Those are impressive numbers and it reflects what I saw when I was an employment counselor back in the day.  However, there is another side to that coin.  I tried looking for data-licious link, but I'm too tired.  So, I will offer up what I saw when I was an employment counselor.  It's all anecdotal, so ymmv...

I was an employment counselor back in the day and my agency served a town that once been an important shoe and textile center.  When it became obvious that the shoe and mill jobs weren't coming back the big push in the region and through the state was encouraging people to start their own businesses.  The idea took off and the results were really exciting.  But, here's the flip side...from my observation, most of those new businesses centered almost entirely on service jobs...cleaning, property maintenance, FIRE, and food preparation.  Hardly any new businesses to my knowledge focused on manufacturing.  In fact, unless you count a custom car shop and a smattering of computer shops, I can't think of one that actually made things.

Obviously, there's nothing wrong with service jobs, but to my knowledge none of the new businesses provided anything but the most rudimentary of benefits to both the employer and employee.  So while the numbers you mentioned are impressive there still remains the questions of job quality and job durability (is it still true that most new businesses fail within the first 5 years?)  The jobs that these new jobs created, their wages, and longevity never really replaced those of the ones that disappeared.  

There is a happy ending though...even though the shoe shops and mills went to Asia (one of my former clients actually had to help box up equipment that was being shipped out by the Chinese company that bought the shop he worked for until he was, of course, let go).  The town finally got its act together and renovated the vacant mills and they filled up with banking, call center, and telecom firms.  At the same time, the town is now a growing center for the printing trade and medical care.  Almost all of the new firms would not fit into the "small business", category though.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

My point is that niche, highly automated custom manufacturing might provide a nice living for somebody who can afford half a million dollars of kit (and I actually know of somebody who makes just such a living), but it's not going to put food on the table for the average out of work UAW worker.

My point was it's not a half million dollars anymore, it's more like $10,000 to $50,000, making it accessible to tons of people and they are taking advantage of it.  From custom cabinet making to RC helicopters, it's amazing what people are doing.  And there are at least 150 companies servicing this market.

But that's only one side of the equation, the other side is e-commerce and the internet in general cutting distribution and sales barriers.

Chris.

Joe Blow won't make money from customized manufacturing not because he doesn't have the tools, but because he doesn't have the skills.  It takes a lot of knowledge of both physics and art to make something right.  They are harder to get than a $500K tool.

That's my point.  New software tools like SolidWorks and OneCNC allow a lot of people to do this type of work without a huge learning curve.  As an extreme example, look at DP Cars (http://www.dpcars.net/) where Dennis Pavlov basically designed and build a custom car on his own, enabled by sophisticated software tools.

At the other end is me.  With no mechanical engineering or design experience, I have designed and machined a fair number of parts, although not for re-sale.   Most of the problems I have encountered have been due to attitudes in the industry like yours ("you can't do that without 10 years of experience"), but have been resolved by connecting with people who are interested in sharing knowledge and being helpful, while ignoring the naysayers.

However, having experience and the right machine tools are only 20% of the equation, contrary to what industry thinks (and that's going to be it's downfall right there).  Most of the difficulty is in actual innovation coupled with sales and marketing, and the infrastructure to support those two things.   That's the key difference between all those failing machine shops and these new businesses.  That, and the fact that they are not afraid of ignoring standard 'industry' thinking and standards.

Chris.

I used to be in business for myself.  It's a pain in the neck, or it can be, if you have the kind of business where clients may call you 24x7 and want something, or if you try to handle all the business-end stuff yourself... I'm a technical guy, and find it much more satisfying to work for a company large enough that they handle all the business planning, and I can do what I actually find interesting and worthwhile for the human race.  So there's one reason.  :)

I run my own business, and it's simply not for everyone.  Whether or not you are actually more secure in a 9-5 job, being out on your own certainly feels less secure, and a lot of people simply can't handle that.  Many people also can't handle the extra paperwork and filing requirements.

Science fiction writers have been thinking about the question you raise for quite a long time, of exactly what human beings will do with themselves, or the question of what human beings are actually good for, in some future society in which all work is automated.  The most perfect form of the totally automated world is based upon the use of neural-interface to create a perfect virtual reality, so that people are just stockpiled in tanks, and live very happy lives of complete fantasy (or in the somewhat ridiculous case of the Matrix movies, people live rather unhappy lives of complete fantasy, which is generated by the deranged computer running the world).  And since people in such a world really do have no purpose, there would not seem to be any reason why this fully automated world would ever go to the trouble of arranging for human reproduction (people would have all the sex they want in their virtual realities, but no actual children would ever result) so that the human race would soon be extinct.  Quite possibly there would be an actual culture or civilization created by the artificial intelligences that were originally invented just to make life easier for people, and that culture might very well go on to become much superior to any human-based culture.

