Peter D'Antonio

Daniel Golden

The decline of US manufacturing and the rise of Chinese manufacturing has preoccupied policymakers over the past 25 years. It has resulted in the latest effort to use tariffs to try to drive domestic and foreign manufacturers back to the United States and limit trade disparities with China. This idea of bringing back manufacturing to the US is so ingrained in people’s thinking that it almost seems odd to question if that is a goal the US should pursue.

The facts are clear: Employment in the US manufacturing sector from 1965 to 2000 was fairly stable in a range between 17 million and 19 million. However, there was an abrupt shift away from manufacturing in the early 2000s, to a new lower range of 11.5 million to 13 million, which was nearly a 6 million decline, or 33 percent (see chart 1).

250417PD1.jpg

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics/Haver Analytics

Importantly, these manufacturing employment figures do not take account of demographic changes over the past 80 years. We get a starkly different picture of manufacturing employment when we compare it with total employment. Manufacturing has been falling as a share of total employment since the end of WWII (see chart 2). If anything, the decline in manufacturing share has slowed since 2010.

250417PD2.jpg

So, what is behind this long-running decline in manufacturing share? The usual explanations for the decline in manufacturing are foreign competition and labor-saving technology. Indeed, the US has run a current account deficit since the mid-1970s and that deficit now stands at 3 percent of GDP.

Also, improvement in technology has resulted in increased manufacturing productivity. Real manufacturing output has continued to rise during that time, averaging 1.5 percent per year, despite the sharp decline in manufacturing employment starting around the year 2000. As a result, manufacturing productivity, measured as output per worker, has doubled in the past 24 years, rising at a 3.0 percent annual rate. So, less labor is needed to produce more output.

But something else is going on – tastes are changing. As nations become wealthier, they demand more services. This stands to reason, as people can become sated with goods. For instance, they can only eat so much food, they generally need only one stove or refrigerator in their house, and there is only so much need for clothing. Once these needs are met, big gains in those areas are hard to come by. On the other hand, people might still want to spend more money on healthcare, entertainment, professional services, education, etc.

There is an endless variety of services and experiences people might want to buy when means allow. Just look at US spending patterns since WWII. The share of services consistently increased over time through 2010 and has maintained a more than 60 percent high share, while the share of goods declined (see chart 3).

250417PD3.jpg

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis/Haver Analytics

The important point here is that US employment and production in services has increased over time because consumer and business demand for services has risen. Similarly, the share of goods has fallen because people in the US demand a smaller share of those products. The share of manufacturing production has declined in lock step with demand – in other words, the US is producing to satisfy its own demand.

This pattern of shifting away from manufacturing and toward services is not just isolated to the United States. In every nation, consumers demand a higher share of services as the nation becomes more affluent. Let’s take a look at where the United States stands in terms of standards of living and services share (see chart 4).

250417PD4.jpg

Source: IFS/G10/Emerging Market Data from Haver Analytics

The chart clearly shows a pattern of rising living standards and rising share of services across nations. The US is at the pinnacle of standard of living, as measured by per capita income. As a result, the US produces and purchases a high proportion of services, and US employment patterns reflect that shift. Notice where China is in this array of countries. In our opinion, the US is in an entirely different place developmentally and should not preoccupy itself with trying to match China’s manufacturing and trade performance.

Less Manufacturing Can Indicate Economic Prosperity

The economy remains resilient and core measures of inflation are stubbornly high in the face of the most aggressive Fed tightening in decades. This resilience is partly a result of government stimulus programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. These programs generated a stockpile of excess savings that has continued to support household spending through rising inflation and higher interest rates. The Fed needs to counter that fiscal expansion in its fight against inflation.

Despite all the layoffs and furloughs, household income jumped during the pandemic due to the massive fiscal stimulus. Chart 1 shows the actual level of disposable personal income through the pandemic compared to trend. The income supports totaled more than $2 trillion in 2020-21. As the chart shows, the rise in income supports matched disposable personal income almost dollar for dollar.

Peter 071123 1.jpg

Sources: Bureau of Economic Analysis and Haver Analytics.

Meanwhile, the boost to personal income came at a time when government was actively discouraging consumer spending. This was especially true in high-touch services, such as restaurants, recreation, and travel. Consumer spending dropped $1.2 trillion at an annual rate in the initial lockdown phase of the pandemic and was still $500 billion below trend a half year later at the end of 2020. Notably, spending was far below disposable income (see Chart 2A) which caused savings to surge. Chart 2B shows the magnitude of the rise in savings resulting from these unprecedented and opposing swings in income and consumption. At the outset of the pandemic, actual savings more than tripled and the combination of decreased spending and increased income from expanded unemployment insurance and the stimulus checks kept savings at unusually high levels.

Peter 071123 2A.jpg

Peter 071123 2B.jpg

Savings accumulated as consumers simply didn’t spend the waves of stimulus. We mapped the accumulation by summing the extra savings (the differences between actual and trend savings) over time. Chart 3 (bars) shows the extent of the cumulative excess savings, which jumped by more than $1 trillion by midyear 2020. Continuous waves of stimulus drove excess savings to a peak of $2.5 trillion in mid-2021. Since that time, consumers have saved slightly less than norms, which has diminished the cumulative amount of excess savings somewhat. However, the total amount of excess savings remains enormous.

Peter 071123 3.jpg

Importantly, the excess savings has developed into an unprecedented rise in liquid assets. Household checking and savings accounts skyrocketed during the pandemic. Chart 3 (line) shows the relationship between the accumulated excess savings and the excess balance in household bank accounts over the past half-decade. This chart confirms that most of accumulated savings is sitting in consumer bank accounts ready to be spent. In other words, the stimulus during the pandemic, which consumers weren’t really able to use, is still available to support spending and absorb higher prices. This has made the Fed’s job more difficult.


Pandemic Stimulus Still Supporting Spending

Our global data offering is unparalleled in terms of coverage, quality, and organization. We offer 290+ databases from 2500 government and private sources, a wealth of key survey and forecast data covering the world’s economies, and a robust offering of archive databases that drive machine learning for big data applications.

Optimized for precision analytics, our data is seamlessly integrated with Microsoft Office and all leading statistical packages through our DLX® software and platform independent HaverView™ website. We further offer direct database feeds, client server or cloud-based delivery, and RESTful API.


Daniel Golden

Publications by Daniel Golden

Less Manufacturing Can Indicate Economic Prosperity

Pandemic Stimulus Still Supporting Spending