[Paul Ross]

Your chart's figures fail to subtract the IMPORTS that these "so-called" manufacturers rely on for their asserted production and profits.

And I'm sure that switching to cheap labor imports is highly profitable. I'm not surprised. As the two-to-one trade deficit attests...and further implies that substitution is happening.

But unlike you, I'm also not impressed with the contention that you blindly swallow...that these are in fact "American manufacturers" anymore. Maybe once. But not anymore.

There has been quite a row in the National Association of Manufacturers over just this issue...with the bulk of its members...concluding that the big guys are fronting for the importers...and have co-opted NAM to be an import lobby.

[1rudeboy]

Perhaps you can direct the rest of us to the section where the U.S. Dept. of Commerce discusses how its figures are calculated?

[Mase]

Your chart's figures fail to subtract the IMPORTS that these "so-called" manufacturers rely on for their asserted production and profits.

I'm sure you can show us that manufacturing profits are not what these companies say they are and can break out for us, in detail, just how deleterious these lower cost INPUTS are to the health of American manufacturing.

I'm also not impressed with the contention that you blindly swallow...that these are in fact "American manufacturers" anymore

I see you've still been unable to explain away the fact that we make more today than at any other time in our history -- other than your usual obfuscation and data dump two stepping. Your portfolio of explanations rivals that of Clinton himself.

...with the bulk of its members...concluding that the big guys are fronting for the importers...and have co-opted NAM to be an import lobby.

Is there any organization in this country you're not intimately familiar with? I said earlier that Tonelson believes he's omniscient but he's just a piker compared to you. Now, if only you had his minions.....