• Home
  • Booklets/Grouped Entries
  • Tech Tsunami
  • List of Entries to Date
  • About the Author

usrevolution5

~ USA Headed for a 5th Revolution! Why?

usrevolution5

Monthly Archives: October 2020

#395 Post COVID-19 — How Do We Repurpose Human Capital? (Part 2)

28 Wednesday Oct 2020

Posted by Jordan Abel in Economics, Education Issues, Gov't Policy, Societal Issues, Tech Tsunami, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Readers: some of the dialogue in this blog is set in the future (sometime after the year 2020). Entries addressing events in the the future assume there has been a 5th revolution in the US — the Revenge Revolution. More about the Revenge Revolution, a list of earlier revolutions and the author, Entry #1.

Periodically I write a “sense check” to assess whether in the next few years, a revolution in the US is still possible or whether the entire exercise is based on a statistical aberration — i.e., a roughly 50-year cycle between major upheavals in the US.  Most recent sense check, ENTRY #387.  

Some of the entries are part of a series.  Several series are available as easy-to-read booklets for download:

  • Coming technology tsunami and the implications for the US, Tech Tsunami Booklet with Supplement
  • Working with Lee Iacocca after he left Chrysler, 2019Q3 Iacocca Personal Observations. 
  • GM EV1 — behind-the-scenes events affecting development and introduction of the GM EV1, the first modern electric vehicle. 2020Q1 GM EV-1 Story Behind the Story Booklet
  • Trump Supporters Brainwashed? A series discussing why Republics have abandoned basic principals, Are Trump Republicans Brainwashed 2020Q1  Related article published 10/07/20.  Op-Ed piece in NYT about how people bend their thinking to justify beliefs.  Example is Fox News Information about Covid-19, 20 10 07 Fox News Still in Coronavirus Bubble aka Brainwashed
  • Who took out the Donald?  Who/what groups are most likely to “take out” Trump? The booklet was written early in the Trump administration but still worth a read. Who Took Out the Donald Entries with Update
  • Revenge Revolution — description of what form the revolution might take, 20 01 07 Start of Revolution

Prelude to the current series of entries: I’ve concluded Trump is a lunatic and the administration filled with lapdogs save a couple of people at CDC.  Instead of wasting time commenting on actions by Trump, I thought it more productive to begin discussing what happens in the US once the coronavirus is more under control.  #378 began the series. At this point not sure how many entries.  Comments and suggestions welcome.

ENTRY #395: What has happened to unemployment during the Coronavirus? How severe is unemployment?

Counting the number of people who have filed unemployment claims paints a grim picture. Beginning March 2020, claims per week jumped dramatically.  Toward the end of March, new claims for unemployment for just one week  totaled nearly 7 million.  New claims per week have fallen since but seven months after the peak in March new claims are on average more than 3x higher than earlier on 2020.

Keep in mind these numbers are new claims. The numbers represent new people who are now unemployed. Obviously, some people who filed claims will be called back to work or find another job, but the net amount of those unemployed keeps increasing.  Further, throughout the 2020/2021 winter, the number of weekly new claims for unemployment is likely to remain extraordinarily high by historic standards.

What about the people who are self-employed?  You know, 1099 contract workers, consultants, musicians, even undocumented workers?  What’s happened to their workload?  They all pay taxes.

Contract, or gig workers, have seen jobs dry up as well. There is a provision in the CARES Act (Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security) that enables gig workers to file for a limited amount of economic relief.  The program is administered by states, which makes tracking claims nearly impossible. 

Nevertheless, if we add the number of gig workers seeking  CARES-based income supplement to those filing unemployment claims, the total likely exceeds 1,000,000 every week since early March 2020.  Like those employed by companies, the number of gig workers working fewer hours will increase during the winter.

Some may comment, “Is unemployment really that bad? I mean, the unemployment rate lately has been less than 10.0%. And it bounced back fast following the spike in the Spring.  Early in the Obama Administration, unemployment reached 10.0% and it took years to decline. What’s the big deal?  Trump’s done much better than Obama ever did.”

