People who work in U.S. manufacturing worry almost constantly about the viability of domestic manufacturing. People who are not in manufacturing sense the anxiety, but they misunderstand the problem.

 A regular correspondent, who owns a manufacturing company and cares deeply about this subject, sent me a link to a letter written to The Holland (MI) Sentinel.

“Today, manufacturing is high-tech, highly automated and in need of innovative, problem-solving workers,” writes a local SME chapter president, in a letter that opens a discussion about the types of jobs available in manufacturing and the types of people needed to fill them. People who understand this need no explication, but the meaning of it is lost on the rest.

In Michigan and so many other states, and at the federal level, too, “manufacturing” is given lip service with frequent references to “innovation,” or progress. But, manufacturing is not treated as a source of anything but revenue.

First, government officials want voters to be productive, so they want to "create jobs," and they see aiding manufacturing companies as a way to accomplish this.

More generally, these government officials view manufacturing companies as just one more constituent that they can “fix,” with policies and programs, in order to create a reliable source of tax revenue: income taxes, payroll taxes, sales taxes — and now, in the minds of certain federal officials, carbon taxes. Manufacturing companies are tools for them to use to execute their own agendas, but it ought to be treated as a resource: something viable that needs to be nurtured and tended.

The letter writer references recent remarks by General Electric chairman Jeffrey Immelt that the U.S. should aim to have 20% of all employment based in manufacturing companies.  This is a fine goal, but it’s unlikely to be achieved by any initiative of the sort that conglomerates like GE tend to coordinate with governments — unless GE and the like can convince the governments to step out of the way entirely, so that going concerns can plan for the future, so that start-ups will be encouraged, so that investors will have incentives to stake new projects and equipment, and so that businesses and those who rely on them can thrive.

Manufacturers know all this, but they need to recognize how they are viewed, and treated, by federal, state, and local governments who they may look to for help or direction. Making and keeping manufacturing viable is not a priority for elected officials: for them, it is an opportunity to help themselves.