1. Introduction

The manufacturing sector is and still to be a significant part of a country’s economic strength. The evaluation of the government’s support for the manufacturing sector is hence an important part for this advancement. A number of countries, more so in the developed countries, have amassed a great sum of wealth. This paper will focus on this with regard to the United States which has become amongst the wealthiest nations in the world as well as strong. This has offered a great basis for a rigid middle class and powered vital development in innovation and technology that has changed lives and brought about great development (Estrin 2009). This is right from Henry Ford’s assembly to the going to the moon.

The manufacturing industry does not only play a vital role in the economy but similarly it has a major role to play with regards to the country’s economic strength. A rigid manufacturing industry upholds a rigid, middle class jobs; it brings about a country to be at the fore front in technology and innovation; as well as assist in handling the trade deficit (Porter 1998). Economic research is displaying that manufacturing is necessary and important to a countries economic prosperity.

The government has a number of ways that it can it can support manufacturing where changing the corporate tax aspect is among them. Manufacturers create investment choices with regard to a number of aspects, not only on the issue of taxation. Any set of laws or strategies applied by the government that is targeted at supporting the manufacturing industry has to involve investments in education and training, infrastructure, research and advancement as well as elevation to the collection of information.

2. Situation

The manufacturing sector plays a vital role to the growth of the economy, notwithstanding the high numbers of loss of employment and increase in manufacturing in the other states in the past period. In the previous year, the manufacturing industry brought about well above $1.8 trillion to the United States gross domestic product which is almost 13 percent of the total economy. One year later, the manufacturing industry contributed to 60 percent of the total United States exports. In the year 2008, the United States was at the top of the global ranking in terms of manufacturing value added and it attained the third position as the biggest exporter of the processed products to the global countries (Pielke 2010). This was only third to China and Germany while staying ahead of Japan and France.

In the period 1979 and 2010 the outcome of manufacturing in every sixty minutes of labor that the United States has applied, has gone up by approximately four percent yearly and the US has among the most industrious labor forces in the world. Additionally, in the year 2009 there was approximately 12 million places of employment that were created in the manufacturing sector and approximately 7 million more places of employment in other industries that are connected to it (U.S. Department of Commerce International Trade Administration 2010). Basically, one of six United States private-sector places of employment is directly connected to manufacturing.

3. Problem

The Manufacturing industry has experienced a vast amount of problems in more ways which has led it to suffer. A number of countries have faced declines in a number of areas that led to a drop in the economy leaving it to relay on other sectors of the economy. The government’s involvement in the support of the manufacturing sector has fallen short which has brought about high numbers of loss of employment among other effects (Ezell and Robert 2011). This sector has been faced by lack of financial support from the government which will be able to keep the sector running and offer employment to its citizens (Atkinson 2011). The government does not invest in the sector but places its focus on other areas. Workers in this sector do not get better pay and benefits considering that they are the force behind the economy’s advancement. Their standard of living is hence poor as well as the economy. The level of production has similarly been affected leading to poor levels that cannot support a country.

Most of the countries do not have a working form of regulation or policy that can bring about associations with the community so as to train them (Department of Business and Innovation 2011). This would secure the future workforce for industries making it to be a great force. A program of this form lacks the government support and involvement. The form of infrastructure in most countries has been a brought down thing. The manufacturing sector relies on the infrastructure to transport their products from one place to another. Companies have faced difficulties in moving their goods making a great number of them to spoil. The surplus of products in one particular areas of the country would lead to the companies to sell them at a loss; this would lead to a great number of the companies to venture out of these areas of business for other favorable pastures.

The United States’ global manufacturing value has been on the decline from approximately 25 percent in the year 1998 to below 20 percent in 2007. This has made the country to shift from being an exporter of manufactured products in the 60s to an importer. The Manufacturing as a share of the United States gross domestic product has dropped from 15 percent in 1998 to 10 percent in 2009. The rate of creation of employment has been on the decline from approximately 17.5 million at the beginning of the year of 1998 to 12 million at the start of the year of 2010. However considering that the manufacturing industry has acquired employment in each and every month from that time, for a total number of jobs created of 500, 000 since June 2012, it share of job creation has dropped from 17 percent in 1998 to 11 percent at present.

4. Solutions

The aspects stated are quite significant for a strong manufacturing sector. The manufacturing industry in terms of the trade deficit has a great number of implications. This may be brought to a decline in a number of ways, though it is not that easy to notice any development with manufacturing playing a part. A country like the United States could do away with the trade deficit with the help of exports with the service exports increasing yearly at a speed of 14 percent in comparison to the yearly growth from 2001 to 2010 of 8 percent. It would be better and much simpler to place at an equal balance the trade deficit through manufacturing exports; this is since the exports would desire to increase at a yearly rate of 9.4 percent in comparison to 2010 yearly growth rate of 6 percent.