How Is the Unemployment Rate Calculated?  The unemployment rate is the ratio of those unemployed and looking for work to those in the workforce – those employed and unemployed.  Let’s say there are a thousand people in the workforce. 100 are unemployed and actively looking for a job and 900 are working. The unemployment rate would be 10.0%, or 100/1,000.

Now let’s assume that 50 of the 100 unemployed get discouraged and quit looking for a job. The new unemployment rate would be 50 actively looking for work / 950 (900 employed + 50 actively working), or 5.3%.

What happened to the unemployment rate?  The rate dropped from 10.0% to 5.3%, even though the only change was 50 people became discouraged and quit looking for work.  

What Else Does the Unemployment Rate Not Count? Let’s say that of the 900 people working, 200 are being forced to work part-time because their employer reduced their hours.  Even though working part time, the 200 are counted as “fully employed” when calculating the unemployment rate.   

So what’s the real unemployment/underemployment rate when one considers those who are only working part time and those who are so discouraged about finding another job they quit looking for work?  We know the rate is not 5.3%, which would be the official government number. 

The real rate is more like 30.0% — 200 underemployed, 50 unemployed and looking and 50 unemployed but who’ve quit looking.  In our example, there are 300 out of 1,000 who are either unemployed or underemployed and looking for more work.

If the numbers in this simple example seem ridiculously high, the 30.0% rate probably understates the true underemployment rate the US experiencing in Fall 2020.  Even for professional economists, calculating a reasonable estimate of unemployment/underemployment is nearly impossible because the Trump Administration refuses to disclose what most of us would consider any credible information about many parts of the economy.

As stated in Entry #394, the unemployment problem will not go away post COVID-19. During the initial lockdown to control the virus, organizations began to understand how to conduct operations with far fewer people than in the past. Consumers also began to think differently.

The change in thinking will affect some sectors of the post-COVID-19 economy more than others.  Portions of the service sector will be particularly hard hit.  Even with a vaccine, how many people will be willing to attend sporting events if there are thousands of other people jammed next to one another? How many people will be willing to eat in crowded restaurants, travel on crowded airplanes, ride jam-packed trains/buses, stay in unfamiliar hotels, go to amusement parks, etc.?  While we won’t know the extent for a number of years, assuming a 25-30% loss of pre-COVID-19 travel-and-entertainment-related jobs would be a reasonable estimate. 

Manufacturing output should rise post-virus but the number of jobs in manufacturing will continue to erode relative to output.  The trend will continue to replace workers with more automation, use of sophisticated software and robotics.

What’s the Solution? After mulling over this problem for a number of months, my conclusion is a two-pronged solution is necessary.

  1. WPA-like programs that focus on building/rebuilding critical infrastructure throughout the United States. Yes, such programs require lots of manual labor.  And no, such programs are not a long-term solution.  However, WPA-like programs will employ a portion of the workforce that will have an extremely difficult time transitioning to a digital-based economy. Plus, WPA-like programs will address much of the US infrastructure that needs repairing and upgrading.
  2. Repurposing many existing jobs.  Initial repurposing training for some jobs could be completed in 10-12 weeks.  The basic training would be followed by a job using the skills learned and additional on-the-job training (OJT). 

Will some of the jobs after basic training be considered “make work”? Yes, but any kind of training includes time to practice and expand basic skills.

When I joined General Motors following undergrad (many moons ago), I worked at Cadillac HQ in Detroit.  At the time the Clark Street Cadillac facility was huge, including two assembly line, paint shop, welding, full engine machining and a bunch of other stuff.  The campus totaled nearly 50 acres and included many buildings with 3-4 stories. Who knows how many million square feet of floor space.  For someone who likes cars and manufacturing, the facility was like one giant candy store.

My initial assignment was in a department called “Project Control.”  The department’s primary function was to evaluate various proposed expenditures – new equipment in Engine Machining Department, e.g.

Truth be known, most of my early assignments really were “make work,” since the guys in the department who’d been around awhile already knew the answer. But I’d be given an assignment and off I go to find some department located in this huge complex. 

