(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Fading Momentum in U.S. Manufacturing Growth?

Tags

aerospace, aircraft, aircraft parts, apparel, appliances, automotive, dollar, electrical components, electrical equipment, exchange rates, exports, Federal Reserve, housing, inflation, machinery, manufacturing, medical supplies, nonmetallic mineral products, petroleum and coal products, pharmaceuticals, printing, semiconductors, wood products, {What's Left of) Our Economy

The big story in the new Federal Reserves manufacturing production figures that were released Wednesday (taking the story through October) was in the revisions. And I don’t mean the revisions for individual industries, which previous Fed reports has shown to be pretty remarkable (to put it diplomatically). It was in the downgrades for the total output of U.S.-based industry adjusted for inflation, which revealed a considerably weaker performance than first estimated.

Domestic industry just barely stayed in growth mode in October, expanding real production by 0.15 percent. But weighing more heavily on the sector’s recent performance, revisions for every month since July were negative.

September’s initially reported price-adjusted gain of 0.43 percent is now estimated to have been 0.24 percent. August’s after-inflation increase – first upgraded from 0.09 percent to 0.38 percent was downgraded to 0.10 percent. July’s initially reported constant dollar advance of 0.72 percent has now been downgraded three straight times – to 0.62 percent, 0,60 percent, and 0.53 percent. And June’s initially reported inflation-adjusted drop of 0.54 percent, after having been revised up to a dip of 0.45 percent, was downgraded three straight times, too – to 0.56 percent, 0.58 percent, and 0.59 percent.

Consequently, U.S.-based manufacturing’s real production increase since February, 2020 – just before the arrival of the CCP Virus sparked assorted mandated and voluntary behavioral curbs and a shot but deep economic downturn – now stands at just 3.76 percent, versus the 4.19 percent improvement calculable last month.

Among the broadest manufacturing sub-sectors tracked by the Fed, the biggest October winners in terms of after-inflation output were:

>the automotive sector, whose volatility has greatly influenced manufacturing’s
overall growth performance throughout the pandemic era. Price-adjusted production of motor vehicles and parts climbed by 2.05 percent on month in October, and revisions were mixed. September’s initially reported increase of one percent was revised down to one of 0.44 percent. August’s initially reported fall-off of -1.44 percent was downgraded to one of 1.48 percent before being revised back up one of 1.07 percent. July’s initially reported jump of 6.60 percent was downgraded to an increase of just 3.24 percent, but then revised up again to 3.57 percent and 3.84 percent. (still the best such performance since September, 2021’s 10.34 percent burst). And June’s initially reported 1.49 percent decrease was upgrade to a decline of 1.27 percent before being downgraded to a loss of 1.31 percent and settling in at a retreat of 1.84 percent

All the same, these gyrations left the automotive industry 3.18 percent larger in real terms since immediately pre-pandemic February, 2020, versus the 0.89 percent increase calculable last month;

>electrical equipment, appliance, and components, where a 1.92 percent increase
in real output in October was its best such performance since February’s 2.29 percent rise. Revisions, however, were slightly negative. September’s initially reported 0.93 percent gain was downgraded to one of 0.63 percent. August’s initially reported 1.01 percent decrease was revised up to one of 0.51 percent before being revised down again to inflation-adjusted growth of 0.81 percent. July’s initially reported -1.41 percent contraction in price-adjusted output has been steadily downgraded to one of 1.44 percent, 1.55 percent, and finally 1.65 percent. And June’s initially reported real growth improvement of 1.34 percent was revised up twice – to 1.42 percent to 1.45 percent, and then held steady before being revised down to 1.37 percent.

After-inflation production in this diverse sector is now 7.07 percent above February, 2020 levels versus the 5.90 percent calculable last month;

>aerospace and miscellaneous transportation equipment, which generated a 1.90 percent sequential inflation-adjusted output increase in October, and registered mixed revisions. September’s initially reported increase of 0.56 percent is now judged to have been a dip of 0.28 percent, and August’s initially reported 2.08 percent rise has been downgraded first to 1.19 percent and now 0.48 percent. But July’s initially reported 1.54 percent constant dollar output increase has been upgraded three times – to 1.85 percent, 2.11 percent, and 2.12 percent. And after a downward revision from a 0.09 percent rise to a 0.14 percent fall, June’s results were upgraded to increases of 0.15 percent, 0.37 percent, and 0.53 percent.

These upgrades were enough to push real aerospace and miscellaneous transportation equipment’s post-February, 2020 price adjusted growth to 26.29 percent, versus the 24.20 percent calculable last month;

>printing and related support activities, a hard-hit industry recently that nonetheless produced 1.90 percent more in October when accounting for inflation than in September – its best such result since e February’s 3.13 percent surge. Yet revisions spoiled the picture to some extent. September’s initially reported decrease of 1.67 percent was downgraded to one of 1.93 percent – its worst monthly shrinkage since January’s 2.09 percent. But August’s initially reported 0.27 percent contraction was significantly upgraded to a gain of 0.59 percent and then to 0.87 percent. July’s results have been revised up from a decrease of 1.67 percent to one of 1.60 percent to one of 1.50 percent to one of 1.27 percent. And June’s estimates have been all over the place – from an initially reported 1.68 percent advance to one of 0.51 percent to a 0.40 percent decline back to a 0.41 rise and then to a 1.04 percent fall.

All told, real output in this sector closed to within 9.37 percent of its levels just before the CCP Virus struck from the 11.81 percent calculable last month;

>apparel and leather goods, which continued a generally good recent run by boosting real output by 1.04 percent on month in October Revisions were positive on net –and in one instance, stunningly so. September’s initially reported 1.56 percent inflation-adjusted production increase was upgraded significantly to 2.29 percent. August’s initially reported -0.53 slip was upgraded all the way up to a 1.85 percent increase and then back down to a 2.81 deterioration. July’s initially reported 1.60 percent advance was revised down to one of 1.46 percent, then back up to one of 1.66 percent, then left unchanged, and then downgraded to a 1.52 percent increase. And June’s initially reported 1.68 pecent increase was downgraded to a 0.51 percent decline, then revised up to a dip of just 0.40 percent, then downgraded to a decrease of 1.04 percent, and then revised all the way back to a 5.84 percent pop – these companies’ best such performance since the 8.04 percent jump in August, 2020, during the economic recovery from the first pandemic wave.

Apparel and leather goods production is now up 5.82 percent in real terms since immediately pre-pandemic February, 2020, versus the 5.39 percent calculable last month; and

>machinery, which RealityChek regulars know is a major barometer of the health of the entire economy, since its products are used so widely by nearly all goods and industries alike. Its constant dollar production climbed by one percent month-to-month in October, but revisions were negative on net. September’s initially reported 0.32 output gain was upgraded nicely to one of 1.41 percent. But August’s initially reported advance of 0.99 percent was upped considerably to 2.64 percent before being downgraded to 1.99 percent. July’s initially reported rise of 0.50 percent was revised up to 0.68 percent and 0.78 percent, but then downgraded to 0.57 percent. And June’s initially reported drop of 1.49 percent was narrowed to one of 1.27 percent before being downgraded to 1.75 percent, 1.83 percent, and 1.93 percent.

Still, the machinery sector has now boosted its real growth since February, 2020 to 8.31 percent, versus the 7.23 percent calculable last month.

Among the broadest manufacturing groupings tracked by the Fed, the biggest inflation-adjusted output losers were:

>wood products, whose fortunes seem to stem from the woes of a housing sector suffering from the central bank’s inflation-fighting interest rate hikes. In real terms, it contracted by 2.54 percent in October – its worst such performance since sinking 3.22 percent in February, 2021. And revisions were negative on balance. September’s initially reported 0.44 percent loss is now judge to have been one of 2.14 percent. August’s initially reported 1.70 percent decrease was revised down to one of 2.36 percent before being upgraded to one of 2.09 percent. July’s initially reported advance of 0.72 percent was turned into a decreases of 0.03 percent, 0.09 percent, and -0.65 over the next three months. And June’s initially reported increase of 0.73 percent was downgraded to 0.42 percent, then to a decrease of 0.62 percent before being revised up to a retreat of just 0.34 percent.

These net setbacks mean that wood products’ real output since the pandemic arrived is now down by 2.67 percent. As of last month, it was up by 1.43 percent;

>nonmetallic mineral products, whose price-adjusted output fell by 1.19 percent
– its worst such showing since April’s 1.52 percent. Revisions overall, though, were positive. September’s initially reported 1.41 percent growth was upgraded to 2.13 percent – the sector’s best such performance since February’s 4.39 percent surge. August’s initially reported vised 0.90 percent decrease was revised up to a 0.22 percent loss and then to a 0.14 percent expansion. July’s initially reported 0.52 percent increase was downgraded to a 0.09 dip, then slightly upgraded to a fractional decline, and to a 0.04 percent decrease. And June’s initially reported 1.07 percent decrease was revised up to gains of 0.48 percent and 0.46 percent, respectively, down to a fractional decrease, and back up to a 0.37 percent increase.

