Apparently, Kevin Drum and I need to have a chat.
FMK: Listen, here, buddy -- I argue that unions are poor vehicles for equitable distribution of wealth. What do you have to say to that?
Kevin Drum: Unions are hardly a panacea for middle class wage growth.
FMK: Oh ... so we both agree that unions are not a one-size-fits-all solution for our nation's destabilizing income inequality?
Kevin (imaginary): Yes.
FMK: And we both agree that criticizing labor unions for not being, say, a progressive system of taxation coupled with generous investment in middle class infrastructure makes about as much sense as criticizing this hamburger for not being a pair of shoes? /holds up hamburger
Kevin (imaginary): Yes.
FMK: Do you find it hilarious that our measured and apparently simpatico takes on the macroeconomic effect of unionization is being mocked as pie-in-the-sky by a writer whose grand solution to boosting middle class wages is deporting a bunch of Mexicans?
Kevin (imaginary): Yes. And by the way, I think you're a fantastic writer.
FMK: Thanks!
Jessica Alba (imaginary, nude): Have you been working out?
To be fair, Mickey has another prescription for raising wages:
How about restoring economic growth and creating a tight labor market, giving all workers (not just the unionized) greater bargaining leverage?
How about that! The solution to our economic problems might be to restore economic growth? Man, I would have never thought of that! It must be because I, like all liberals everywhere, hate economic growth.
Mickey refers to his plan as the "traditional Clintonite formula" -- which makes perfect sense when you remember how Robert Reich busted the AFL-CIO and Janet Reno built a border fence -- and offers it as a sort of rebuttal to the Kevin Drum crowd.
Of course, FDR -- that old Clintonite -- was able to restore economic growth, and create a tight labor market, too. But, really, what's the point of economic progress if it doesn't involve picking on Mickey's enemies?