The purposes of these assignments were: (i) can he find the way out to the department and back without getting lost too many times; (ii) help me begin to understand the breadth and depth of the complexity involved in manufacturing a car/truck; (iii) can he understand the scope and purpose of the proposed project and write a coherent recommendation?

What do I remember from those early days on the job? Frankly I do not remember any specific project. What I do remember is beginning to understand that manufacturing components for a vehicle and then assembling that vehicle is an incredibly complicated task, but also one that fascinates me to this day.

I also remember discovering all kinds of places in the plant to eat. One cafeteria, for example, had great pastrami sandwiches every Thursday. I also remember finding vending machines that dispensed ice cream bars. The bars would just fit inside the canister for the plant-wide pneumatic tube system.  While on these assignments one of my tasks might be to send ice cream bars back to the office via the tube system.

While some of those assignments were make-work, I think the learning from those assignments served me and GM well for my entire career. I’ve also applied many of the lessons learned to situations post GM.

Now back to the problem at hand.  How do we, societal we, train people to transition to a more digital economy?  First, we need to understand and appreciate that the training will not be completed overnight. We also need to understand that some of the projects, especially those early in the training cycle, will seem like make work. And, we also need to understand that some people will not be able to make the transition as effectively.

However, if we don’t start transitioning now, then the US will continue to fall behind countries with more advanced or more disciplined education systems and/or fall behind countries that have fully committed to a digital economy.  How do we truly make America great again?  To be continued, including some discussion about changes in approach to education, from K through grad school.

Advertisement

#394 Post COVID-19 — How Do We Repurpose Fixed Assets and Human Capital? (Part 1)

21 Wednesday Oct 2020

Posted by Jordan Abel in Economics, Education Issues, Gov't Policy, Societal Issues, Tech Tsunami, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Readers: some of the dialogue in this blog is set in the future (sometime after the year 2020). Entries addressing events in the the future assume there has been a 5th revolution in the US — the Revenge Revolution. More about the Revenge Revolution, a list of earlier revolutions and the author, Entry #1.

Periodically I write a “sense check” to assess whether in the next few years, a revolution in the US is still possible or whether the entire exercise is based on a statistical aberration — i.e., a roughly 50-year cycle between major upheavals in the US.  Most recent sense check, ENTRY #387.  

Some of the entries are part of a series.  Several series are available as easy-to-read booklets for download:

  • Coming technology tsunami and the implications for the US, Tech Tsunami Booklet with Supplement
  • Working with Lee Iacocca after he left Chrysler, 2019Q3 Iacocca Personal Observations. 
  • GM EV1 — behind-the-scenes events affecting development and introduction of the GM EV1, the first modern electric vehicle. 2020Q1 GM EV-1 Story Behind the Story Booklet
  • Trump Supporters Brainwashed? A series discussing why Republics have abandoned basic principals, Are Trump Republicans Brainwashed 2020Q1  Related article published 10/07/20.  Op-Ed piece in NYT about how people bend their thinking to justify beliefs.  Example is Fox News Information about Covid-19, 20 10 07 Fox News Still in Coronavirus Bubble aka Brainwashed
  • Who took out the Donald?  Who/what groups are most likely to “take out” Trump? The booklet was written early in the Trump administration but still worth a read. Who Took Out the Donald Entries with Update
  • Revenge Revolution — description of what form the revolution might take, 20 01 07 Start of Revolution

Prelude to the current series of entries: I’ve concluded Trump is a lunatic and the administration filled with lapdogs save a couple of people at CDC.  Instead of wasting time commenting on actions by Trump, I thought it more productive to begin discussing what happens in the US once the coronavirus is more under control.  #378 began the series. At this point not sure how many entries.  Comments and suggestions welcome.

ENTRY #394: Note: Yikes, the craziness of the Trump administration has continued the last couple of weeks. Trump and a substantial portion at his staff contracted the COVID-19.  After a few days hospitalization at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, and after taking a host of unapproved drug cocktails plus some steroids, Trump claimed that he was feeling better than any time in the last 20 years.  Must have been a rough 20 years.