But nonmetalllic mineral products has now expanded its post-CCP Virus arrival real production by just 1.09 percent, versus the 1.48 percent calculable last month; and

>petroleum and coal products, where constant dollar was depressed sequentially by 1.86 percent in October and revisions were mixed. September’s initially reported 1.13 percent rise was upgraded to one of 1.68 percent. August’s initially reported jump of 3.54 percent was revised even higher to 4.13 percent (the strongest since March, 2021’s post-winter storm 11.49 percent) and then back down to 2.77 percent (still the best since that March). July’s initially reported 0.94 percent decrease was upgraded to narrower losses of 0.25 to and 0.23 percent to an uptick of 0.05 percent. June’s initiallyreported 1.92 percent drop was revised down to one of 2.80 percent, to a no-change finding, to a smaller drop of 2.58 percent – still the worst such performance since January’s 2.96 percent retreat.

These results pushed real output by petroleum and coal products businesses 1.14 percent above their February, 2020 levels, lower than the 3.20 pecent calculable last month.

The semiconductor industry, whose supply chain problems have so influenced the fortunes of manufacturing and the entire U.S. and global economies, saw inflation-adjusted production decline by 1.37 percent on a monthly basis in October, and revisions were strongly negative. September’s initially reported after-inflation production gain of 0.45 percent has turned into a 1.07 percent drop. August’s initially reported 0.57 percent decline was slightly upgraded to one of 0.39 percent but now stands as a 1.47 percent retreat (the biggest since April’s 3.14 percent). July’s initially reported 1.16 percent increase has been revised down to a gain of 0.77 percent, and then to losses of 0.02 percent and 0.40 percent. June’s initially reported results were first significantly revised up from a rise of 0.18 percent to 2.09 percent, but have since been downgraded to 0.88 percent to 0.86 percent to 0.80 percent.

In inflation-adjusted terms, semiconductor production is now up by only 12.16 percent since the pandemic’s arrival in force state-side, way down from the 17.29 percent increase calculable last month.

For two manufacturing groupings of special interest during the pandemic era, October brought good growth results. Indeed, in aircraft and parts, real output advanced by 2.51 percent on month – the best such performance since April’s 3.01 percet. Revisions, however, were somewhat negative. September’s initially reported 0.59 percent rise was downgraded to one of a mere 0.05 percent. August’s initially reported 3.11 percent improvement has been revised down twice – to 1.69 percent and 1.48 percent. July’s initially reported 1.02 percent growth was upgraded twice – to 1.52 percent and 1.90 percent – before falling back to 1.85 percent. But after a downgrade from an initially reported 0.26 percent increase to one of 0.18 percent, June’s results have received upward revisions to 0.24 percent, 0.56 percent, and 0.74 percent.

Nonetheless, aircraft and parts’ price-adjusted output is now 34.14 percent greater during the pandemic era versus the 31.18 percent calculable last month.

Pharmaceutical and medicines companies’ (including vaccine producers’) constant dollar production edged up just 0.20 percent in October, and revisions on balance were negative. September’s initially reported 0.64 increase was downgraded to 0.55 percent. August’s initially reported 1.62 percent growth was upgraded to 1.81 percent and then slightly reduced to 1.80 percent. July’s initially reported 0.29 increase was revised up to 0.30 percent, but then downgraded to losses of 0.55 percent and 0.54 percent. June’s initiallay reported 0.39 rise went unchanged before falling to 0.32 percent, and then advancing to 0.43 percent and 0.44 percent.

After these moves, real output of pharmaceuticals and medicines was 16.71 percent higher than since the February, 2020 onset of the U.S. pandemic, versus the 16.56 percent calculable last month.

Finally, medical equipment and supplies firms raised their production in after-inflation terms by 0.32 percent in October, but revisions were significantly negative. September’s initially reported 1.33 percent drop was revised down to one of 1.43 percent – the worst such performance since the 15.08 percent nosedive of peak pandemic-y April, 2020. August’s initially reported rise of three percent was upgraded to 4.40 percent but then revised dow to 2.92 percent – the best such perfomance since January.

These revisions dragged inflation-adjusted medical equipment and supplies output down to 15.75 percent over its level since February, 2020, versus the 17.95 percent increase calculable last month.

As usual, during these last CCP Virus-roiled years, the outlook for domestic manufacturing seems to be subject to numerous crosswinds. The headwinds include continued tightening of credit conditions by the Fed as it tries to reduce inflation by slowing the economy; numerous predictions of a recession next year (see, e.g., here); economic weakness in major foreign markets to which domestic industry sells; and a still strong dollar (which harms the price competitiveness of U.S.-made goods the world over).

The tailwinds include indications of American economic growth that’s actually strengthening; the possibility that the Fed will at least slow the pace of its rate hikes even before it’s sure that inflation is cooling (precisely to avoid a recession, or a deep recession); a loosening of the supply chain snags that appeared once the global recovery from the first CCP Virus wave began; and amped up federal support for domestic semiconductor manufacturing and the continuing (and hopefully quickening) roll-out of projects funded by the 2021 infrastructure bill.

So far, as I keep observing, the nation’s manufacturers have met their challenges admirably.  But those downward revisions have me wondering whether This Time It’s Different – at least for the next few months. 

Advertisement

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: U.S. Manufacturing Dispels Recession Fears

Tags

aircraft, aircraft parts, apparel, automotive, CCP Virus, computer and electronics products, coronavirus, Federal Reserve, inflation-adjusted growth, machinery, manufacturing, medical equipment, miscellaneous durable goods, non-metallic mineral products, paper, personal protective equipment, petroleum and coal products, pharmaceuticals, PPE, printing, recession, semiconductors, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

If the U.S. economy is still in recession, or getting uncomfortably close to one, it seems no one’s told the nation’s manufacturers. Yesterday’s latest figures from the Federal Reserve show that domestic industry expanded its inflation-adjusted output by 0.43 percent on month in September. Moreover, revisions at this 30,000-foot level were modestly positive (as opposed to some for manufacturing sectors which, as you’ll see, were pretty dramatic).

August’s initially reported gain of just 0.09 percent – which seemed to indicate that the sector was heading into a downturn – is now judged to have been one of 0.38 percent. July’s originally reported 0.72 percent advance was revised down slightly again – from 0.62 percent to 0.60 percent. And June’s results were downgraded a third straight time – from an initially reported dip of 0 05 percent to a drop of 0.58 percent.

These new and revised figures pushed real U.S. manufacturing production is up 4.19 percent from 2020 – just before the CCP Virus and assorted mandated and voluntary behavioral curbs sparked a short but scary downturn and touched off waves of distortion that persist to this day. As of last month’s Fed report, industry’s inflation-adjusted production had risen by 3.49 percent during the pandemic period.

Among the broadest manufacturing sub-sectors tracked by the Fed, the biggest September winners in terms of after-inflation output were:

>apparel and leather goods, whose monthly constant dollar output jumped 1.56 percent. Revisions, moreover were strongly positive. August’s initially reported 0.53 percent downturn was lowered to a slump of 1.85 percent. But July’s results rebounded from a 1.46 percent gain to one of 1.66 percent, after having been revised down from 1.60 percent.

And get a load of the June figures! The initially reported 1.44 percent drop was revised to a boom of 6.09 percent (which would have been the best such increase since August, 2020’s 8.04 percent), then back down to a rise of just 1.46 percent, and finally (for now) back up to a 5.98 percent advance.

Apparel and leather goods’ real output is now 5.39 percent higher than in immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 4.98 percent calculable last month;

>non-metallic mineral products, where inflation-adjusted production was up 1.41 percent for these companies’ best month since May’s 1.69 percent. Revisions, though, were moderately negative, with August’s initially reported 0.09 percent monthly dip being downgraded to a drop of -0.22 percent; July’s initially reported 0.52 percent increase revised down to a slip of 0.09 percent to a fractional decline; and June’s initially reported 1.07 percent fall-off significantly upgraded to a 0.48 percent increase, then revised down to growth of 0.46 percent, to a fractional decrease.

Still, price-adjusted output in non-metallic mineral products is now 1.48 percent higher than just before the CCP Virus arrived in force, versus the 0.12 percent calculable last month;

>petroleum and coal products, which grew inflation-adjusted output by 1.13 percent in September, and which saw overall positive revisions. August’s initially reported 3.54 percent is now judged to be an advance of 4.13 percent (the strongest since March, 2021’s 11.49 percent). July’s initially estimated 0.94 percent decrease has now been upgraded first to one of 0.25 percent and now to one of 0.23 percent. And June’s results stayed at a significantly downgraded 2.80 percent tumble.

Real output in these sectors is now 3.20 percent higher than in February, 2020, versus the 1.45 percent calculable last month; and

>computer and electronics products, whose constant-dollar production climbed 1.07 percent – now the best growth since February’s 1.20 percent. Yet revisions were negative, as August’s initially reported increase of 1.27 percent (which had been the best since May, 2021’s 2.44 percent) has been downgraded to one of 1.05 percent; July’s initially reported drop of 0.65 percent downgraded to one of 0.68 percent and now to one of 0.89 percent; and June’s results settling in at a 0.45 percent increase after the initially reported 0.21 rise was upgraded to 0.67 percent and then revised down to 0.46 percent.

