Washington Post Harold Myerson’s column starts by presenting readers with a stark choice: nationalization or more rigid regulation. Things get interesting in a car-oriented sort of way when Myerson talks about Motown’s simmering antipathy towards the southern senators who almost denied them their $17.4b suckle on Uncle Sugar’s teat. “If Abraham Lincoln were still among the living as he prepared to turn 200 six weeks from now, he might detect in the congressional war over the automaker bailouts a strong echo of the war that defined his presidency. Now as then, the conflict centered on the rival labor systems of North and South. Now as then, the Southerners championed a low-wage, low-benefits system while the North favored a more generous one. And now as then, what sparked the conflict was the North’s fear of the Southern system becoming the national norm. Or, as Lincoln put it, a house divided against itself cannot stand… “But, just as Lincoln predicted, the United States was bound to have one labor system prevail, and the debate over the General Motors and Chrysler bailout was really a debate over which system — the United Auto Workers’ or the foreign transplant factories’ — that would be. Where the parallel between periods breaks down, of course, is in partisan alignment. Today’s congressional Republicans are hardly Lincoln’s heirs. If anything, they are descendants of Jefferson Davis’s Confederates.” That’s just WAY out there.
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
Is there a Civil War equivalent to Godwin’s Law? If so, Myerson just lost his argument.
Another reason to cheer every time a newspaper announces another round of layoffs. Although, I wouldn’t be surprised if large newspaper and media companies are soon whoring for bailout funds.
Today’s congressional Republicans are hardly Lincoln’s heirs. If anything, they are descendants of Jefferson Davis’s Confederates.” That’s just WAY out there.
Actually, as a former student of the Antebellum South, I would say this analysis has some merit. What we witnessed in the bailout hearings from Senator Shelby et al was southern Republicans making legislative decisions that favored their respective states. Contained in the filibuster threat against federal aid to Detroit, was direct defiance of the wishes of a Republican presidential administration (albeit one with decidedly Democratic tendencies).
So in the sense that regional concerns trumped the wishes of a federal government which was, arguably, attempting to act in the interest of the nation’s economy at large, what we witnessed was something similar to warring political ideologies before the Civil War, i.e. states rights vs. strong, centralized federal governance.
And as to modern day “Republicans” now taking up the mantel of mid 19th Century Confederates, that just speaks to the natural fluidity of meaning attached to political labels over time.
I guess I forgot to notice the part of the constitution that has the article about right to unions….We have the right to associate but it is not required. The workers in the southern plants have freely chosen to work in their non-unionized plants. The workers in the big 3 have chosen to be unionized. Some choices are good; some are bad.
The column also talks about “laissez-faire regulation” of the finanacial industry? Rep. Barney Rubble Frank and Sen. Chris Countrywide Dodd ran Freddie and Fannie right into the ditch with affordable loans. Affordable for whom? the taxpayer?
I expect senators to look after their respective state’s interests. They were elected by their constituents to be their represenatatives.
Now as then, the Southerners championed a low-wage, low-benefits system while the North favored a more generous one
Of course, plus, you have to realize that the cost of living in the Rustbelt states is much higher (maybe11% higher) than in Alabama and Mississippi. The right-to work plants can implement contract work on their assembly lines for $13.00 an hour with no benefits and can throw these people away when they are done with them.
Residents of the unionized north enjoyed higher living standards
That is true, thanks in part to unions. This cannot be denied whether you like them or not. In many cases, the labor movement spread the wealth throughout the communities in more ways than you will see in transplant communities. Like that or not.
The Washington Post has to fill the newspaper every day even if it has nothing intelligent to say. But Meyerson’s piece does comfort the WaPo’s dwindling tribe of subscribers by validating their faith that more government is always the answer.
Since GM and Chrysler claimed to want loans, not grants, the senators like Sen. Shelby that were actually doing their job were asking tough questions about how the money would get paid back. Everyone involved has to make concessions for GM and Chrysler to earn a profit and repay the loans.
The choice isn’t simply between union car manufacturing in the north vs. non-union car manufacturing in the south. A third option of manufacturing cars overseas in South Korea, Mexico, Thailand, China, etc. exists. If the UAW was successful in driving up costs and imposing work rules on the southern transplants, auto manufacturing moves out of the US.
This analysis has zero merit. What was the antebellum personal income tax rate? How much of those income taxes went directly to the textile industry? railroads? manufacturing? How much of these income taxes went to support overcompensated, overpensioned union workers?
Why are we pretending that the southern states are the enemies of detroit, when all Americans, even in the US are overwhelmingly against their tax dollars going to zombie car companies?
Why don’t we admit detroit is the enemy of Yankee cities Pittsburgh and Gary and Youngstown and Cleveland, since detroit sent its steel orders to japan and china, putting those afforementioned towns into a recession for the last 30 years?