Then, in only Trump fashion, he claimed getting COVID-19 was a blessing from G_d. Of course, who else would G_d choose to save the world from this scourge? Mother Teresa? An epidemiologist? No, the Harvard/MIT grad, Trump. Well, maybe Trump didn’t go to Harvard or MIT but just ask and he’ll tell you he’s a stable genius and one of G_d’s favorites.

A bit of irony was part of Trump’s treatment at Walter Reed included cells obtained from an abortion. Where was the outrage from Trump and the far-right about stem cells from an abortion? Cat apparently got their tongue.

More seriously, and the focus of this entry is the major restructuring of the US economy that’s going to occur whether or not there is a vaccine or even cure for COVID-19. The US is faced with an economic upheaval that may rival what occurred during the first and second phases of the Industrial Revolution.

Industrial Revolution Phase I started in earnest around 1800 with the introduction of machines and devices that replaced handcrafting. These machines could complete a task in a fraction of the time and with higher precision than the work done by hand.  Phase I also benefited from the refinement of the steam engine, which allowed the engine to power such mobile devices as a locomotive.  The locomotive enabled the creation of a railroad network to deliver goods to more locations.  Steam-powered tractors used in agriculture resulted in significantly higher output per man-hour of labor.

What I’ve labeled as Phase II of the Industrial Revolution started about 1900.  Two major breakthroughs: (i) introduction of the internal-combustion engine, which was smaller and lighter than a comparable output steam engine, and (ii) standardization of parts. Standardizing parts, originally developed by the rifle manufacturing industry for easy replacement in the field, was later adopted by manufacturers of transportation – automobiles, locomotives and aircraft.  Standardization enabled the use of assembly lines, which lowered labor cost per unit and increased quality.

Phase II also resulted in workers shifting from agriculture to manufacturing jobs.  The shift required workers to have a different set of skills, although for most workers skills required for jobs in manufacturing were limited and could be learned on the job. 

The vast majority of manufacturing companies, especially automotive, were based in the Northeast and Midwest, both of which experienced a major influx of immigrants and southern blacks leaving the farm.  While the manufacturing companies made enormous profits, hourly workers were not well paid until the companies faced work stoppages as the UAW and other unions gained membership.  Following WWII the economy steadily improved and wages for factory workers increased to the point that many enjoyed what could be called a “middle-class lifestyle.”

The plethora of well-paying manufacturing jobs began to erode in the 1980’s with the introduction of: (i) companies shifting production of goods to plants outside the US; (ii) robotics and somewhat later, artificial intelligence-based programs.

Rather than the disruption being caused by a change in required job skills, as seen in Phases I and Phase II of the Industrial Revolution, jobs were shifted outside the US due, in part, to: (i) US tax laws on corporations, which ended up favoring job shifts rather than penalizing job shifts; (ii) erroneous analysis of costs by the employer.  Shifting jobs outside the US accelerated further in the 1990s and by the early 2000s, a substantial number of manufacturing jobs had been shifted outside the US.

The analysis of costs justifying the shift to plants outside the US often focused primarily on labor costs per unit rather than a more holistic approach that accounted for all costs associated with manufacturing.  High labor costs were blamed on union contracts and therefore the only way to keep costs down was to move jobs to a different location.  But were labor costs really too high? 

Following is an example I experienced personally.  While the story is a data point of one, my experience is the thinking of the Board was fairly typical among many companies, large and small. 

One of my jobs post GM was running a company in northern California that assembled electric scooters.  When I took the job the Board said to shift assembly out of northern California (Sonoma County) to China, where labor costs were much lower.  I resisted and within seven months we had increased productivity (with virtually no capital expenditures) to a level where we could double the labor costs in California and pay the Chinese workers zero and it would have been cheaper to continue to produce in California.  Why?  When all related costs were considered, producing in Northern California – in the middle of wine country, no less – was cheaper.  Such a holistic approach to calculating costs apparently was not considered by many companies. 

In addition to being affected by jobs shifting elsewhere, many assembly and other semi-skilled workers in the US are facing another growing threat — robots. The increased use of robotics and AI represents a fundamental shift in how goods are designed, manufactured, assembled and processed for shipment.  The shipment of these goods to the buyer’s location is going to be disrupted as autonomous vehicles migrate from testbed demonstrations to daily use.    