After inflation production in these industries is now 6.78 percent higher than in that last pre-CCP virus data month of February, 2020 versus the 6.11 percent calculable last month.

September’s biggest price-adjusted growth losers were:

>printing and related support activities, where real output sank by 1.67 percent – its worst such perfomance since January’s 2.09 percent retreat. Just as bad, revisions were negative on net. August’s initially reported 0.27 percent decrease was revised up all the way to a 0.59 percent gain, but July’s loss is now judged to have been 1.60 percent after having been upgraded from on of 1.67 percent to one of 1.50 percent. And June’s initially reported 1.68 increase (then the best such performance since February’s 3.13 percent advance) has been revised since to a decrease of 0.51 percent, 0.40 percent, and 0.41 percent.

Conseqently, this hard-hit sector’s output is 11.81 percent smaller than in February, 2020, versus the 11.02 calculable last month.

>miscellaneous durable goods, the broad category that includes the personal protective equipment and other medical devices used so widely to fight the CCP Virus. Its inflation-adjusted production fell by 1.29 percent in September – the first decrease since March’s fractional dip. Even better, this decline comes off overall positive revisions of already excellent results.

August’s initially reported 1.71 percent increase is now estimated to have been one of 2.86 percent the – best since growth rate since July, 2020’s 5.96 percent, as the economy recovered from the pandemic’s first wave and medical equipment production was prioritiezed. July’s initially reported 1.23 percent improvement was downgraded to one of 0.89 percent and then back up to 0.95 percent, and June’s initially reported 2.25 percent growth stayed at a downwardly revised 0.67 percent following a downgrade to 0.87 percent.

Still, in constant dollar terms, production in this broad category is now 13.78 percent greater than in immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus the 13.92 percent calculable last month; and

>paper, where real output in September sank by 0.92 percent. Revisions were mixed, with August’s initially reported 0.80 percent increase (the best such performance since February’s 2.26 percent jump) revised down to 0.69 percent; July’s initially reported 0.64 percent decrease upgraded for a second time, to one of 0.58 percent and now to 0.51 percent; and June’s numbers following a similar pattern, with an initially reported shrinkage of 0.88 percent revised up to losses of 0.62 percent and 0.57 percent, respectively.

Yet paper’s real output is now down by 3.78 percent since just before the pandemic arrived, versus the 2.83 percent worse calculable last month.

Good Septembers were also recorded in two manufacturing sectors of long-time special importance to the economy.

Machinery’s economic role is critical because of how widely its products are used throughout the economy and because its output largely reflects business’ expectations of future demand and growth. So it was good news that this diverse sector’s constant dollar output rose by 0.32 percent in Sept, and that revisions were positive on net.

August’s initially reported 0.99 percent increase (mistakenly reported in my last post as 0.91 percent), which had been the best such growth since April’s 1.97 percent was upgraded all the way up to 2.64 percent! That’s now the best production month since July, 2021’s 2.76 percent. This July’s initially reported 0.50 percent growth was upgraded again – from 0.68 percent to 0.78 percent – but June’s data has been revised down overall from a drop of 1.49 pecent to one of 1.27 percent, and back down to 1.75 percent and 1.83 percent.

These developments have now pushed up machinery’s post-February, 2020 real output to 7.23 percent, versus the 5.07 percent calculable last month.

The automotive sector has greatly influenced the manufacturing production statistics throughout the pandemic era, and its volatility continued in September, with after-inflation output up by one percent. Yet that result followed an August whose production decrease was revised down from 1.44 percent to one of 1.48 percent; a July whose output increase was downgraded from an initially reported 6.60 percent to one of 3.24 percent and now back up to 3.57 percent; and a June whose results have changed from -1.49 percent to -1.27 percent to -1.31 percent to -1.84 percent.

Real vehicle and parts production, however, is now back in the black since February, 2020, now aving risen by 0.89 percent, versus the 0.89 percent slippage calculable last month.

The news also was generally good in September for industries prominent in the news during the CCP Virus era.

Constant-dollar production in the shortage-plagued semiconductor sector rose by 0.45 percent, and revisions overall were mixed. August’s initially reported decline of 0.57 percent (the first in three months) is now judged to have been only 0.39 percent. July’s initially reported 1.16 percent growth has been revised down to 0.77 percent and now a measly 0.02 percent. But June’s initially reported 0.18 percent advance is now judged to have been one of 0.86 percent, after being revised way up to 2.09 percent, and then back down to 0.88 percent.

Real semiconductor production is now 17.29 percent higher since February, 2020, versus the 17.46 percent improvement calculable last month.

Inflation-adjusted production of aircraft and parts grew 0.59 percent in September, and revisions were mixed. August’s initially reported 3.11 percent surge (the best since January, 2021’s 8.61 percent) was downgraded significantly to 1.69 percent. But July’s numbers have been upgraded from an initially reported gain of 1.02 percent to one of 1.52 percent and now to one of 1.90 percent. And June’s initially reported 0.26 percent growth has been revised to a 0.18 percent advance, back up to a rise of 0.24 percent, and again to one of 0.56 percent.

Aircraft and parts production, therefore, has now increased by 31.18 percent since just before the pandemic’s arrival, versus the 30.60 percent rise calculable last month.

Pharmaceutical and medicines companies boosted their real monthly production by 0.64 percent in September, and revisions were mixed. August’s initially reported 1.62 percent improvement (the best since August, 2021’s 1.96 percent) was upgraded to 1.81 percent. But July’s initially reported 0.29 percent increase, which had been revised up to 0.30 percent, is now judged to have been a 0.55 percent loss – the first such setback since February’s 1.35 percent fall). And June’s results have gone from 0.39 percent to unrevised to a gain of 0.32 percent and now a rise of 0.43 percent.

As of last month, phamaceuticals’ and medicines’ after-inflation production level had grown by 16.56 percent since February, 2020.  Now the figure is 16.58 percent.

The lone exception to these good September results was medical equipment and supplies – where the personal protective devices and other pandemic fighting equipment is found. Its 1.33 percent after-inflation production fall-off last month was its first since last December (0.71 percent) and the worst such performance since the 15.08 percent crash dive in April, 2020 – at the height of the CCP Virus’ devastating first wave.

But August’s initially reported three percent increase was revised up to 4.40 percent – the best such result since July, 2020’s 9.84 percent. This July’s initially reported 1.90 percent rise was downgraded to 1.58 percent but then upgraded to 1.69 percent. And although June’s figure was revised down from an initially reported 3.12 percent to 1.01 percent and then to 0.67 percent, it was nudged back up to 0.68 percent yesterday.

These net gains pushed medical equipment and supplies’ real production to 17.95 percent above their February, 2020 levels, versus the 17.81 percent improvement calculable last month.

For what it’s worth, the normally pretty reliable forecasters at the Atlanta branch of the Federal Reserve system believe that the economy has now exited the recession it experienced in the first half of this year, and that will grow at a very respectable 2.9 percent after inflation at annual rates in the third quarter of this year. We’ll find out for sure starting October 27, when the first official read on third quarter growth comes out. But at this point, these new manufacturing production data support the idea that economic expansion is back for the time being – and certainly augur well for domestic industry’s prospects at least for the short term.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: An Up-Side Surprise for U.S. Manufacturing Output

Tags

aircraft, aircraft parts, apparel, appliances, automotive, CCP Virus, coronavirus, COVID 19, electrical components, electrical equipment, fabricated metal products, Federal Reserve, furniture, machinery, manufacturing, medical devices, pharmaceuticals, printing, recession, semiconductors, transportation equipment, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Just as it’s looking like the U.S. economy as a whole may have skirted the danger of a near-term recession, domestic American manufacturing saw a revival of its fortunes last month, according to yesterday morning’s latest official report on its after-inflation output in July.

Following two consecutive months of falling real production, U.S.-based industry grew by 0.74 percent in price-adjusted terms sequentially last month – its best such performance since March’s 0.74 percent. Revisions were mixed but modest.

These new figures mean that constant dollar U.S. manufacturing output is now 3.69 percent greater than in February, 2020, the last month before the CCP virus and assorted mandatory and voluntay burbs on economic behavior triggered a steep but brief recession and began distorting the economy. As of June’s release, domestic manufacturing had grown by an inflation-adjusted 2.98 percent since then.

Among the broadest manufacturing sub-sectors tracked by the Fed were:

>the automotive industry, whose volatility fueled many of U.S.-based manufacturing’s ups and downs earlier during the pandemic, boosted its real output by 6.60 percent on month – and this burst was only its best such result since March’s 9.04 percent. Revisions here were generally negative, with June’s initially reported monthly loss of 1.49 percent revised up to one of 1.27 percent, but May’s results downgraded again to a drop of 1.92 percent, and April’s originally reported gain of 3.92 percent is pegged at 2.98 percent. All told, though, vehicle and parts production -though still dealing with semiconductor shortages – once again rose back above its immediate pre-pandemic level by 4.73 percent. As of last month, it was still down by 1.07 percent;

>fabricated metal products, which lifted real output on month in July by 2.05 percent – its best such result since February’s 2.49 percent. Revisions were mixed, with June’s initially reported decline of -0.83 percent now estimated as a decrease of 1.40 percent, May’s initially reported shrinkage of 1.16 percent downgraded further to a 1.18 tumble before being upgraded to one of 1.02 percent, and April’s initially 0.85 percent rise previously revised down to a 0.46 percent advance before recovering to one of 0.65 percent. Inflation-adjusted production in this sector has now come to within 0.14 percent of its February, 2020 levels, as opposed to 2.11 percent below them calculable last month;

>aerospace & miscellaneous transportation equipment, where constant dollar production jumped 1.54 percent month-to-month, and where revisions were mixed, too. June’s initially reported fractional improvement is now judged to have been a dip of 0.14 percent, May’s advance estimate of a 0.85 percent decrease bouncing back from a downgrade to a 1.25 percent drop to one of 1.05 percent, and April’s initially reported 2.15 percent increase getting upgaded to one of 3.47 percent before settling back to one of 3.34 percent. In after-inflation terms, this cluster of industries is 21.30 percent bigger than just before the CCP Virus’ arrival in force, versus the 19.47 percent calculable last month; and

>apparel and leather goods, which recorded a second straight excellent growth month. July constant dollar production increased on month by 1.60 percent, and June’s initially reported 2.54 percent surge was revised all the way up to 6.09 percent – its best such result since the 8.04 percent recorded in August, 2020, when the economy’s recovery from the first virus wave was still underway. But May’s initially reported 0.88 percent price-adjusted output rise was revised down a second time – to a 0.24 percent dip. And April’s advance figure, a 0.18 percent climb, is now estimated to have been a 0.43 percent decrease. Still, thanks to the last two months’ results, this long-beleaguered sector has now grown in real terms by 5.71 percent, as opposed to the 0.56 percent calculable last month; and

July’s worst performing of the major sub-categories tracked by the Fed?

>printing and related support activities, where price-adjusted production sank by 1.67 percent on month. Revisions overall were positive, with June’s first reported loss of 2.16 percent revised up to one of 0.51 percent, May’s advance estimate of a 0.35 percent retreat upgraded a second time, to one of only 0.09 percent, and April’s initially reported 0.49 percent gain now standing at 0.69 percent. All the same, this group of companies still 10.50 percent smaller in real terms than it was in February, 2020, versus the11.37 figure calculable last month;

>furniture and related products,where real output sagged by 1.57 percent sequentially, the worst such result since the 2.77 percent decrease in February, 2021. Revisions on the whole were just as bad, with June’s initially reported fall-off of -0.55 percent now judged to have been one of 1.33 percent, May’s initially reported 0.94 increase (the biggest since this past February’s 4.75 percent pop) revised down second time to ai 0.99 decrease, and April’s initially reported -0.59 percent drop now pegged at a slightly smaller one of 0.41 percent. These results dragged down the furniture complex’s performance down to a 5.56 percent inflation-adjusted output shrinkage since immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, versus a 0.91 percent decline calculable last month; and

>electrical equipment, appliances and components, where after-inflation production was off 1.41 percent from June’s levels. Revisions, though, were on the whole positive. June’s originally reported production increase of 1.34 percent was revised up to 1.42 percent (the best such performance since February’s 2.29 percent), May’s downgrade from an advance decrease of 1.83 percent to one of 2.35 percent was upgraded to a 1.93 percent retreat, and April’s initially reported -0.60 percent drop is now judged to have been a 0.57 percent advance. Yet constant dollar production in this cluster is now up only 4.83 percent over its last pre-pandemic reading, versus the 5.59 percent figure calculable last month.

As known by RealityChek regulars, the very big and diverse machinery sector is seen as a bellwether for both the rest of manufacturing and the rest of the entire economy, since so many industries use its products. So it’s encouraging to report that in July its companies notched their first monthly real output gain (0.50 percent) since April. Revisions, however, were overall sigificantly negative terrible. June’s initially reported 1.14 percent decrease is now pegged at 2.16 percent, and May was downwardly revised again to a 3.53 percent loss (the sector’s worst since the 18.64 percent collapse in April, 2020, during the worst of the economy’s pandemic-induced downturn). Only April broke the pattern even somewhat. Its initially reported 0.85 percent price-adjusted sequential output rise was upgraded all the way to 2.27 percent in May. It’s been downgraded since, but still stands at a 1.88 percent advance (the best since January’s 1.95 percent.

These results mean that wherewas last month, inflation-adjusted machinery production was up 4.70 percent during the pandemic era, now it’s only 2.82 percent higher.

The industries that consistently have made headlines during the pandemic performed well in July, too.

Measured in constant dollars, production by aircraft- and aircraft parts-makers was up 1.02 percent on month, but revisions were modesty negative. June’s initially reported after-inflation output growth of 0.26 percent is now pegged at only 0.18 percent, and May’s real production was unchanged at down 0.23 percent after having been downgraded from a 0.33 percent improvement. After having been upgraded twice, from an initially reported 1.67 percent advance to one of 3.13 percent, the April results dipped to a 2.96 percent rise. But this was still the best monthly result since January, 2021’s 8.60 percent surge). Nonetheless, the aircraft and parts sector is now 26.67 percent larger in real terms, since February, 2020 – up from the 25.58 percent figure calculable last month.

In the big pharmaceuticals and medicines industry, real production climbed on month by 0.29 percent n July and revisions were generally positive. June’s initially reported 0.39 percent increase was slightly downgraded to 0.32 percent, but after having its initially reported 0.42 percent increase was revised down to only 0.01 percent, it was upgraded all the way to a 1.20 percent improvement. And April’s initially reported -0.20 percent after-inflation monthly production dip was revised up a third time to a 0.08 percent increase. Due to these results, real output of aircraft and parts has now grown by 14.69 percent during the pandemic period, versus the 12.98 percent calculable last month.

Medical equipment and supplies firms (who make so many of the products used to fight the CCP Virus) enjoyed a banner July, expanding after inflation by 1.90 percent – its best such result since January’s 3.15 percent jump. June’s initially reported from 3.12 percent rise was downgraded to one of 1.01 percent, but after a downward revision from 1.44 percent real growth to 1.01 percent, May’s results wee revised back up to 1.66 percent, and after two straight upward revisions and one downward, April’s final (for now!) result is now judged to be 0.44 percent growth. But this cluster’s virus era inflation-adjusted production growth now stands at 16.15 percent versus the 17.27 percent calculable last month.

For the shortage-plagued semiconductor industry, price-adjusted output improved on month in July by 1.16 percent. Revisions were positive – but all over the place. June’s initially reported 0.18 percent rise is now pegged at 0.49 percent. But after a massive downgrade from 0.52 growth to 2.24 percent shrinkage, May’s performance is now recorded as a 0.37 gain. And the April sequential results are now as follows: down 1.85 percent, down 0.88 percent, down 2.71 percent, and down 2.68 percent – still the worst production month since the 11.26 percent plunge in December, 2008 – in the middle of the Great Recession that followed the global financial crisis. After all this movement, though, constant dollar semiconductor production is now up 21.98 percent since pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, up dramatically from the 15.22 percent calculable last month.

Even by pandemic-era standards, the outlook for domestic manufacturing looks unusually murky to me. The reasons for pessimism abound (like the near certainty of more growth-slowing monetary tightening by the Federal Reserve in order to tame inflation, darkening growth prospects in all of export-heavy manufacturing’s foreign markets, and continuing supply chain woes, industry’s still ginormous trade deficit). But so do reasons for (cautious) optimism (like U.S. unemployment at 50-year lows and all the personal spending this level supports, the chance that the Fed will ultimately chicken out in its anti-inflation campaign, and the ongoing fade of the pandemic).

Moreover, and maybe most important, all recent bets so far against U.S.-based manufacturing’s resilience have been losing bets. Unless you think that the nation’s manufacturers have suddenly lost their chops, or are about to, it’s reasonable to suppose that, at least for now, they remain horses worth riding.       

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: A Second Straight Month of Production Shrinkage for U.S. Manufacturing

Tags

aircraft, aircraft parts, apparel, appliances, automotive, CCP Virus, China, coronavirus, COVID 19, dollar, electrical components, electrical equipment, exchange rates, Federal Reserve, fiscal policy, inflation, inflation-adjusted growth, machinery, manufacturing, medical devices, medicines, metals, miscellaneous durable goods, monetary policy, personal protective equipment, petroleum and coal products, pharmaceuticals, production, real output, recession, semiconductor shortage, semiconductors, stimulus, supply chains, textiles, Trade Deficits, Wuhan virus, Zero Covid, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Yesterday’s after-inflation U.S. manufacturing production report (for June) marked a second straight decline in real output for domestic industry, adding to the evidence that this so far resilient sector is finally suffering the effects of the entire economy’s recent slowdown.

Another possible implication of the new downbeat results: The record and surging trade deficits being run in manufacturing lately may finally be starting undermine U.S.-based manufacturing’s growth. (See here for how and why.)

Also important to note: This release from the Federal Reserve incorporated the results of both typical monthly revisions but also its annual “benchmark” revision, which reexamined its data going back several years (in this case, to 2020), and updated the figures in light of any new findings.

And the combination has revealed some big surprises – notably that the domestic semiconductor industry, which along with its foreign competition has been struggling to keep up with recently booming worldwide demand, has turned out fully 36 percent less worth of microchips on a price-adjusted basis since the CCP Virus struck than was calculable from the (pre-revisions) May report.

In real terms, U.S.-based manufacturing shrank by 0.54 percent on month in June – the worst such result since last September’s 0.78 percent drop. Moreover, May’s originally reported 0.07 sequential percent dip is now judged to be a decrease of 0.52 percent.

The April results remained good, but were downgraded a second time, from 0.75 percent monthly growth in after inflation to 0.66 percent, while the March numbers told a similar story, with a third consecutive modest downward revision still leaving that month’s inflation-adjusted expansion at 0.76 percent.

Especially discouraging, though – the June report plus the two revisions left constant dollar U.S. manufacturing output just 2.98 percent greater than just before the pandemic struck the economy in full force and began distorting it, in February, 2020. The pre-benchmark revision May release pegged its virus-era real growth at a much higher 4.94 percent, and the first post-benchmark number was 4.12 percent.

May’s biggest manufacturing growth winners among the broadest manufacturing categories tracked by the Fed were:

>the very small apparel and leather goods industry. Its price-adjusted output surged by 2.54 percent month-to-month in June – its best such perfomance since May, 2021’s 2.63 percent. May’s initially reported 0.88 percent gain was revised down to a 0.34 percent loss, though. April’s upgraded 0.30 percent rise is now judged to be a 0.33 percent decrease, and March’s figures were revised down after two upgrades – from 1.54 to a still solid 1.30 percent. But whereas last month’s Fed release showed inflation-adjusted production in this sector up 4.59 percent during the pandemic era, this growth is now pegged at just 0.56 percent; 

>the miscellaneous durable goods sector, which contains the medical products like personal protective equipment looked to as major CCP Virus fighters. It’s June sequential output jump of 2.25 percent was its biggest since March, 2021’s 2.61 percent, and revisions were overall positive. May’s initially reported 0.96 percent monthly price-adjusted production gain was downgraded to 0.49 percent, but the April figure was revised up for a second time – to 0.71 percent – and March’s results were upgraded a third straight time, to 0.51 percent.

These industries are now 14.11 percent bigger in constant dollar terms than in February, 2020, versus the 11.41 percent gain calculable last month; and

>the electrical equipment, appliances, and components cluster, where price-adjusted production climbed 1.34 percent on a monthly basis in June, the strongest such showing since February’s 2.29 percent.. Revisions were positive on net, with May’s originally reported 1.83 percent monthly falloff downgraded to one of 2.35 percent, but April’s initially estimated -0.60 percent decrease upgraded a second time,to a 0.49 percent gain, and March’s three revisions resulting in an originally judged 1.03 percent increase now pegged at 1.23 percent. These results pushed these companies’ real production 5.59 percent higher than in immediately pre-pandemic-y February, 2020, not the 2.19 percent calculable last month;

The list of biggest manufacturing inflation-adjusted output losers for June was considerably longer, starting with

>printing and related support activities, where the monthly inflation-adjusted production loss of 2.16 percent was the worst such showing since February, 2021’s 2.26 percent. Revisions were actually net positive, with May’s initially reported dip of 0.35 percent upgraded to one of 0.15 percent; April’s results downgraded from a one percent advance to one of 0.33 percent after being revised up from an initially reported 0.49 percent; and March’s totals rising cumulatively from an initially reported 1.10 percent decrease to a decline of just 0.05 percent. All the same, the printing cluster is now judged to be 11.37 percent smaller in real terms than in February, 2020, not the 1.89 percent calculable last month;

>petroleum and coal products, whose June sequential production decrease of 1.92 percent was its biggest since January’s 2.96 percent. Revisions here were mixed, too, with May’s figure revised up from a 2.53 percent improvement to one of 2.61 percent; April’s totals downgraded a second time, from a 0.13 rise to one of 0.04 percent to a decrease of 1.91 percent; and March’s results increasing from an initial estimate of 0.72 percent to one of 1.03 percent. But whereas last month’s Fed release showed petroleum and coal products’ after-inflation output 1.21 percent above its last pre-pandemic level, this month’s reports that it’s 0.27 percent below.

>textiles and products, where price-adjusted output sank on month by 1.80 percent for its worst month since March’s 2.45 percent shrinkage. Revisions were negative, with May’s initially reported 0.02 percent real production decline downgraded to one of 0.35 percent, April’s upgraded 0.45 percent increase now pegged as a 0.05 percent decrease, and March’s initially reported 1.55 percent falloff now judged to be one of 2.45 percent. As a result, the sector is now 5.35 percent smaller in terms of constant dollar output, rather than down 3.80 percent as calculable last month; and

>primary metals, whose inflation-adjusted production sagged by 1.60 percent on month – its poorest performance since March’s 1.42 retreat. Revisions were overall positive here, with May’s initially reported 0.77 percent real output rise downgraded to one of 0.66 percent, April’s initially downgraded 1.22 percent increase revised up to 1.46 percent, and March’s initially reported 1.69 percent drop now judged to be that aforementioned 1.42 percent. Even so, primary metals price-adjusted production is now estimated as having inched up only 0.50 percent since the pandemic arrived, not the 4.45 percent increase calculable last month.

In addition, an unusually high three other major industry sectors suffered constant dollar output declines of more than one percent on month in June. On top of plastics and rubber products (1.25 percent), the were two that RealityChek has followed especially closely during the pandemic period – machinery and automotive.

As known by RealityChek regulars, the machinery industry is a bellwether for both the rest of manufacturing and the entire economy, since use of its products is so widespread. But in June, its real production was off by 1.14 percent on month, and May’s initially reported 2.14 percent decrease is now estimated at-3.14 percent – its worst figure since the 18.64 collapse recorded in pandemic-y April, 2020. And although this April’s numbers have been revised up twice, to have reached 2.20 percen, March’s initially reported 0.78 percent inflation-adjusted increase is now estimated to have been a 0.89 decrease. Consequently, in price-adjusted terms, the machinery sector is now estimated to be 4.70 percent larger than in February, 2020, not the 6.29 percent calculable last month.

As for motor vehicles and parts makers, dogged for months by that aforementioned semiconductor shortage, their real output was off by 1.49 percent on month in June, and May’s initially reported rise of 0.70 percent is now estimated as a1.86 percent decline. Following a slight downgrade, April’s output is now pegged as growing by 3.85 percent rather than 3.34 percent, and March’s initially reported 7.80 percent advance is now pegged at 9.08 percent – the best such total since last October’s 10.34 percent. Nonetheless, after-inflation automotive output is now reported to be 1.07 percent lower than just before the pandemic arrive in force, not the 1.17 percent higher calculable last month.

Notably, other industries that consistently have made headlines during the pandemic outperformed the rest of manufacturing in June.

Constant dollar output by aircraft- and aircraft parts-makers was up 0.26 percent month-to-month in June, but revisions were mixed. May’s initially reported 0.33 percent rise has now been downgraded to a 0.23 percent decline – snapping a four-month winning streak. April’s results were upgraded a second straight time – from a hugely upgraded 2.90 percent to an excellent 3.13 percent (the best such performance since January, 2021’s 8.60 percent burst). But the March figures have been substantially downgraded from an initially reported 2.31 percent to a gain of just 0.53 percent. After all this volatility, though, real aircaft and parts production is now 25.58 percent greater than in February, 2020, much better than the 19.08 percent calculable last month.

The big pharmaceuticals and medicines industry grew its real putput by another 0.39 percent in June, but revisions were generally negative. May’s initially reported 0.42 percent improvement, however, is now judged to be just an infinitesimal 0.01 percent. April’s upgraded 0.15 percent rise is now pegged as a 0.04 percent loss, and March’s results have been downgraded all the way from an initially reported 1.17 percent increase to one of just 0.49 percent. Price-adjusted output in these sectors, therefore, is now estimated at 12.98 percent higher than in February, 2020, versus the 14.64 percent calculable last month.

Medical equipment and supplies firms boosted their inflation-adjusted output for a sixth straight month in June, and by a stellar 3.12 percent – their best such performance since January’s 3.15 percent. May’s growth was downgraded from 1.44 percent to 1.01 percent, but April’s estimate rose again, from 0.51 percent to 1.01 percent, and March’s initially reported 1.81 percent improvement has been slightly downgraded to 1.67 percent. This progress pushed these companies’ real pandemic era output growth from the 11.51 percent calculable last month to 17.27 percent.

The news was significantly worse, though, in that shortage-plagued semiconductor industry. Real production rose by 0.18 percent sequentially in June, but May’s initially reported 0.52 percent advance is now judged to have been a 2.24 percent drop. Meanwhile, April’s already dreary initially reported 1.85 percent slump has now been downgraded again to one of 2.71 percent (the sector’s worst such performance since the 11.26 percent plunge in December, 2008 – in the middle of the Great Recession that followed the global financial crisis). Even March’s initially reported impressive 1.99 percent monthly price-adjusted production increase has been revised all the way down to 0.52 percent.

The bottom line: The pandemic-era semiconductor real production increase that was estimated at 23.82 percent last month is now judged to have been just 15.22 percent.

