• About
  • Contact
  • Editorial
  • Policies
  • Archives
Angry Bear
Relevant and even prescient commentary on news, politics and the economy.
  • US/Global Economics
  • Taxes/regulation
  • Healthcare
  • Law
  • Politics
  • Climate Change
  • Social Security
  • Hot Topics
« Back

Business Destruction is Never Creative, Always Fatal

Ken Houghton | October 3, 2011 4:53 pm

by Mike Kimel

Via asymptosis this cartoon….

Tags: economic history, history, income inequality, labor economics, labor share Comments (6) | Digg Facebook Twitter |
6 Comments
  • Rusty_Shackleford says:
    October 3, 2011 at 8:34 pm

    Massive unemployment? 

    Hmmm.

    I wonder what happened to the American Textile Industry?

  • Tom says:
    October 4, 2011 at 12:53 am

    When tariffs disapeared so did the American Textile Industry. So now Viet-nam makes our shirts, and the rest of SE Asia makes the rest. But we are told this benefited all. True?

  • buffpilot says:
    October 4, 2011 at 3:44 pm

    What new labor rights law?

    I assume your not talking about the right to organize unions without a secret ballot correct?

    Islam will change

  • PJR says:
    October 4, 2011 at 4:35 pm

    Tom you spend less on clothes than did your 1960s counterpart, and the clothes have designer labels. This may have helped a bit when you bid-up house prices.

    Relatedly, although this cartoon doesn’t mention it, cotton was a cheaper in the 1850s before we elected Lincoln with his anti-business, pro-labor bias.

  • Mike Kimel says:
    October 4, 2011 at 6:16 pm

    PJR,

    I’d like to see the data on cotton prices.  

    That said, I’m assuming freeing the slaves was one of those anti-business pro-labor biases that affected the price of cotton.

  • PJR says:
    October 4, 2011 at 10:15 pm

    Mike good question and, based on data that I can find, your suspicions are correct that cotton prices weren’t affected much by freeing slaves–the price spiked up and down before the Civil War and went up after the war but not for long. Other factors were more important in driving the price up and down. So I guess slave labor didn’t keep the price down, or at least that’s true given that this labor entered into the country to work the cotton fields and its population grew (to about 4 million) without the costs of having to entice them by offering good wages.

Featured Stories

Martin Wolf has a new book coming out . . .

Eric Kramer

Index of leading indicators says recession almost certain; so what of the coincident indicators?

NewDealdemocrat

Extending Capital to Nature, Reducing Nature to Capital

Peter Dorman

Trump and the debt ceiling

Eric Kramer

Contributors

Dan Crawford
Robert Waldmann
Barkley Rosser
Eric Kramer
ProGrowth Liberal
Daniel Becker
Ken Houghton
Linda Beale
Mike Kimel
Steve Roth
Michael Smith
Bill Haskell
NewDealdemocrat
Ken Melvin
Sandwichman
Peter Dorman
Kenneth Thomas
Bruce Webb
Rebecca Wilder
Spencer England
Beverly Mann
Joel Eissenberg

Subscribe

Blogs of note

    • Naked Capitalism
    • Atrios (Eschaton)
    • Crooks and Liars
    • Wash. Monthly
    • CEPR
    • Econospeak
    • EPI
    • Hullabaloo
    • Talking Points
    • Calculated Risk
    • Infidel753
    • ACA Signups
    • The one-handed economist
Angry Bear
Copyright © 2023 Angry Bear Blog

Topics

  • US/Global Economics
  • Taxes/regulation
  • Healthcare
  • Law
  • Politics
  • Climate Change
  • Social Security
  • Hot Topics
  • US/Global Economics
  • Taxes/regulation
  • Healthcare
  • Law
  • Politics
  • Climate Change
  • Social Security
  • Hot Topics

Pages

  • About
  • Contact
  • Editorial
  • Policies
  • Archives