As if implementation of technology were not enough of a formidable threat, these workers face yet another threat caused by COVID-19. To control the spread of the virus, many employers mandated that staff work from home. COVID-19 restrictions also forced many businesses to close, at least temporarily, although more and more businesses are closing permanently.

Within the service sector, the great unknown is to what degree travel and entertainment and supporting businesses will be changed post-COVID-19.  By the time the threat of the virus subsides, will a substantial portion of the population have become less interested in traveling on crowded airplanes, sailing on petri-dish-like cruise ships with hundreds of others, eating in crowded restaurants, or attending sporting events with tens of thousands of others? 

If so, then many assets supporting travel and entertainment will become obsolete – airplanes, hotels, restaurants, theme parks, cruise ships, large athletic stadia, etc.  Some of the buildings can be repurposed but what does one do with a surplus jet liner, cruise ship or football stadium? 

In the retail sector, the shift toward on-line shopping in not new.  For several decades, the brick-and-mortar retail sector has been facing disruption.  The shift toward internet sales, both personal and business, started to take hold in the late 1990s, early 2000s. While some of the shift to internet sales replaced transactions previously completed using 800#’s, most of the shift has been new.    

Restrictions associated with COVID-19 have been like a rocket ship propelling the shift forward.  In a manner of months, forced isolation may have accelerated on-line shopping patterns an amount that otherwise would have taken 10-20 years to achieve.  The shift to the internet and the number of store closings generate the question, “What to do with all the empty retail space?” 

Thus, any plan to stimulate the economy post-COVID-19 needs to address job creation as well as how to repurpose many assets associated with the service sector.  One assumption seems certain – the mix of output in US economy will be different post-COVID-19 than pre-COVID-19.  Making America great again will not be looking in the rear-view mirror and trying to recapture what once was.  The Pre-COVID economy and valuation of assets is as long gone as Wally and the Beaver.    

The US, and many countries worldwide, will have a blob of dislocated assets that have little or no value in their current configuration. Repurposing some of the fixed assets could be fairly straightforward.  Office buildings, shopping centers, many factories could be converted into housing, assisted living facilities and schools.  Converting shopping centers to housing seems ideal to help address the shortage of affordable housing in many cities. 

What do we do with surplus airplanes and cruise ships?  Beyond scrap metal, there’s not much use.  What about surplus infrastructure supporting the air-travel industry?  Some surplus airfields could become ideal recreation centers.  Or, the airfield could be reforested to support wildlife and help address global warming. 

The more difficult problem is how to repurpose human capital.  Without significant training, how do you take someone who was in a semi-skilled job – say an assembly plant or sewing clothing – and have the person perform in a job requiring a more advanced skill set?  How does society repurpose service workers, especially those in travel-related Industries? 

Even many semi-skilled, white-collar workers will be displaced post-COVID-19.  As organizations adjust to more remote working, some middle management jobs likely will be eliminated.

Repurposing the human assets is a daunting task for government and organizations.  In terms of required job skills, Phase III of the Industrial Revolution will be the opposite of Phases I and Phase II.  In Phases I/II new jobs often required less skill, or a skill that was relatively easy to learn on the job. 

Phase III job skills will be more advanced.  Robots and AI-based machines can replace many existing lower-skilled jobs.  OJT will be very difficult.  An example.  There is a company in Fort Wayne, IN that makes exhaust systems for many auto OEM’s.  The plant runs 24×7.  Despite the high output, the plant has few employees.

At first glance, bending pipe a few ways for an exhaust system seems simple enough.  However, the exhaust system might be different for the same model car/truck with a different engine.  Plus there are at least three different auto OEM’s serviced by this plant, which complicates production schedules. 

Bending pipe is a bit more complicated than it seems.  When pipe is bent, one side becomes thinner and the other side of the bend tends to crinkle. 

The Fort Wayne company’s solution to pipe bending and complicated production schedules is a highly automated process to bend the pipe and to change configurations automatically.  Most workers at the plant are skilled in computer programming.  There are no manual “pipe benders.”  The only non-skilled jobs are the lift-truck operators moving raw material to the beginning of and off the end of the line.  In a few years, the lift-truck operators could be replaced by autonomous lift trucks. 

