8 Comments
User's avatar
H. Pike Oliver's avatar

Your terrific post caused me to ask Microsoft's AI bot, Copilot, to compare the total value of U.S. manufacturing output from 1964 to 2024. Here is a summary of what Copilot provided. If you'd like the longer version, just let me know -- pike@urbanexus.com.

1964 (in 2024 dollars): Approximately $1.9 trillion in manufacturing output.

2024: Approximately $4.0 trillion in manufacturing output.

This shows that even though manufacturing’s relative share of GDP has declined over the past 60 years, its real (inflation-adjusted) output has more than doubled, driven by higher levels of efficiency, larger-scale production, and the overall expansion of the U.S. economy.

Labor hasn't fared as well. Manufacturing employment declined from about 16 million workers in 1964 to around 12.8 million in 2024.

Most of today's manufacturing in the U.S.A. depends on supplies and components sourced internationally. If maintained, the Trump tariffs will likely significantly and negatively impact what we produce in the U.S.A.leading to job losses in that sector.

Expand full comment
Bill Fulton's avatar

Thanks Pike. Really interesting. Like I say, this makes about as much sense as trying to reshore agriculture on the theory that we want more farmhands to have jobs. Those jobs went away a long time ago with mechanization. Same thing happening in agriculture today.

Expand full comment
H. Pike Oliver's avatar

I did some more research and posted on my blog athttps://www.urbanexus.com/pikeurbanexuscom/2025/4/9/changes-in-total-us-manufacturing-output-and-employment-from-1964-to-2024

Revised estimes in which I have greater confidence are:

1964 - $1.8 to $2.1 trillion in manufacturing output (in 2024 dollars).

2024 - $2.8 to $3.1 trillion in manufacturing output.

Expand full comment
Mike McCollum's avatar

Coming from an urban planning background I’m curious what your thoughts are on Jane Jacob’s theory that metro regions are the main economic drivers of prosperity and that they should be focused on import replacement. Is that region relevant or are you thinking regions of the country or regions of the world?

Expand full comment
Bill Fulton's avatar

I'm with Jane Jacobs on this one -- I mean metropolitan or micropolitan regions. I was heavily influenced by CITIES AND THE WEALTH OF NATIONS. Some of these metropolitan economies cross national boundaries (think San Diego-Tijuana or Detroit-Windsor) and, yes, international regions sometimes have tight trading relationships. But the best way to think about this is to think about the geographical extent of housing and labor markets. That's what I mean.

Expand full comment
Mike McCollum's avatar

I also like your concept of micropolitan. Some products and services should be made and consumed within the 15 min radius….

Expand full comment
Mike McCollum's avatar

That makes sense thank you. I’m reading that book now and wondering how her theories fit with globalization and then now with what is going on!

Expand full comment
Pamela Hazard's avatar

Sadly, MAGA would never want to read this as it messes with their narrative.

Expand full comment