C corporations in 2015, 99.0 percent of all business are small businesses” with fewer than 500 employees as defined by the Small business Administration; “96.4 percent of firms had fewer than 100” and “84.9 percent of firms had fewer than 20 employees.”

This means that the majority of C corporations paid tax rates well below the maximum tax rate of 35%. Therefore, the flat tax of 21 percent replacing is hurting low-earning corporations that were paying a lower rate and benefiting high-earning wealthy corporations.

The Balance website also states: “The Act allows companies to repatriate the $2.6 trillion they hold in foreign cash stockpiles. They pay a one-time tax rate of 15.5 percent on cash and 8 percent on equipment.”

The reason corporate monies need to be repatriated is that according to Wikipedia, “tax deferral is one of the main features of the worldwide tax system that allows U.S. multinational companies to delay paying taxes on foreign profits. Under U.S. tax law, companies are not required to pay U.S. tax on their foreign subsidiaries’ profits for many years, even indefinitely until the earnings are returned to U.S.”

Thus, repatriation benefited wealthy corporations because they are the ones that shifted manufacturing to subsidiary plants outside of the United States in the past 20 years. It is unlikely that any small business has a plant outside of the U.S., and thus wouldn’t have any profits stockpiled offshore to repatriate.

In the last two years, I wrote two articles about corporate tax reform at the federal level based on the Sales Factor Apportionment Framework proposed by one of the members of the Coalition for a Prosperous America, Bill Parks. Mr. Parks is a retired finance professor and founder of NRS Inc., an Idaho-based paddle sports accessory maker. He asserted that “Tax reform proposals won’t fix our broken corporate system… [because] they fail to fix the unfairness of domestic companies paying more tax than multinational enterprises in identical circumstances.”

He explained that multinational enterprises (MNEs) use cost accounting practices to transfer costs and profits. “Currently MNEs manipulate loopholes in our tax system to avoid paying U. S. taxes… MNEs can legitimately choose a cost that reduces or increases the profits of its subsidiaries in different countries. Because the United States is a relatively high-tax country, MNEs will choose the costs that minimize profits in the United States and maximize them in what are usually lower-tax countries.”

The way his plan would work is that the amount of corporate taxes that a multinational company would pay “would be determined solely on the percent of that company’s world-wide sales made to U. S. customers. Foreign MNEs would also be taxed the same way on their U. S. income leveling the playing field between domestic firms and foreign and domestic MNEs.”

On January 24, 2019. the Coalition for a Prosperous America (CPA) released a Press Release stating that  a letter was sent to both the Senate Finance and House Ways & Means Committees asking “for consideration of both a destination-based Sales Factor Apportionment tax system (SFA) and a Strategic Goods and Services Tax (GST).”

A Goods and Services Tax (GST) is a strategic consumption tax, which would improve America’s trade competitiveness. The Release states: “Currently, foreign governments charge US exporters value-added (VAT) taxes—averaging 17 percent globally—at their borders. Most of these countries have reduced tariffs over the last 45 years—but replaced them with value added taxes. They use this new revenue to reduce other taxes and costs, and to fund national pension systems and health care. The US is virtually alone in not collecting value added taxes on imports.”

CEO Michael Stumo said, “Congress should fix this foreign trade advantage through an innovative and strategic consumption tax called a Goods and Services Tax…a 13 percent GST could raise $1.4 trillion in revenue and fund a full credit against payroll taxes, reduce personal income taxes, and provide a credit for healthcare costs. US companies would benefit from the cost reduction and receive a 13 percent GST rebate when exporting. Foreign companies would pay a 13 percent GST tax when bringing goods into the US.”

Stumo continued, “Tax reform can reduce our trade deficit, drastically reduce complexity and put even more Americans to work in good paying jobs. Congress should tax the profits and sales of all companies selling here and eliminate taxes on exports. The combination of an SFA and a strategic GST is the most pro-American tax system Congress could devise.”

It’s time that small American domestic corporations stop bearing the brunt of corporate taxes that benefit the large multinational enterprises.  Bi-partisan tax reform that benefits all Americans should be made a priority by our newly elected Congressional Representatives and Senators.

Tags: ,
Posted in Legislation, Manufacturing, Taxes/Regulations | No Comments »

Upcoming Southern California Events

January 16th, 2019

We have a busy first few months of trade shows and conferences for 2019. I will be attending the following shows for at least one day to keep up with the latest technologies and industry news for writing future articles.