For the US, post-COVID-19 the training of unemployed workers for new skills will be more difficult than repurposing fixed assets.  How do we approach solving this problem? More thoughts in the next entry.  For some guidance, see the existing write-up titled “Technology Tsunami.” (https://usrevolution5.files.wordpress.com/2020/01/tech-tsunami-booklet-with-supplement-1.pdf)

#393 Can One Person Destroy a Large Organization or Country?

06 Tuesday Oct 2020

Posted by Jordan Abel in Causes of the Revolution, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Readers: some of the dialogue in this blog is set in the future (sometime after the year 2020). Entries addressing events in the the future assume there has been a 5th revolution in the US — the Revenge Revolution. More about the Revenge Revolution, a list of earlier revolutions and the author, Entry #1.

Periodically I write a “sense check” to assess whether in the next few years, a revolution in the US is still possible or whether the entire exercise is based on a statistical aberration — i.e., a roughly 50-year cycle between major upheavals in the US.  Most recent sense check, ENTRY #387.  

Some of the entries are part of a series.  Several series are available as easy-to-read booklets for download:

  • Working with Lee Iacocca after he left Chrysler, 2019Q3 Iacocca Personal Observations. 
  • GM EV1 — behind-the-scenes events affecting development and introduction of the GM EV1, the first modern electric vehicle. 2020Q1 GM EV-1 Story Behind the Story Booklet
  • Coming technology tsunami and the implications for the US, Tech Tsunami Booklet with Supplement
  • Trump Supporters Brainwashed? A series discussing why Republics have abandoned basic principals, Are Trump Republicans Brainwashed 2020Q1  Related article published 10/07/20.  Op-Ed piece in NYT about how people bend their thinking to justify beliefs.  Example is Fox News Information about Covid-19, 20 10 07 Fox News Still in Coronavirus Bubble aka Brainwashed
  • Who took out the Donald?  Who/what groups are most likely to “take out” Trump? The booklet was written early in the Trump administration but still worth a read. Who Took Out the Donald Entries with Update
  • Revenge Revolution — description of what form the revolution might take, 20 01 07 Start of Revolution

Prelude to the current series of entries: I’ve concluded Trump is a lunatic and the administration filled with lapdogs save a couple of people at CDC.  Instead of wasting time commenting on actions by Trump, I thought it more productive to begin discussing what happens in the US once the coronavirus is more under control.  #378 began the series. At this point not sure how many entries.  Comments and suggestions welcome.

ENTRY #393: Note: This entry was written before the White House announced president Trump tested positive for Covid-19, then hospitalized.  The content of the entry continues to be relevant, whether or not Trump recovers and whether or not the president is a Republican or Democrat.  However, behavior of the current president is the issue at hand.  As you read the entry mentally substitute “Trump administration” for “General Motors.”  

For those who think one person cannot destroy a large, seemingly well-structured organization with significant checks and balances, think again.

A lesson we can learn from industry is how one person destroyed what was the largest, most consistently profitable organization in the world, General Motors. If you are not familiar with the history of GM, between roughly 1920 and the early 1980s, GM could have been the US Treasury – GM was so profitable it might as well have printed money.

As a company, GM was enormously large and yet, maintained very high profit margins on many of its products.  For example, variable profit on some car and truck models was 60%, and in some cases even higher.

How did GM become so profitable, even remaining profitable during the Great Depression? The key to GM’s success was the leadership of Alfred P Sloan.  Under Sloan’s leadership, General Motors operated following three basic tenets.

  1. Set clearly defined roles for operating divisions – Chevrolet, Buick, Cadillac, etc.  The products of each division were distinct in appearance and content.  There was no confusion, for example, between a Chevrolet and a Buick.
  2. Hire highly qualified people.  Sloan viewed his role as providing general direction and then getting out of the way and letting the managers do their job.  Under Sloan, the divisions operated with an incredible amount of autonomy.
  3. Strict adherence to a simple but powerful financial metric.  The metric allowed GM to make money even when sales declined sharply. Inside GM, the metric was known as “standard volume.”  Standard volume was equal to 70% of rated capacity.  If an assembly plant had rated capacity of say 200,000 units per year, standard volume was 140,000.  Budgets were established so the operating unit would break even at 70% of rated capacity. In addition to ensuring GM would be profitable during recessions, the standard volume metric allowed GM to become even more profitable as the economy improved.