But honestly, I don't think that we are actually headed in that direction.  In a well-run world, the needs of human beings could be met in an efficient manner, but at the very least, this requires that we limit our population so that it does not exceed the available resources (and the current global population is already much too high, and still climbing).  If we develop an inter-planetary or even inter-stellar civilization we could then support a larger population, but even then we would need some kind of planning for our population, since we are capable biologically of reproducing beyond the carrying capacity of any finite quantity of resources, even if that should be a billion galaxies worth.  And there doesn't seem to be any indication that we as a species are developing the kind of self-discipline that would be needed for population planning.  

And with scarcity of resources comes inevitable conflict, which also prevents the world from being in any sense well-run.  It's not enough to have efficient automated factories if they are going to be destroyed by the efficient automated weapons (or the less efficient suicide bombers) that our enemies will send against us.  Only with both global unity and global planning might we aspire to any kind of utopian future, whether of the fully automated variety or any other kind.

And even though we can all easily figure out that we would be better off cooperating with each other rather than fighting with each other, such cooperation can only occur if we can trust each other to be honest and to comply with the agreements that we make, rather than cheating, and there is no likelihood of such trust.  We know all too well, from the long history of human treachery and deceit, that we can't trust other people, or particularly other groups of people.  And in a world of selfish people and selfish groups, all engaged in cut-throat competition (often involving the literal cutting of throats), there is only so far we can go in the creation of a prosperous, happy world in which all of our needs are met by our sophisticated machines.

Which is too bad, because I personally would really enjoy having machines do all the work, leaving me to pursue my hobbies.  

Doesn't the theory of singularity say that we become the machines? If you enjoy your work then what is the difference between work and play? If you can complete 37,000,000,000,000 processors per second by extension of the machines that have become a part of you is that really work in a traditional sense? The basic tasks we undertake now almost exclusively entail staving off death in some form. If we become immortal through our machines, I don't think there's anyway we today can really comprehend the tasks of work and play that will confront our future selves.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

I'm sure it is something I read in a (highly recommended) book called Better Off.  I think you are right about the name being Nedd Ludd anyway....

What is Mary Tyler Moore? No wait, don't answer that, I'm glad I don't know.  I haven't watched TV since survivor's first season.

Maybe it wasn't Mary Tyler Moore. Maybe it was I Love Lucy.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

It wasn't MTM, it was Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracey in "Desk Set".

Well, FWIW, Honda is shutting down the motorcycle plant in Ohio and moving the jobs back to Japan.  They claim that no one will be laid off (I doubt that).  Could this be the first of more closings?  I haven't got a clue, but it does make me wonder.

there's only one way to find out...

They claim that no one will be laid off (I doubt that).  Could this be the first of more closings?

It's plausible. Honda has been steadily increasing US market share with its autos and I can easily imagine that it would be cheaper to expand its auto manufacturing capacity by converting part of its motorcycle operation than to build an entirely new plant.

"I can easily imagine that it would be cheaper to expand its auto manufacturing capacity by converting part of its motorcycle operation than to build an entirely new plant."

That's a shame.   I've owned a couple of Honda motorcycles (among others), and the Hondas were the best.  I wish I could get back my CB400F.  The Silverwing was great, too.  To the best of my knowledge, both were Japanese-made.

Still, I hate to hear about the Honda motorcycle plant closing here.  

there's only one way to find out...

"One of his first moves was to make certain government jobs part time that only get 8 paid holidays a year plus vacation instead of 16 paid holidays a year plus vacation."

I have no idea about the jobs involved, but in general I'm against part-time (read: no benefits) jobs, but I fully agree with getting rid of some of the government holidays.  IIRC, when I was working we only got 6.  No Presidents day, no MLK day, no Columbus day, no Veteran's day (even if you were a veteran)...  Either give them to everyone or get rid of them!

Sorry, just my two cent rant.

there's only one way to find out...

I have no idea about the jobs involved, but in general I'm against part-time (read: no benefits) jobs, but I fully agree with getting rid of some of the government holidays.  IIRC, when I was working we only got 6.  No Presidents day, no MLK day, no Columbus day, no Veteran's day (even if you were a veteran)...  Either give them to everyone or get rid of them!

The problem locally is full timers get obscene benefits packages and salaries, and due to restrictive union contracts previously negotiated as well as absurdly pro-labor friendly laws it is almost impossible to negotiate with the unions. By paying people as "regular/part timers" or whatever the term is to work 39 hours a week they were still able to get competent people. Even though wages were slightly lower and there were no 16 government holidays plus paid lunches plus hour off early on friday in the summer plus 100% free healthcare plus 100% free pension plus etc etc etc. Hell, I wish I got 8 paid holidays a year plus vacation. Basically the whole thing was a ploy to get around the union, although in this case I could agree with it because of the obscene salaries/benefits completely out of touch with the private sector.

Then again, maybe the local county exec didn't cut enough on the part timers because the part timers benefits package is still completely past what many private sector people get anyway.

I don't understand why anyone would argue for less time off in America under any circumstances.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

I'm with you, brother.  Check out where the US falls in terms of vacation days.  You know, Canada is looking better and better.  But then, moving there would only be a delaying action...soon there will be no such thing as weekends or maybe even time off anywhere.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine

I think we should all get more vacation time. My mandated two weeks off per year sucks, especially compared to some European countries that supposedly get three-four times that amount.

What "private sector" workers take umbrage to is the government civil servants getting 18 paid holidays plus 3-4 weeks a year in vacation, when most of us get only the majors (Christmas, New Years, the 4th, etc) off and have to take extra time for the day after Thanksgiving or veterans don't get veterans day off and then we only get 2 or at most 3 weeks off a year.

Although the benefits packages given to public sector workers (vacation at least) may be comparable to Europe and other industrialized countries it seems patently unfair when we have to support that with our taxes earned at jobs that give us half or less.

Then deny your talents to those greedy bastards. Work for a different company or in a different sector. I get 10-12+ per year--MLK, President's, Memorial Day, July 4, Labor Day, Veterans, Thanksgiving and the Day after, Christmas (plus the day before or after if it's on a Tuesday or Thursday) and New Years (plus the day before or after if it's on a Tuesday or Thursday). Plus all the executives in my industry take off half of August and pretty much a full two weeks around Christmas so those are practically working holidays if you don't cash in yours. In my previous job, I also started accruing 3 weeks annual vacation after two years. Man, was that ever nice. If I ever negotiate another contract, I'm not asking for more $$, just more vacation days. Plus, it's custom to take half days before long weekends, so you can add another 4-5 days on top of that.

It is easy to buy small plaster models of what you think life is like.

"when most of us get only the majors (Christmas, New Years, the 4th, etc) off and have to take extra time for the day after Thanksgiving or veterans don't get veterans day off and then we only get 2 or at most 3 weeks off a year."

My last employer (a major hospital) had a "Paid Absence Management" program.  At my level, 6 holidays and 3wks/yr.  No separate sick days.  We used to haul our asses in no matter how sick we were.  Smart?  Probably not.

The upside was that you could bank up to 30 PAM days, and still get paid for them when you left.  I quit and got a check for almost $5K.  

Is that a better/worse system?  I don't know.  When I was younger, I had a job where they shut down the company for a week (at their discretion, usually in July) and that was your vacation, like it or not.  That sucked.

I do envy the European countries with 4-6wks vacation.  

there's only one way to find out...

My last employer (a major hospital) had a "Paid Absence Management" program.  At my level, 6 holidays and 3wks/yr.  No separate sick days.  We used to haul our asses in no matter how sick we were.  Smart?  Probably not.

I don't know. I can't recall the last time I was ill enough to miss work. I know some friends employed at places that have sick days on the "use it or lose it" plan tend to have problems with employees calling out for colds, feeling lazy, or being hungover. If I ran a company I'd probably have 4 weeks/year off of flexible leave. Use it as vacation or sick, your choice. If you stay healthy you can take a month long vacation or something. That incentive would probably cut insurance costs. If you get sick, well, at least you could have a few weeks extra in reserve before taking one of those 12 week unpaid family leaves.

"I know some friends employed at places that have sick days on the "use it or lose it" plan tend to have problems with employees calling out for colds, feeling lazy, or being hungover."

How true.  One former employer had the "use-it-or-lose-it" sick day plan, and we could always count on Willie (once he saw he had another sick day accounted for on his paycheck) calling off within the following week.  Good for him.  I lost lots of sick days.  

My brother (a LEO) can accumulate up to a years-worth (IIRC) of sick days to use whenever he wants. Is that fair to the rest of us?  I don't think so.

there's only one way to find out...

Is that fair to the rest of us?  I don't think so.

I'm burning with rage already.

Our state civil service puts your unused sick days onto your retirement time, so you can leave early if you want.  My boss has something like five years saved up.

People coming to work sick is just as much of a problem as people staying home when they aren't, maybe even worse, since you lose the work days of those who get sick.  My boss chews out and sends home anyone who comes in sick...but then, he likes chewing people out.