I’m also beginning the year with several webinars in January – March.  I am giving two webinars on “How to Return Manufacturing to the U.S. Using Total Cost of Ownership Analysis” on two dates, Tuesday, January 22nd (Register here) and Wednesday, January 30th (Register here).

Then, I’m giving one Tuesday, February 12th, on “How We Can Solve the Skill Shortage and Attract the Next Generation of Manufacturing Workers.” Register here.

On February 5-7, 2019, the UBM Advanced Manufacturing Expo & Conference

will be held at the Anaheim Convention Center, Anaheim, CA

This conference will be part of the five shows being held concurrently at the Center.

Register Here

 Register Here

Expo Hours for all shows:

 February 5, 10:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.

February 6, 10:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.

February 7, 10:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.

 

AFCEA/USNI WEST Conference
Registration Center
11208 Waples Mill Road, Suite 112
Fairfax, VA 22030
(888) 273-5706 / (703) 449-6418
Register

Why Attend AFCEA:

Attend three days of open discussions with defense and maritime leaders. Gain a better understanding of the impacts and implications of the new National Security Strategy. Hear about the current set of challenges facing the Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard, and be a part of the dialogue on the opportunities and solutions to address these concerns.

CONNECT

Spend time with military, government and industry ‘out of the office’ and ‘outside of the beltway.’ Engage with speakers, attendees and exhibitors and discuss ideas and insights. Afternoon happy hours on the exhibit floor provide an opportunity to network with thought leaders.

INNOVATE

Explore and experience the latest platforms, leading edge technologies and state-of-the-art networking capabilities that support the Sea Services operations. Visit over 300 maritime exhibits.

 

IPC APEX EXPO 2019 is a five-day event like no other in the printed circuit board and electronics manufacturing industry. Professionals from around the world come together to participate in the Technical Conference, Exhibition, and Professional Development, Standards Development and Certification programs. These activities offer seemingly endless education and networking opportunities that impact your career and company by providing you the knowledge, technical skills and best practices to address any challenge you face.

Exhibition Hours

Tuesday, January 29           10:00 am–6:00 pm

Wednesday, January 30     9:00 am–6:00 pm

Thursday, January 31         9:00 am–2:00 pm

About IPC

IPC is a global trade association dedicated to furthering the competitive excellence and financial success of its members, who are participants in the electronics industry. In pursuit of these objectives, IPC will devote resources to management improvement and technology enhancement programs, the creation of relevant standards, protection of the environment, and pertinent government relations.

Register Here

Conference: April 29 – May 2, 2019 | Exhibits: April 30 – May 1

Long Beach Convention Center, 300 East Ocean Blvd, Long Beach, California

Conference Hours:

Tuesday, April 30, 2019 | 10:30 AM – 4:00 PM

Wednesday, May 1, 2019 | 10:30 AM – 4:00 PM

Thursday, May 2, 2019 | 9:00 AM – 12:00 PM

Exposition:

Tuesday, April 30, 2019 | 10:00 AM – 5:30 PM

Wednesday, May 1, 2019 | 10:00 AM – 5:30 PM

Dates and times for workshops, tours, and networking receptions are being determined. Check back for updates.

Register Now

 

For those of you in San Diego County, you may also want to attend the free Economic Roundtable on Thursday, January 17, 2019.

What does the San Diego County economy look like for 2019 and beyond? Join  the lively discussion with a panel of experts covering the future of the economy, housing/homelessness, military, and diversity and inclusion. Experts will provide predictions and their perspective on what may be in store for San Diego County.

Session One:

Ray Major, Chief Economist, SANDAG

Ryan Ratcliff, Associate Professor of Economics, USD School of Business

Sarah Burns, Director of Research and Evaluation, San Diego Workforce Partnership

Session Two:

Housing/Homelessness: Stephen Maduli-Williams, Community Development Program Manager, City of San Diego

Military: Jesse Gipe, Senior Manager, Economic Development, San Diego Regional Development Corporation

Diversity and Inclusion: Dwayne Crenshaw, CEO and Co-Founder, RISE San Diego

Date: Thursday, January 17, 2019

Time:

Networking: 8–8:30 a.m.

Program: 8:30 a.m.–noon

Location:

University of San Diego—Joan B. Kroc Institute for Peace & Justice

5998 Alcala Park, San Diego, CA 92110

Cost: Free

Save Your Seat

 

 

Tags: ,
Posted in Economy, Innovation, Manufacturing | No Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »