Is Michigan successful in the competition for new vehicle plants?

At first glance, it looks like Michigan is doing well in the competition to attract new employment centers in the vehicle industry. Stellentis invested more than $3 billion to renovate the old Jefferson North Plant and build a new one to assemble the three bench Jeep Cheroke. GM devoted more than $2 to renovate the Hamtramck Assembly plant for production of electric trucks. Ford has not only renovated the Michigan Central station to serve as a technical center but invested in a renovation of River Rouge and a new battery plant in this area.

However, there are other major investments:

Toyota is investing $1.29 billion in a battery plant in Randolph County North Carolina

Vinfast - the Vietnamese vehicle producer - will invest $5 in a new assembly plant in Chatham County North Carolina

Hyundai will invest $5.5 billion in a new plant in Bryan County Georgia

Rivian - if they stay solvent - will invest $5 billion in a new plant in Bryan County Georgai

SKInnovation [[from Korea) and Ford will invest $11.4 billion in two new plants to produce batteries in:
Hardin County Kentucky and Haywood County Tennessee

President Reagan helped to shift the vehicle industry to the South when he successfully imposed a limit on the number
of Japanese vehicles that could be imported to the USA.
The Japanese firms almost immediately decided to build cars in the USA. I spoke with a person who dealt with Toyoto
about sites in the USA. Apparently the ideal site was in a state where there was no history of unionization, where
the state legislatures was not at all sympathetic to union and the site should have a relatively small African American population. The ideal locations were in the Appalachia stretch from the western sections of the Carolina across to northern Mississippi.

Perhaps today's criteria have more to do with what tax incentives a state can provide. Michigan has been a right to work state for quite some time and the state's unions no
longer have special clout in the legislature.

Will Michigan be able to attract a larger share of the huge capital investments now being made by the dozen or so firms who hope to enter the US market or build batteries?

There is alot more to the equation,the north is way more racist then the south so I do not think that was a factor.

If you look at the size of the land purchases,they were large mostly farrow dirt bought cheap,Michigan has a lot of fertile farmland which is more conducive to producing food.

Also way cheaper property taxes in the south,different employment laws different regulations that are more business friendly,there is a whole host of factors that go into location choice.

The factory’s in the south we’re having a serious problem with tool and die makers or service folk,the experienced ones based in Michigan used to travel down down south at a very exorbitant rate,the manufacturers tried for years to get them to establish a location there also but they refused because they based it on working for a lower wage.

They are not employing workers at a cheaper wage,I have a friend that works at factory that makes the torque converter’s for Toyota.

He is married and makes enough so his wife can stay home,that he owns,and takes care of the kids,that’s in Alabama,so at the same wage he would make in Detroit his COL is totally different,which plays into employee satisfaction,loyalty and retention.

The multiple battery locations do not really count because of the weight of them it is more cost effective to put a plant near the demand due to shipping.

The majority of the people in the south are actually people from the north,so they are well versed in the union aspects and it gives an indication of how they feel about them if they are less prevalent.

It we really get down to the crux of it all,we need to do what everybody knows we need to do,bring manufacturing back to this county so places like Michigan that have a heavy manufacturing history can capitalize on it.

It does not need to be a game of highest bidder wins,its only that way because there is a smaller pool of opportunity to draw from.

The demand was lost so the opportunity was lost,all the steps after that are just putting bandaids on things while looking for solutions.

Michigan has its issues just like any other state does,we are all swimming around in this bowl of soup,until we as a country comes together and actually does what we all know what needs to be done,we will keep running around in circles.

Michigan still has a heavy industrial base,it is conducive for other companies establishing to center around those,but because of the scarcity of those looking to establish,they have the upper hand in negotiations.

We have already experienced the devastation that things have brought,but we do not seem to want to change it.

And this is constructive criticism and not ment in a negative way,when somebody was there trying to do the very thing that we all know needs to be done,Michigan was front and center doing everything they could to undermine that,so it becomes a case of you make your bed you have to lay in it.

It does not matter who we support,at the end of the day,it is us that pays the price.

It’s not that Michigan has little to offer or does not have a even playing field,it’s playing that part in the messaging of,we want the perks of what things bring but we want to retain the superficial part that prevents the very thing we are seeking.