The level of infrastructure ought to be advanced so as that the United States products may be placed on transit from one part of the country to another or country to another country (Muro and Bruce 2010). Marketing would similarly be improved locally and in other countries. The government similarly ought to look at its future labor prospects and develop it at the present stage. This would be through encouraging collaboration and associations with community sectors and imparting the necessary skills to them. There ought to be high level of government investment in the manufacturing industry. The government directing its financial help to this industry would lead to its growth in a number of areas considering that it is vital for the growth of the economy.

5. Evaluation of the solutions

By balancing the trade deficit of a country through manufacturing of exports would be much simpler. This is considering manufacturing of exports requires a progress of a higher percentage than the previous year. The infrastructure is another area of advancement. With the improvement of the infrastructure in varied parts of the country, the country would be placed at a good position to be able to distribute the products that have been manufactured to other countries and towns (Boushey 2012). This would be a better way to create employment for a number of people. A country like the United States improving the infrastructure would make it more appealing to other businesses in the world.

The labor force that is acquired and integrated into the manufacturing industry does not have the necessary skills and expertise to handle manufacturing. They are hence undertaken through small period of training which is not enough as they do not have the necessary skills. By collaboration and association with the community sectors, the countries would be able to safeguard the future as well as bring about labor force that is well skilled and able to handle work allocated to it (Ezell and Robert 2011). They would be able to work in burgeoning industries. A work force that is skilled would offer countries, for instance the United States and its associated economies a greater advantage over its competitors in other parts of the world.

An increased government investment would lead to the workers in this sector to get better pay as well as benefits. Considering that the manufacturing industry is the leading force in innovation in a country’s economy (Association for Manufacturing Technology 2010). More investment will help to elevate the standard of living of the staff and support the economy to be a stable one.

6. Conclusion

Having a rigid manufacturing industry in a country ought to be among the top agendas for a government. When there is a strong and innovative manufacturing ground, the country will be a world leader for a long period of time. Additionally, with a great size of energy relying on the improved manufacturing, a country’s economic effectiveness will more and more in line with its ability to be innovative and high level producer of manufactured products.

Moreover, this is a vital issue that requires the government to take consideration of as it brings about success through job creation and production as well as high standards of living. Government support in manufacturing brings about leadership in technology and innovation. This is necessary to keeping a future economic competitiveness. The manufacturing industry is bound to bring about innovation that in any other industry.

The government support to manufacturing ought to be in a number of ways so as to bring about development. A high level of government data collection and effectiveness management is vital to a country’s economy. Among the hindrance to creating a strong sense of policy is the government does not have a rich idea of what their country produce and hence limited harmonization between the government departments and programs that are concerned with primary competitiveness.

References

Association for Manufacturing Technology, 2010, The Manufacturing Mandate: Unleashing Dynamic Innovation Economy, acquired from <http://www.amtonline.org/images/userContent/ManufacturingMandate_Book_Ver04.pdf>.

Atkinson, Robert D, 2011, The Case for Incentives in the U.S. Corporate Tax Code. Washington, DC: The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, acquired from www.itif.org/files/2011‐atkinson‐tax‐incentives.pdf

Boushey, H., 2012, Tax Reform and the U.S. Manufacturing Sector: Testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Ways and Means, acquired from <http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2012/07/boushey_manufacturing.html>

Department of Business and Innovation, 2011, a more competitive manufacturing industry: New directions for industry policy and manufacturing, acquired from http://www.dbi.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/386797/Manufacturing-statement.pdf

Estrin, J., 2009, Closing the Innovation Gap: Reigniting the Spark of Creativity in a Global Economy, New York: McGraw Hill.

Ezell, Stephen J., and Robert D. Atkinson 2011, The Case for a National Manufacturing Strategy. Washington, DC: The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, April.

Muro, Mark, and Bruce Katz. 2010, “The New ‘Cluster Moment’: How Regional Innovation Clusters Can Foster the Next Economy.” Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings Institution, www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2010/0921_clusters_muro_katz/0921_clusters_muro_katz.pdf.

Pielke, A., 2010, The Great American Manufacturing Battle, bridges, vol. 33, acquire from <http://www.ostina.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5892&Itemid=3237>

Porter, Michael E, 1998, “Clusters and the New Economics of Competition.” Harvard Business Review, 81-83, acquired from www.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html.

U.S. Department of Commerce International Trade Administration, 2010, “Wisconsin: Exports, Jobs, and Foreign Investment,” acquired from <http://trade.gov/mas/ian/statereports/states/tg_ian_002761.asp>.

Latest Assignments