Chattanooga Times Free Press

FACTORY JOB GROWTH TEPID AT BEST

-

President Joe Biden has been traveling the U.S. touting a manufactur­ing revival that he no doubt hopes will help his chances for re-election. Unfortunat­ely, there is much less substance to this “Biden Boom” than the White House would have Americans believe. Even under the rosiest of projection­s, the administra­tion’s signature programs will do little to increase manufactur­ing employment — and even less to uplift the overall economy.

Constructi­on spending on manufactur­ing facilities more than doubled from an annualized rate of $81 billion this time last year to an all-time high of nearly $200 billion in August. Some of that increase can be attributed to the incentives provided by the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS Act, both championed by the president.

But there are more relevant factors. Shortages caused by COVID, backlogs at major ports in 2021 and a threeyear-long (and continuing) surge in retail sales created a compelling case for reshoring production even without those incentives. Spending on consumer goods is 30% higher now than when the pandemic started, and global supply chains have yet to fully recover. So a near-term expansion in domestic manufactur­ing was all but inevitable.

Another reason the recent run-up in manufactur­ing investment is not as impressive as it might seem: When adjusted for inflation, the figures are overshadow­ed by a decline in investment in the rest of the economy.

The U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis estimates that inflation-adjusted investment in manufactur­ing facilities was a more modest $125 billion (annualized) in the second quarter. Outside of manufactur­ing, investment in nonresiden­tial structures was $480 billion last quarter, down $90 billion from its peak in the third quarter of 2019 (again, figures are annualized).

The long-term effects of Biden’s industrial policies are even less impressive. An analysis conducted by the Labor Energy Partnershi­p, a strong supporter of Biden’s policies, said they would create 150,000 additional manufactur­ing jobs by 2030. That amounts to an increase of just 1.3% relative to the 13.1 million workers in employed in manufactur­ing right now. By comparison, the U.S. economy created 272,000 manufactur­ing jobs in 2018 alone.

The administra­tion hopes that by funneling its resources toward semiconduc­tors and green energy, it can foster the growth of a manufactur­ing ecosystem that will ensure U.S. leadership in high-tech manufactur­ing. Research suggests otherwise.

Analysts at the World Trade Organizati­on summarize evidence this way: For economies in transition from undevelope­d to developed, direct investment in manufactur­ing can indeed benefit domestic suppliers. For fully developed economies, however, direct investment has no benefits for either domestic suppliers or purchasers of manufactur­ing products. That’s because investors are already aware of what they have to offer, and capital markets — in the U.S. especially — can easily finance the creation of new industries if there is a strong business case for them.

In fact, the Biden administra­tion’s tendency to include incentives favorable to unions and other progressiv­e interests in these programs can actually make it more difficult for investors to ascertain the full costs of expanding production in the U.S. Then again, as Peterson Institute President Adam Posen points out, under a more business-friendly administra­tion, the policy’s incentive programs would be ripe for corruption.

The president is no doubt sincere in his desire to revive U.S. manufactur­ing, and it’s tempting to look at the surge in reshoring as evidence that his administra­tion’s policies are having a transforma­tive effect. Yet even the most optimistic projection­s suggest that Biden’s industrial policy will have only a minor effect on U.S. manufactur­ing employment.

 ?? ?? Karl W. Smith
Karl W. Smith

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States