What was the antebellum personal income tax rate? How much of those income taxes went directly to the textile industry? railroads? manufacturing? How much of these income taxes went to support overcompensated, overpensioned union workers?
How about those 50 plus years where Michigan was a donor state getting something like $.78 back from each dollar in taxes. How much do the Southern states get back from every dollar they put in? It is a vaild argument that nobody can ignore.
How about those 50 plus years where Michigan was a donor state getting something like $.78 back from each dollar in taxes
Except that Ohio and Indiana and Pennsylvania were also net donor states during that time. How much will Michigan kick back to Cleveland and Pittsburgh and Gary after putting all their union workers on the unemployment line?
Those high paid, low skill auto workers in the dirty south better hope the UAW doesn’t fold. IMO they are reaping the benefits of high wages that the UAW negotiates for its paying members. If the UAW folds do you really think all of those foreign manufacturers are going to keep paying the same wages? Of course not, right now the foreign makers only pay nearly the same to keep the UAW out! No more threats of union organization equals a minimum 40% pay cut; in line with other unskilled labor.
Further Shelby and those other southern hypocrites have given away billions in subsidies/credits to get those companies to set up shop in their states. It’s very disingenious for them to rail against helping out the domestics.
The comparison is not without any merit, and it is important that Michigan has for years been a “donor state”. What’s interesting is that it’s federal power grabbing and overtaxation that is responsible for all of it.
Most people have a poor understanding of the causes of the civil war, and have no clue about the true role of the abolitionist movement in the conflict.
The southern states, just like any other region, are not fond of having the feds come and tell them how to live. Sure, there were many times that the south got it wrong on race matters. That is why every time they are right, it gets thrown in their faces. There are many people who have bigoted views of the south, but it’s ok, because they can justify it because all southerners are bigots themselves.
kamikaze2b :
Further Shelby and those other southern hypocrites have given away billions in subsidies/credits to get those companies to set up shop in their states. It’s very disingenious for them to rail against helping out the domestics.
You ignore hidden subsidies in the UAW states…
As a resident of NY, I know how the game is played. There’s state unemployment funds (that are combined with Job’s bank payments), ‘job training’ funds, ‘industrial-development’ incentives, ‘low-cost’ electric rates in return for jobs, multi-year workman’s compensation procedures/schemes that bleed firms white, retarded work rules that allow workers to leave after they’ve finished quota production for a day. The list is as long as it is secretive.
At least the southern states are transparent. And they build cars I want to drive.
^^Trees, the UAW needs an enema too, no disagreement there. My original post simply pointed out that if the UAW goes under the low skilled labor in the south can look forward to hefty pay and benny cuts. They are essentially riding the back of dues paying members and should be very thankful if the UAW/Big 3 survive.
And I certainly don’t want a POS BMW or Nissan that comes out of those factories, from what I have seen over the past few years they rank near the bottom in quality.
And FWIW I drive an Accord made in Ohio, and its been bullet proof.
How about those 50 plus years where Michigan was a donor state getting something like $.78 back from each dollar in taxes. How much do the Southern states get back from every dollar they put in? It is a vaild argument that nobody can ignore.
That’s because during those 50 plus years Michigan was one of the wealthiest states in the US. That’s why it was a donor state. The Southern states received more in taxes thanks to being poorer. Congratulations, since Michigan’s economy has been so bad, it’s no longer a donor state. Personally, I’d take being wealthy and being a donor state in return over getting more out of taxes in exchange for being poorer.
I didn’t see the UAW or Michiganders arguing in any of those 50 years for some of that highly paid auto work to move down South, to the poorest states in the Union. No, they wanted their high-paying jobs to stay right there in the Midwest, preferably in Michigan. Any attempt to move down South would have been met with punishing strikes. So why exactly are the Southerners supposed to feel sympathy?
The auto jobs in the South may be low-wage compared to the UAW jobs, but they’re still much higher wages than the jobs that were there before. The foreign auto companies have produced far more local jobs for the South, good jobs, than the domestic auto companies ever have.
In other words, the choice is between Communism and Fascism according to some filthy government-worshiping parasite at the Washington Post…Shocking!
Leave it to the political Left to invoke trash-talking labels in lieu of rational debate.
I recently visited the Montgomery, Alabama assembly plant where my Santa Fe was built with non-union labour, and I didn’t see any shackles or chains. I did, however, meet a lot of nice people who really take pride in their work. I hear that the same conditions exist at Smyrna (Tennessee) and Alliston (Ontario), where my previous non-union cars came from… infinitely better products than the pieces of shit Detroit sold my family for 30 years.
When the Big 3 go swirling down the bowl in part thanks to their gangster unions, we should all light a copy of the Washington Post in memoriam.
Residents of the unionized north enjoyed higher living standards
That is true, thanks in part to unions. Then their current standard of living is the fault of the unions, as well.
The car companies promised themselves an awesome lifestyle, and now the bill has come due.