What changed at General Motors? Why is GM no longer the juggernaut in the auto industry?  In 1980, then GM chairman Thomas A Murphy retired and was replaced by Roger B Smith.  Unlike Murphy, who was warm, generous and unassuming, Smith was cold, rude and narcissistic. Smith seemed to suffer from an inferiority complex.  He was physically short, had a ruddy complexion and a high voice. Inside GM, at least on the financial staff, Smith was known as “Squeaky.”

During Smith’s autocratic reign of terror – 1980-1990, he made every effort to reshape, some say destroy, most every aspect of what had made General Motors so profitable. My view, having worked on the financial staff for a good portion of my career – Smith was a wannabe Alfred P. Sloan. 

Sloan was, and still is, highly regarded worldwide.  Sloan’s name is associated with among other things academic institutions (The Sloan School at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology), Sloan-Kettering Hospital in New York, and the Sloan Foundation, which makes grants primarily to support original research and education related to science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and economics. 

 Despite experiencing Smith’s management first hand and now 30 years following his retirement, I have yet to understand why he took the approach he did.  One of the most baffling strategies was to divert funds from product development – one of the keys to GM’s money machine – to buy companies that added little or no value to GM.  Electronic Data Systems (EDS) was outside GM’s core competency.  Same with Hughes Aircraft.

Smith also eliminated the standard-volume budget and the discipline associated with that budget.  In addition, he allowed the operating divisions to begin to encroach on each other’s position in the marketplace.  Smith viewed as unnecessary the cost to keep Buick distinct and separate from say Chevrolet.  As a result, Smith began to force the operating divisions to share parts and platforms. 

Sharing, according to Smith, would save money.  And, the customer would never notice those parts that were shared.  Well, guess what?  The customer did notice. One of the most memorable was the disclosure that a more expensive Oldsmobile shared the same engine as the less expensive Chevrolet.  The Oldsmobile was labeled a “Chevmobile.” 

Smith also reorganized GM.  Rather than being an autonomous operation, the divisions were grouped.  The groups were: (i) Chevrolet, Pontiac and GM of Canada, aka CPC; (ii) Buick, Oldsmobile and Cadillac, aka BOC.  (The grouping is not dissimilar to how the Trump administration has grouped staffs at say CDC.) 

Two examples associated with the reorganization.

  1. Because of my job at the time, I was part of a small group interviewed about whether the company should be reorganized and, if so, how.  It was obvious during the interview by McKinsey & Co that the interview was perfunctory; my opinion didn’t matter and the decision to reorganize had already been made.

At the implementation kickoff, the “justification” for the reorganization was presented to about 100 executives.  Following the general meeting we broke into groups.  There were 10 people in the new Buick-Oldsmobile-Cadillac group.  At the beginning of the BOC group meeting, I asked a simple question to the head of the new BOC group, “What are we trying to accomplish with the reorganization?”  After what seemed to be an eternal pause, the executive responded, “Let’s get on with the implementation.” 

During that meeting and later, no one was able to answer my simple question.  (For reference, at the time Buick Division, which was by no means GM’s largest operating division, generated more revenue than say the worldwide operations of Goodyear Tire.  Why combine so many functions with another operation whose products have been distinct for decades?)  

The result of Smith’s reorganization and other actions was GM lost market share and significant earning power. Between 1980 and 1990 GM market share declined 10 points — ~45% to 35%.  The loss equates to far more than all Honda’s sold in the US every year. 

In 1992, just two years after Smith retired, GM was technically bankrupt.  GM avoided declaring bankruptcy by borrowing money from its finance subsidiary, GMAC.  GM has never fully recovered from Smith’s reign of terror.  While the current management has made impressive gains in product design and innovation, GM remains a mere shadow of its former self.   