We need to take the politics out of the equation and actually do and support what is best for the people and what America stands for,provide opportunities for all,otherwise we are just going to keep spinning in a hamster wheel.

The incentive battle is a zero sum game and it puts long established industrial cities and states at a disadvantage because they already have a long established local tax debt,they are perpetuating the circle of demise by taking on more debt.

Any changes Michigan makes and other states are doing under the guise is just looking for ways to cover up the wound,we need to fix the wound first,the rest will take care of itself.

Thank you, Richard, for a thoughtful description of the issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard

There is alot more to the equation,the north is way more racist then the south so I do not think that was a factor.

If you look at the size of the land purchases,they were large mostly farrow dirt bought cheap,Michigan has a lot of fertile farmland which is more conducive to producing food.

Also way cheaper property taxes in the south,different employment laws different regulations that are more business friendly,there is a whole host of factors that go into location choice.

The factory’s in the south we’re having a serious problem with tool and die makers or service folk,the experienced ones based in Michigan used to travel down down south at a very exorbitant rate,the manufacturers tried for years to get them to establish a location there also but they refused because they based it on working for a lower wage.

They are not employing workers at a cheaper wage,I have a friend that works at factory that makes the torque converter’s for Toyota.

He is married and makes enough so his wife can stay home,that he owns,and takes care of the kids,that’s in Alabama,so at the same wage he would make in Detroit his COL is totally different,which plays into employee satisfaction,loyalty and retention.

The multiple battery locations do not really count because of the weight of them it is more cost effective to put a plant near the demand due to shipping.

The majority of the people in the south are actually people from the north,so they are well versed in the union aspects and it gives an indication of how they feel about them if they are less prevalent.

It we really get down to the crux of it all,we need to do what everybody knows we need to do,bring manufacturing back to this county so places like Michigan that have a heavy manufacturing history can capitalize on it.

It does not need to be a game of highest bidder wins,its only that way because there is a smaller pool of opportunity to draw from.

The demand was lost so the opportunity was lost,all the steps after that are just putting bandaids on things while looking for solutions.

Michigan has its issues just like any other state does,we are all swimming around in this bowl of soup,until we as a country comes together and actually does what we all know what needs to be done,we will keep running around in circles.

Michigan still has a heavy industrial base,it is conducive for other companies establishing to center around those,but because of the scarcity of those looking to establish,they have the upper hand in negotiations.

We have already experienced the devastation that things have brought,but we do not seem to want to change it.

And this is constructive criticism and not ment in a negative way,when somebody was there trying to do the very thing that we all know needs to be done,Michigan was front and center doing everything they could to undermine that,so it becomes a case of you make your bed you have to lay in it.

It does not matter who we support,at the end of the day,it is us that pays the price.

It’s not that Michigan has little to offer or does not have a even playing field,it’s playing that part in the messaging of,we want the perks of what things bring but we want to retain the superficial part that prevents the very thing we are seeking.

We need to take the politics out of the equation and actually do and support what is best for the people and what America stands for,provide opportunities for all,otherwise we are just going to keep spinning in a hamster wheel.

The incentive battle is a zero sum game and it puts long established industrial cities and states at a disadvantage because they already have a long established local tax debt,they are perpetuating the circle of demise by taking on more debt.

Any changes Michigan makes and other states are doing under the guise is just looking for ways to cover up the wound,we need to fix the wound first,the rest will take care of itself.

---

I was almost moved to tears there for a bit, but the significance was so obscure, that I thought I would either go read something off “The Onion" website, or a bit of Walt Whitman, for my own sanity.

The little that wasn’t cryptic I can answer to.

You mentioned that your friend in Alabama wasn’t working at a cheaper wage, but then said that his cost of living was cheaper than Michigan’s. I suspect that there is a wage disparity but that you decided to bury it beneath your COL argument. As the Southern states become more industrialized, that is unless everybody is turned into a robot, there will be more revendication from labor, and more of a motion toward negotiating working conditions via organized labor, rather than the laissez-faire that now exists.

This story recently in Crain's I think it spot on when it comes to fretting over lost manufacturing jobs:

https://www.crainsdetroit.com/voices...-battery-plant

The past has been all about manufacturing jobs, so naturally we look to build up manufacturing for the future. I would argue, as the author does that measuring ourselves by that standard is akin to using a ruler from the stone age.

"If the train station doesn't work, it doesn't matter where Ford puts battery plants, because Ford's toast," said Lou Glazer, president and co-founder of Michigan Future Inc., an Ann Arbor think tank. "Somehow a light bulb has to go off that that stuff matters more than whether you get the next battery plant."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canuck

I was almost moved to tears there for a bit, but the significance was so obscure, that I thought I would either go read something off “The Onion" website, or a bit of Walt Whitman, for my own sanity.

The little that wasn’t cryptic I can answer to.

You mentioned that your friend in Alabama wasn’t working at a cheaper wage, but then said that his cost of living was cheaper than Michigan’s. I suspect that there is a wage disparity but that you decided to bury it beneath your COL argument. As the Southern states become more industrialized, that is unless everybody is turned into a robot, there will be more revendication from labor, and more of a motion toward negotiating working conditions via organized labor, rather than the laissez-faire that now exists.

---

The question is what can Michigan do to encourage more companies to establish in state bringing more jobs,opportunities and revenue.

To get that answer you have to look at what motivates a company to decide where and why they establish locations and what changes need to be addressed to encourage more of that.

What you personally suspect plays zero relevance.

You bring up working conditions,you do not need unions to regulate working conditions,it’s not the 1920s anymore,working conditions are overseen and regulated by OSHA.

Established hours and overtime paid or not is set by the federal government,everything the union fought for back in the day is now covered under federal laws.

Sure unions can demand a higher wage,and the same thing can happen like it did in Atlantic City when the casino workers did,18,000 lost their job overnight and the city whent right back into a nosedive.

There is also a thing called business retention,you know,so you do not make multi billion dollar decisions,like building a bridge based on projected trucking from auto manufacturers cross border then 6 months later the factories shut down and now factories are setting up to be regionally self reliant so they do not have to worry about cross border shipping.

Why is it people like you go out of their way to prevent people from understanding how things work,so they can make informed decisions and make change for the better or at least try and understand why things the way they are ?

I understand it is a strange concept in Canada but in this country,the government works for the people and not the other way around,it is ones civic duty to be involved in their community and help implement change.

Sitting back waiting for the government to fix things does not work,it takes people wanting to get involved to make change and hold those accountable,when they do not we get what happened in Detroit.

Thats what people recognize and are looking to change,maybe try being a little more helpful?

Workers earned top pay in Washington [[​$61,046​), New York [[​$57,334​), New Hampshire [[​$55,513​), California [[​$54,436​) and Vermont [[​$52,399​). Lowest average pay was reported in Mississippi [[​$42,310​), Arkansas [[​$42,261​), Michigan [[​$42,230​), Illinois [[​$42,031​) and North Carolina [[​$38,484​).

https://work.chron.com/average-pay-a...ber-24071.html

That tells you right there that factory’s are not setting up in the south because of lower wages

So that box is ticked off,what is left?.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K-slice

This story recently in Crain's I think it spot on when it comes to fretting over lost manufacturing jobs:

https://www.crainsdetroit.com/voices...-battery-plant

The past has been all about manufacturing jobs, so naturally we look to build up manufacturing for the future. I would argue, as the author does that measuring ourselves by that standard is akin to using a ruler from the stone age.

"If the train station doesn't work, it doesn't matter where Ford puts battery plants, because Ford's toast," said Lou Glazer, president and co-founder of Michigan Future Inc., an Ann Arbor think tank. "Somehow a light bulb has to go off that that stuff matters more than whether you get the next battery plant."

---

I think it is two fold though,you have a percentage of the population that will never be in that technical realm,what do you do with them?

So you design all of this technology,then what happens? It has to be turned into a product that somebody has to build for it to be viable.

So why write off the secondary manufacturing aspect?

This reminds me of when computers were discovered,everybody was pushed into going to college to become an IT or computer repair person.

Then what happened? They changed the rules for foreign IT workers which kicked the American college IT person into the street and technology advanced so if your computer breaks,it’s cheaper to just throw it in the trash and buy a new one.

I think it is wrong to send the message of technology is the future so let’s put all of our eggs in one basket.

They keep trying to write off manufacturing based on they can have it built cheaper overseas.

That is wrong,they are manipulating the market and throwing 1/2 of the labor market to the curb.

Who's best interest is it in to convince the public that manufacturing is dead in this country because we are going into the technology age?

Technology is not floating in the air,the products have to be built,they are saying the smart people are going to design it here and the foreigners are going to manufacture it.

So what is left for all of us non smart people? Serving the smart people?

You cannot write off 60% of the population,somebody has to support them.

It has to go hand in hand,design and manufacturing the product.

Why are they trying to convince the working population that the only ones allowed to make a living are those who are smart techs,why is it they will bend over backwards with incentives to lure tech,but not when it comes to actually manufacturing the product?

They are trying to convince the population that it is okay not to have room for those outside of tech,that is wrong.

Whenever I hear somebody say manufacturing is dead in this country,it throws up red flags as to motive.

Lol, Richard.

Manufacturing was never 60 percent of the workforce.

Besides that, you have a pretty good chance your fellow workers in the near future will be named AK-45 and M15, this started long ago and is not about to disappear.

Too many people with cars. That’s our agenda. The left wants to take the cars off the road, your guns, and that stupid can of Colt 45 in your hand.

We won’t stop until you’re lulled into swinging on your porch watching your pickup rust.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canuck

Lol, Richard.

Manufacturing was never 60 percent of the workforce.

Besides that, you have a pretty good chance your fellow workers in the near future will be named AK-45 and M15, this started long ago and is not about to disappear.

Too many people with cars. That’s our agenda. The left wants to take the cars off the road, your guns, and that stupid can of Colt 45 in your hand.

We won’t stop until you’re lulled into swinging on your porch watching your pickup rust.

---

This is an example where you took your weakness and tried to twist it in to a narrative.

I never posted 60% were involved in manufacturing I was posting the ratio of high end tech workers verses non tech workers.

If you can prove to me that the ratio of highly skilled workers in Detroit outweighs the non skilled or those without high tech capabilities then you would have a valid argument.

In the 1950s 40% of Michigan workers were directly involved in manufacturing alone,what was that other 60% doing?

How many workers in the state of Michigan are ready to immediately step into a high tech position?

I get that you are a socialist and view the decline of the ability for the average worker to be able to make a living so they become totally dependent on the government by design,as a positive,but we are not Canada,but your reply’s have to at least reflect some context in what I provided,otherwise you become transparent.

You keep bringing up guns,Canada has a multi billion dollar weapons manufacturing base and a large percentage of your GDP benefits from that.

How do you even take the anti gun stance while profiting from the very thing you pretend to despise?

Like I said before,you provide weapons to known terrorists and war lords that are creating genocide,you have to get some higher moral ground before you can stand on it.

A majority of high tech workers currently have 6 years of college with a masters or associates degree,what percentage of Michiganders have that and are not currently employed?

Sure MTS can become a tech hub,what percentage of the population is already trained and ready to go to work there tomorrow.

You cannot just throw up buildings and say we are high tech with jobs,they were jobs that did not exist before,so nobody was trained for them,it takes 6 years to train somebody to fill those jobs at full capacity.

So I ask again,what is your plan on what to do with the remaining 60% + of the workers that will never reach that level.

but but but , the guns

We get caught up in this save the planet tech thing with goals but they cannot mine and process the raw materials fast enough to fill that demand,so looking at it as a savior can be detrimental,all it really is another form of diversity in what is required for a strong local economy,you still have to address and improve the other sectors of that economy.

Michigan is not placing a demand on those materials or competing with the other states,they are competing with the entire world that is also going down that exact same path.

Residents cannot wait another 6 years while putting their eggs in one basket,they need options now,there is no singular industry that is a savior.

Whirlpool is based in Michigan,appliances are highly tech heavy bricks now,what percentage of Whirlpools employment base is directly involved in the design and implementation of that tech?

That will give you a base to work off of,or a guide of sorts as to potential future demand.