It’s not as if the recent official manufacturing data has been all disappointing. Employment, notably, rose respectably on month in June. And the pace of capital spending has actually sped up some (at least through May) – which, like employment is a sign of continued optimism among manufacturers about their future outlook.

But at this point, the headwinds look stronger – including continued credit tightening by the Federal Reserve (not to mention a drawdown in the massive bond purchases that also have significantly propped up the entire economy); the resulting downshifting in domestic economic growth at which the Fed is aiming in order to bring down raging inflation; an even worse slump in economies overseas, which have been important markets for U.S.-based industry; the strongest dollar in about two decades, which puts Made in America products at a price disadvantage the world over; and the ongoing supply chain snags resulting from the Ukraine-Russia War and China’s lockdowns-happy Zero Covid policy.

And don’t forget those stratospheric and still-rising manufacturing trade deficits, which could well mean that, once the unprecedented pandemic fiscal and monetary stimulus/virus relief that have helped create so much business for domestic industry starts fading significantly, U.S.-based manufacturers could might themselves further behind the eight-ball than ever.  

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Revisions Take U.S. Manufacturing’s Solid Pandemic-Era Performance Down a Notch

Tags

aerospace, aircraft, aircraft parts, apparel, appliances, CCP Virus, chemicals, computer and electronics products, coronavirus, COVID 19, durable goods, electrical components, electrical equipment, fabricated metal products, Federal Reserve, furniture, inflation-adjusted output, machinery, manufacturing, medical devices, miscellaneous durable goods, miscellaneous nondurable goods, nondurable goods, nonmetallic mineral products, paper, petroleum and coal products, pharmaceuticals, plastics and rubber products, printing, real growth, recession, semiconductors, textiles, wood products, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Sharp-eyed RealityChek readers have no doubt noticed my habit of noting that “final” versions of official U.S. economic data are typically final only “for now.” That’s because Washington’s statistics gathering agencies, to their credit, look back regularly on several years’ worth of figures to see where updates are needed because new information has come in, and this morning, the Federal Reserve released its own such “benchmark” revision of its manufacturing production data.

The results don’t contain any earthshaking changes, but they do alter the picture of domestic industry’s inflation-adjusted growth during the pandemic period, as well as of the performance of specific sectors, in non-trivial ways.

The main bottom lines: First, the Fed previously estimated that U.S.-based manufacturers had increased their constant dollar production from February, 2020 (the month before the CCP Virus’ arrival in force began roiling the entire American economy) through last month, by 4.94 percent. Today, the Fed told us that the advance was just 4.12 percent.

Second, as a result, domestic industry has further to go in real terms to recover its all-time high than the central bank had judged. As of the last regular monthly industrial production increase, U.S.-based manufacturing was 2.41 percent smaller after inflation than in December, 2007 – still its peak. But the new figures show that these manufacturers are still three percent behind the after-inflation output eight-ball.

Third, and especially interesting given the recent, significant U.S. growth slowdown and distinct possibility of a recession before too long, the revisions add (though just slightly) to the evidence that the overall economy’s woes this year are indeed beginning to affect manufacturing. Before the revision, the Fed judged that real manufacturing output had expanded by 2.68 percent between last December and this May, and slipped by 0.07 percent between April and May. The new figures: 2.46 percent and -0.22 percent, respectively.

The virus-era downward revisions affected durable goods and nondurable goods industries alike. The previous price-adjusted growth figure for the former during the pandemic period was 6.31 percent. Now it’s pegged at 5.18 percent. For the latter, the downgrade was from 3.42 percent to 2.99 percent.

Before the revisions, of the twenty broadest sub-sectors of manufacturing tracked by the Fed, only five suffered inflation-adjusted production declines from immediate pre-pandemic-y February, 2020 through this May, and all were found in the nondurables super-category. They were miscellaneous non-durable goods (down 11.43 percent), textiles (down 3.80 percent), paper (2.33 percent), printing and related activities (1.89 percent), and petroleum and coal products (1.21 percent).

The new data show that the number of growth losers has expanded to eight;. Four sectors were added: fabricated metals products (down 1.30 percent), nonmetallic mineral products (1.06 percent), apparel and leather goods (off by 0.59 percent), and furniture and related products (0.17 percent). And petroleum and coal products’ contant dollar production was upgraded from a 1.21 percent decrease during the pandemic period to a 2.96 percent gain.

The names on the list of top five pandemic period growers remained the same, with after-inflation production actually improving in aerospace and miscellaneous transportation (from 18.99 percent to 19.69 percent), miscellaneous durable goods (from 11.41 percent to 12.43 percent), and machinery (from 6.29 percent to 6.52 percent). But real production gains were revised down in computer and electronics products (from 10.42 percent to 7.38 percent), and chemicals (from 8.48 percent to 7.55 percent).

In absolute tems, the biggest price-adjusted output upgrades were registered in miscellaneous nondurable goods (from an 11.43 pecent nosedive to a smaller drop of 7.56 percent), electrical equipment, appliances and components (from a 2.19 percent rise to one of 4.95 percent), the aforementioned petroleum and coal products sector, wood products (from a 5.24 percent increase to 6.45 percent), and plastics and rubber products (from 1.78 percent growth to 2.76 percent).

The biggest real production downgrades came in the printing sector (all the way from a 1.89 percent inflation-adjusted output shrinkage to one of 9.52 percent), apparel and leather goods (from a 4.59 percent real production rise to a 0.59 percent dip), nonmetallic mineral products (from 2.58 percent price-adjusted growth to a 1.06 percent decline), and the aforementioned computer and electronics product sector.

RealityChek has been following with special interest narrower sectors that have attracted unusual attention since the CCP Virus arrived, and the new industrial production revision shows that constant dollar output climbed by more than previously estimated in aircraft and parts (24.89 percent versus 19.08 percent) and medical equipment and supplies (14.48 percent versus 11.51 percent), and by less in semiconductors and other electronic components (22.48 percent versus 23.82 percent) and in pharmaceuticals and medicine (12.79 percent versus 14.78 percent).

These Fed revisions are hardly a reason to push the panic button about U.S. manufacturing. But because domestic industry’s fortunes during the pandemic era have been so closely tied to blazing hot demand for its products, it’s hardly great news to learn that with signs abounding of a slumping American economy, manufacturing is approaching this apparent downturn in less robust shape than thought as late as yesterday.   

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: Biden Big Wigs Signal a Cave-in on China Tariffs

Tags

apparel, bicycles, Biden, Biden administration, CAFTA, Central America, Central America Free Trade Agreement, China, consumer goods, consumer price index, CPI, Daleep Singh, Donald Trump, Hunter Biden, Immigration, inflation, Janet Yellen, Mexico, NAFTA, North American Free Trade Agreement, tariffs, Trade, trade war, {What's Left of) Our Economy

In theory, once can always be dismissed as a gaffe (even President Biden isn’t the speaker) or a trial balloon motivated by genuine uncertainty and curiosity. Twice, especially within two days, looks an awful lot like the preview of a policy change. Which is why recent remarks by two senior Biden administration officials last week are so worrisome. If that’s the game they’re playing, then the President is planning what could be major cuts in the Trump tariffs on China – without requiring any meaningful concessions from China in return. Even worse, the rationale being advanced – reducing inflation — is completely bogus.

This potential tariff-cutting spadework began last Thursday, when deputy White House national security advisor Daleep Singh told a conclave of globalist poohbahs that tariffs could advance U.S. [in the words of Reuters reporter Andrea Shalal “strategic priorities such as strengthening critical supply chains and maintaining U.S. preeminence in foundational technologies and to support national security.”

But, he added (in his words) “For product categories that are not implicated by those objectives, there’s not much of a case for those tariffs being in place. Why do we have tariffs on bicycles or apparel or underwear?”

“So that’s the opportunity,” he continued. “It could be that in this moment of elevated inflation and China having its own very serious supply chain concerns … maybe there’s something we can do there.” Singh also suggested that eliminating such U.S. tariffs could prompt China to cut duties on comparable American products, though he didn’t establish such Chinese moves as a condition.

The very next day, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said on Bloomberg Television that “We’re re-examining carefully our trade strategy with respect to China” and that removing the tariffs is “worth considering. We certainly want to do what we can to address inflation, and there would be some desirable effects. It’s something we’re looking at.”

One immediate problem with Yellen’s position is that she herself has belittled it. As recently as last December, she testified to Congress that cuts in so-called non-strategic tariffs would not be an inflation “game-changer.”

In addition, although Yellen might be excused for not recognizing a major strategic benefit that the China tariffs could create, to the second in command in President Biden’s National Security Council – which is supposed to look at the nation’s global opportunities and challenges holistically – they should be obvious. Specifically, these kinds of labor-intensive consumer goods are exactly the kinds of products that could create the kinds of vital economic opportunities in Mexico and Central America that could many of the incentives for mass emigration.

Indeed, as I’ve written, pre-Trump presidents’ short-sighted decision to pursue trade liberalization with virtually all low-income countries guaranteed that the gains that could have flowed to U.S. neighbors via the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) would shift instead to China and the other more competitive economies of East Asia. Just something to keep in mind the next time the Biden administration claims it’s serious about solving the “root causes” of mass migration in this hemisphere.

As for the inflation angle, Singh and Yellen have some big questions to answer. First of all, all sports vehicles (the category in which the U.S. Labor Department includes bicycles when it breaks down the contributions made to rising prices by different types of goods and services) comprise about 0.4 percent of the core Consumer Price Index (CPI) and apparel makes up about 3.2 percent. So it is indeed difficult to understand how stemming price rises of these products could be an inflation game-changer, as Yellen observed. (See here for the official CPI breakdown.)

Second, and at least as important, announced tariffs on some Chinese bicycles and bike products had already been suspended for much of the Trump China trade war period. For the rest of imports from China in this grouping, the 25 percent tariff remained unchaged. Yet annual inflation in the sports vehicles category has ranged from 4.8 percent in February, 2021 (President Biden’s first full month in office) to 10.52 percent this past January. Why such dramatic price fluctuation and big net increase over time? 

As for U.S. apparel imports, products from China represented just about a quarter of the U.S. global total last year – so it would seem that these goods represented just about a quarter of the total apparel contribution to the CPI (or about 0.80 percent).  And the Trump trade war levies cover just a tiny share of these imports, according to this industry source. Even so, however, annual apparel inflation rates have fluctuated even more dramatically than those for the bicycle category during the Biden presidency. They’ve ranged from -3.72 percent in February, 2021 to 6.79 percent last month (the latest available figures). 

The only possible explanation for these trends: As with the rest of the economy, apparel and bicycle prices have been determined ovewhelmingly by forces other than tariffs – principally the status of the CCP Virus pandemic and of the overall economic growth and consumption rates it’s so powerfully influenced; the injection of trillions of dollars worth of stimulus injected into the economy by the administration, the Congress, and the Federal Reserve; the supply chain snags that have caused shortages and therefore boosted prices of practically everything that needs to be transported; and the energy price rises that have generated the same kinds of effects. In other words, it’s the supply and demand, stupid.

And speaking of stupid, that adjective doesn’t begin to describe the politics of this seemingly impending Biden move. In an election year, does the President really want to expose himself to charges of being soft on China? Especially since evidence keeps emerging of his son Hunter’s lucrative business dealings with Chinese interests – which have clearly feathered the nests of the entire Biden family, including the President’s?

Even though, as I’ve pointed out, Mr. Biden has been a China coddler for his entire career in Washington, I was convinced that the American public’s mounting fear and loathing of the Beijing dictatorship would keep persuading him to follow the basic Trump approach to China trade. Indeed, his chief trade advisor implicitly endorsed this Trump strategy less than a month ago and indicated it would shape Biden administration polic going forward.

The President can still stop this initiative in its tracks.  But if he doesn’t, he’ll have only himself to blame when his political opponents ramp up their charges that he’s in Beijing’s pocket after all, and that his early China hawkishness meant that the payoff from his election, far from being off the table, was merely being delayed.  

Glad I Didn’t Say That! So Much for Nike’s China Suck-Up Strategy

Tags

apparel, China, cotton, footwear, Glad I Didn't Say That!, human rights, Nike, sportswear, Uighurs, Xinjiang

“CEO: ‘Nike is a brand that is of China and for China’”

– The Hill, June 26, 2021

 

“Nike Shares Lose Out to Chinese Sneaker Rivals After Xinjiang

Cotton Boycott”

– Bloomberg.com, July 6, 2021

 

(Sources: “CEO: ‘Nike is a brand that is of China and for China,’” by Caroline Vakil, TheHill.com, June 26, 2021, CEO: ‘Nike is a brand that is of China and for China’ | TheHill and “Nike Shares Lose Out to Chinese Sneaker Rivals After Xinjiang Cotton Boycott,” by Olivia Tam, Bloomberg.com, July 6, 2021, Nike Loses to China Sneaker Rivals After Xinjiang Cotton Controversy – Bloomberg)

 

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: It’s an Autos Story Again for U.S. Manufacturing Production

Tags

aerospace, aircraft, aluminum, apparel, automotive, Boeing, CCP Virus, chemicals, China, computers, coronavirus, COVID 19, Donald Trump, electronics, facemasks, Federal Reserve, health security, inflation-adjusted output, machinery, manufacturing, medical supplies, paper, pharmaceuticals, PPE, printing, real growth, semiconductor shortage, semiconductors, shutdowns, steel, stimulus, tariffs, vaccines, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Earlier in the CCP Virus era, the U.S. manufacturing production story was largely an automotive production story – because the industry shut down so suddenly and completely during the pandemic’s first wave and the deep economic downturn it triggered, and then began reopening at a record pace. And today’s Federal Reserve figures show that domestic industry’s growth is being driven by dramatically fluctuating vehicles and parts output once again – but this time it seems due significantly to the global semiconductor shortage that’s deprived the sector of critical parts.

Also noteworthy about today’s Fed manufacturing release (which covers May): It incorporates the results of the benchmark revision of these data for the 2017-19 period. As explained in yesterday’s post on the subject, the new numbers create a new baseline for pre-pandemic manufacturing growth, and therefore a new picture of how big the virus-induced downturn was, and how strong the recovery has been – at least until the next benchmark revision. And of course, the new figures therefore supersede those in the April Fed release I reported on last month.

Automotive’s influence on the May numbers is clear from the following: Total inflation-adjusted sequential growth for U.S.-based manufacturing hit a strong 0.89 percent last month. Without automotive (whose 6.69 percent monthly output pop followed a 5.57 percent April drop), the increase would have been just over half that – a still solid 0.50 percent. Don’t be surprised if the microchip shortage keeps these results on a roller coaster.

Its May increase brought total real domestic manufacturing output back within 0.31 percent of its last pre-pandemic level, in February, 2020. In March and April, such production plummeted by 19.41 percent. Since then, it’s surged by 23.90 percent. For the record, as I wrote yesterday, the pandemic-spurred Spring, 2020 nosedive was slightly shallower (0.92 percent) than judged before the revisions (1.42 percent) but the comeback through this past April was a bit weaker (22.81 percent versus 23.27 percent).

Machinery making enjoyed a good month in May, and as known by RealityChek regulars, that’s good news for all domestic manufacturing and the rest of the economy, since its products are so widely used. Constant dollar output improved by 0.78 percent last month, and consequently, the sector is now 2.35 percent bigger in these terms than just before the virus started depressing the economy. One downside should be noted, though: The new revision indicates that the machinery recovery has actually be significantly slower than previously estimated.

Manufacturing’s list of other big inflation-adjusted production winners in May featured some real surprises. The apparel and leather goods industries remain shadows of their historic selves, but their real output last month jumped 2.59 percent – their best such result since January’s 2.06 percent. Moreover, this sector has grown in real terms by 6.74 percent since just before the pandemic – much faster than manufacturing as a whole.

After-inflation production in the small printing and related activities industry grew by 2.59 percent – also its best result since January (3.99 percent).

But some big sectors saw healthy gains in May, too – notably chemicals (whose products are also used throughout the economy) and computer and electrnics products. The former saw real production advance by 2.19 percent sequentially last month – its best such result since March’s weather-aided 4.08 percent. And the latter grew in May by 1.60 percent.

The biggest losers? Paper led this pack by far, with May constant dollar production sinking by 1.59 percent on month – its worst such showing since January’s 1.78 percent decrease.

Likely due to Boeing’s continuing production and safety problems (more on which later), the aerospace and miscellaneous transportation sector’s after inflation production sank by 0.95 percent sequentially in May – and that followed a 2.55 percent nosedive (no pun intended) in April. And wood products real output fell by 0.82 percent.

But the losers’ list contains a big surprise, too. Complaints keep coming that that the domestic steel and aluminum industries (and especially the steel-makers) have responded to tariffs simply by enjoying the higher resulting prices and sitting on these winnings. So it’s noteworthy that even after a 0.82 percent monthly real output decline in May, primary metals production after inflation is slightly (0.15 percent) higher than in immediate pre-pandemic-y February, 2020 – another such performance that’s bested that for all manufacturing.

The aforementioned problems suffered by Boeing keep coming through in the real output data for the aircraft and parts sub-sector of the aerospace and miscellaneous transportation industry. In May, inflation-adjusted output was down 1.47 percent on month – much bigger than the larger industry fall-off. And that came on the heels of April’s 2.21 percent decrease. Real aircraft and parts production is still 4.36 percent above its immediate pre-pandemic level, but given the ongoing post-CCP Virus worldwide rebound in air travel, these figures are definitely disappointing – and moving in the wrong direction.

By contrast, the big pharmaceuticals and medicines sector is still benefitting from reopening headwinds. May’s 0.22 percent monthly real output increase was admittedly modest, especially since this sector includes vaccine production. But it’s grown by 8.44 percent since the virus began spreading rapidly in the United States. on g – also delivered a disappointing performance in April, especially since it includes vaccines.

But both the May real production numbers and the benchmark revision left the vital medical equipment and supplies sector a conspicuous production laggard. This industry – which includes virus-fighting items like face masks, face masks, protective gowns, and ventilators – grew in real tems by just 0.19 percent sequentially in May, and April’s after inflation output was down 1.66 percent. As a result, this sector is turning out only 0.35 percent more product than just before the pandemic’s arrival – which doesn’t seem to augur well for national preparedness for the next pandemic.

If I was a betting person (I’m not), I’d still wager on better days ahead for U.S. domestic manufacturing – because so many powerful supportive trends and developments remain in place, ranging from massive government spending and other forms of stimulus to the virus’ continuing retreat to waning consumer caution to huge amounts of pandemic-era consumer savings to ongoing Trump tariffs that keep pricing huge numbers of Chinese goods out of the U.S. market.

But no one should forget about a list of threats to the pace of manufacturing growth, if not growth itself – like the prospect of higher taxes and more regulations, and the possibility that consumer demand will keep growing but switch away from goods to the hard-hit but quickly reopening service sectors (which of course do buy manufactures). Inflation isn’t good for strong (real) growth, either, though I’m an optimist on this front.

Ultimately, though, I’m most struck by evidence of domestic manufacturers’ continuing optimism about the prospects of their businesses. If they’re still confident about their futures, that remains good enough for me.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: How Pre-Trump Trade Policies Devastated U.S. Protective Gear Capacity

Tags

apparel, CCP Virus, China, coronavirus, COVID 19, Fed, Federal Reserve, free trade, garments, health security, manufacturing, manufacturing capacity, NAFTA, non-durable goods, North American Free Trade Agreement, offshoring, textiles, Trade, Trump, World Trade Organization, WTO, Wuhan virus, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Recently I put up a post expressing gratitude that, despite their best efforts, pre-Trump U.S. trade policies didn’t manage to send the entire U.S. textile and apparel industries offshore. After all, companies in these sectors are the companies with the greatest expertise and capabilities in making all the personal protective equipment (PPE) crucial in the anti-CCP Virus fight.

Of course, the nation is therefore reliant for these and other medical products on countries, like China, which have responded to the emergency at various times with export bans. And in the case of pandemic-prone China, much production of all kinds was shut down temporarily because of the original virus outbreak.

Thanks to the release of the latest Federal Reserve industrial production data, it’s possible to quantify the damage done to these vital industries in ways other than the output figures I presented in that previous offering. That’s because the Fed’s monthly releases report in detail not only on increases or decreases in after-inflation output for manufacturing (and related) sectors. They also report the monthly changes in industrial capacity – the resources and facilities available to turn out various goods.

The results through last month are below. They use as baselines the month the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA – which has now been turned into the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement) went into effect, and the month that China entered the World Trade Organization (WTO). NAFTA’s January, 1994 onset signaled to many the transformation of U.S. trade policy into U.S. offshoring policy (see my book, The Race to the Bottom, for this argument). The January, 2002 beginning of China’s WTO membership gave the People’s Republic  overall, and its even-then-immense textile and especially apparel sectors, invaluable protection against American responses to its various forms of trade predation. (Limited safeguards versus “market-disrupting” surges in imports from China were written into the WTO agreement.)

For comparison’s sake, the industrial capacity changes for non-durable goods manufacturing (the super-sector into which textiles and apparel are grouped), and total manufacturing are provided as well:

                                                       Since NAFTA onset    Since China WTO entry

Textiles:                                              -37.05 percent              -44.05 percent

Apparel & leather goods:                   -81.97 percent              -77.18 percent

Non-durables manufacturing:           +17.06 percent                -2.23 percent

Total manufacturing:                         +75.54 percent             +10.78 percent

Clearly, the decimation of apparel capacity sticks out prominently. But although the more capital-intensive textiles industry didn’t suffer nearly as much, it fared much worse than either manufacturing in toto or the non-durables sectors overall. That’s largely because as the apparel industry disappeared, so did a prime domestic customer for textiles producers.

It’s also obvious for all these categories that although NAFTA was, to say the least, hardly a bonanza, the big trade-related damage was done by China’s WTO entry. Afterward that event has been when the shrinkage of textiles capacity accelerated, when the vast majority of the post-NAFTA apparel damage was done, when non-durables capacity gains shifted into reverse, and when total manufacturing capacity growth slowed to a crawl.

Calls are now abounding for remedies to the resulting shortages – like greater stockpiling and various tax and subsidy incentives for reshoring at least some of this production. But material in stockpiles can decay if unused too long, and companies would be foolish to spend heavily on new U.S. factories if they still face the likelihood of being subsidized and dumped out of existence by predatory foreign trade policies. As a result, there’s no substitute for stiff tariffs, and a credible national resolve to keep them in place, for ensuring that America’s health security never becomes so degraded again.

(What’s Left of) Our Economy: When Industries Disappear

Tags

apparel, big government, Breitbart.com, conservatves, embroidery, Frances Martel, Immigration, labor unions, manufacturing, New Jersey, skills, textiles, Union City, unions, {What's Left of) Our Economy

Until I read Frances Martel’s “Hanging by a Thread,” I used to think of Union City as little more than one of those bleak-looking smallish northern New Jersey municipalities the Amtrak trains pass through on their way between New York City and points south.  How wrong I was!  And for such wide-ranging policy and political reasons!  

Not that you can’t simply enjoy her long feature for Breitbart.com for the fascinating descriptions of what makes her hometown special geologically (e.g., it sits on lots of Manhattan bedrock-like granite, good for supporting factories with heavy machines and multistory housing) and demographically (because it developed fairly late in the 19^th century, its population was always dominated by immigrants).

Clearly important as well is Martel’s main theme – how manufacturing built solid prosperity for Union City from the get-go, and how its demise, due to developments like (but not restricted to) offshoring-obsessed U.S. trade policies helped bring punishingly hard times. (Full disclosure: Martel interviewed me for the article, and quoted me quite generously.)

But if you’re thinking this is only an article for trade and/or manufacturing mavens, or for New Jersey history aficionadoes, you’re sorely mistaken. For along the way, “Hanging by a Thread” offers important insights into how these closely related subjects profoundly affect many of the nation’s other major issues and challenges.

For example, Martel offers a novel twist on the notion that the United States welcomed so many immigrants so consistently (though not always) from the mid-19^th century onwards in particular because of its urgent need for unskilled labor. No doubt most of the newcomers were poorly educated. But as “Hanging” makes clear, industry during this period used lots of complicated machinery, including the embroidery sector that became concentrated in Union City.

As Union City’s official historian told Martel, many of its first immigrants came from Germany, Switzerland, Austria, and other parts of Europe with major textile industries, and brought with them extensive experience working with such devices that employers clearly found valuable.

Since skills (of different kinds, of course) remain so crucial to economic success today, Union City’s past raises the question of whether – as Open Borders advocates seem to believe – the United States today should indiscriminately welcome immigrants regardless of skill levels and gainful employability.

Two other messages coming through loud and clear from Martel’s research and analysis are especially important for conservatives to heed. The first has to do with unions. Martel’s parents were hard-line anti-communists who fled Castro’s Cuba, and her mother worked in apparel. The author explains that these arrangements were seen as “a critical part of the factory ecosystem.” The following exchange, with her mother speaking first, makes the point vividly:

“‘I have always had a good union. It works, I think. It works to have a union because without a union, in a private place, you’re screwed,’ she told me.

“‘You don’t feel that there is a conflict between that and being a capitalist?’” I asked…..

“‘No. What? Being a capitalist? No,’ she replied, with confusion. ‘No, that has nothing to do with socialism, it’s just so that the worker has someone to defend them. If you don’t have a job, they can fire you whenever. That’s not fair. To throw you out for no reason, it’s unfair ifyou are working well.’”

Martel’s second message for conservatives actually echoes a point I’ve made before (e.g., here): The more enthusiastically traditional free trade policies are pursued by American leaders, the bigger government’s going to get. But as Martel makes clear, these approaches to the global economy are bound to generate needs that far exceed the kinds of welfare state benefits (ranging from income support to heavily subsidized healthcare) used to keep living standards above third world levels (or at least try to do so).

As the Union City example shows, relentless globalization can also turbocharge government’s role in economic development itself. The author explains that, since 2000, Union City Mayor Bob Stack (a big-city machine politician if ever there was one)

“took the reins on the eve of the guillotine falling on embroidery and has taken to meticulously rebuilding the identity of the city. He tore down Roosevelt Stadium, the sports venue at the heart of the city, to build a new Union City High School – with a stadium on the roof. Union City previously boasted two high schools, one for Union Hill and one for West Hoboken, that Stack turned into middle schools. He built parks in honor of the city’s Cuban, Colombian, and Dominican populations, and an ‘International Park.’ Seemingly every other street has a water park open in the summer for children to play in – the biggest, Firefighters’ Memorial Park, boasts an Olympic-sized swimming pool. His administration also refurbished the downtown library into the Musto Cultural Center and built its replacement, the library at José Martí Middle School (which his administration also built), in the shadow of what was once St. Michael’s monastery, an imposing Catholic historic site that now houses a Korean Presbyterian congregation.”

In other words, Union City realistically recognized the choices before it, and rejected “the option much of the Rust Belt took: do nothing, abandon ship, hope the invisible hand swoops in before you hit the concrete.” As a result (and also because of its proximity to New York City), it’s more than avoided the ghost town fates of counterparts like Gary, Indiana, Youngstown, Ohio, and Detroit, Michigan.