2) Smith also demanded loyalty. Smith’s mantra was simple, “My way or the highway.”  To ensure loyalty and no dissent, Smith handpicked the staff that would support his decisions, whether or not the decisions were in the best long-term interest of General Motors and shareholders. He also tried to pack the Board of Directors with “yes” men. 

One problem, when Smith bought EDS, Ross Perot became GM’s largest individual shareholder and joined the Board.  Perot was good at asking tough questions.  Smith became so irritated he paid Perot $750 million for his stock (~$1.8 billion in 2020$) and kicked him off the Board.

What can the US learn from the experience of Smith as CEO of General Motors?  First the similarities in personality and management style between Smith and Trump are remarkable.  Many of the approaches taken by Trump to “break the mold in Washington” are similar to what Smith did with General Motors.

And the results of Trump’s actions are very similar to what happened to GM. Trump eliminated significant revenue potential to the federal government with a 2017 tax cut.  The tax cut created no jobs and ended up being a transfer of wealth from the middle class to the wealthiest Americans. Plus, the tax cut cost the government revenue and, as a result, the Federal deficit balooned.

Like Smith, Trump demands absolute loyalty, surrounding himself only with people who bend to his wishes.  Those who challenge Trump are broomed out. 

C’mon, you say, “How can you even compare GM to the Federal government?  GM was large but not that large.” 

“Do you really believe one person can ruin a country? A country that has been a beacon worldwide for openness, honesty and integrity? A country that was founded on the principles outlined in the Ten Commandments. Do you really think it is possible one person could bring it to ruin?”

My short answer is, “yes.” Yes, a country can be ruined by one person. And the US is on its way to ruin unless the approach to governing is changed quickly.  If there were any question about how Trump’s radical approach to governing is negatively affecting behavior in the US, then one should look no further than the so-called stalwarts of the Republican Party. 

These so-called stalwarts, who claim to believe in the core values of Christianity.  Who claim to believe in duty, honor, country.    

Duty, honor, country?  No, according to Trump, that’s only for fools.  Be proud, says Trump, that before Justice Ginsburg’s body was cold you Republicans were able to disregard what you claimed was necessary when Obama was President. Be proud you are able to throw away your ethics and ignore all teachings of your supposed religion.

So, stalwart Republicans, with all that kowtowing, what did you get in return?  What you got was a Supreme Court Justice nominee who will disregard what is good for the country.  Disregard what you claim you stand for and disregard what’s good for the American people.

Instead this nominee for SCOTUS will support laws that give more power to a few that already have too much power.  This nominee will vote to overturn the Affordable Care Act, and then replace it with, well, nothing.  And who will suffer?  The very constituents you supposedly represent.

When history books are written about the end of the great democratic experiment in America, the text won’t assign all the blame to Trump.  In fact, most of the blame won’t fall on Trump.  Trump’s personality and style has been familiar to anyone who spent one iota of time searching. 

Most of the blame will fall on the weak-kneed Republican who enabled his behavior.  So-called adults who were afraid of some tweet from Trump.  So-called stalwart Republicans, go look in the mirror and ask yourself, “With such behavior am I worthy of any recognition or reward?  Am I worthy of being called an honorable citizen?”  And then ask yourself, “After all that kowtowing to Trump’s whims, what did I get for my constituents in return?” 

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013

Categories

  • Affordable Solutions
  • Back Asswards Thinking
  • Background
  • Background Stupid Is as Stupid Does
  • Benefits of Revolution
  • Causes of the Revolution
  • Common Sense Policies
  • Corporate Policy
  • Definitions
  • Diversions
  • Economics
  • Education Issues
  • Federal Budget
  • General Motors
  • Gov't Policy
  • Infrastructure & Fixed Fuel Prices
  • Innovative Thinking: Ideas and Products
  • Lessons of Revolution
  • Personal Stories
  • Possible Solutions
  • Post Trump Presidency
  • Rebranding Black Community
  • Sense Check
  • Societal Issues
  • Stupid Is as Stupid Does
  • Tech Tsunami
  • Uncategorized

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • usrevolution5
    • Join 29 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • usrevolution5
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar