Yes back then.  And in the early days of the last century.  But you have to grow up some time - except if you are a democrat or Union Chief.

Just answer this question.  Why should I (Capital) support a union thug's quarter of a million dollar a year extravagant living standard when he does nothing for anyone?  I do not begrudge you being able to support him, but why should I?

I cant wait for the conservative utopia!  Nobody makes a good living except managment, like god intended.  if only you were in charge back in the day.  Then we'd still be working 90 hours a week and earning pennys. Buying our food from the company store and liking it damnit! 

The problem with manufacturing in this country is not the ever shrinking unions, and by the way, i live in detroit, and have never met someone who made a quart-million a year,  the problem is the countrys insain jihad against socialized medicine and free trade.  Get rid of free trade and give everyone healthcare, boom, youve fixed american manufacturing!!! YEY!!! 

But that'll never happen, because of Mr. monopoly guy up there.  And america will fail.  Because a country that isnt self sufficient is a weak country.  Just like they like it.

In the conservative utopia, people would have the sense to work for themselves. If your place of employment is so full of competing untrained labor, than you need to get a different job, or maybe an education.

here is a little work of fiction comparing the liberal and the conservative utopias

http://www.bigheadpress.com/eft?page=1

Nope. Make sure people are able to move between towns and you abolish the problem of 'the company store' - don't like working for store vouchers then move to a different town that gives you money that's usable everywhere. Meanwhile make sure you've reduced barriers to entry and you'll likely see a business that doesn't use a voucher store system appear instead.

Similarly, don't want to work 90 hours a week? Work for someone else who allows you to work 50 hours a week. If there are so many people looking for jobs in the particular sector which is causing low wages/long hours then move to a different sector where you get more pay for less time. Alternatively if the problem is companies are paying less than they should and enjoying far higher profits as a result then assuming you have a 'utopia' barriers to entry should be as low as possible, allowing anyone else to set up their own company, hire workers (by paying a slightly higher wage than the original one meaning they get the best ones/don't have to worry about not hiring enough) and make a decent profit. The original company now struggles to get workers as they all want to go to the one paying higher wages. The end result? Companies end up paying the market/fair rate.

Such a utopia (to me at least) is where the government works with the market mechanism to ensure the best result overall - workers end up being paid a fair wage, unemployment is kept to a minimum, consumers aren't ripped off by companies, etc.; basically the government should look to address possible market failures arising from a lack of information, and where possible steer the end result back into one utilising the market.

Unions on the other hand are effectively taking from the poor to give to the rich - the workers in the union enjoy higher wages (above the market level) at the cost of the company hiring fewer of them, causing higher unemployment (i.e. severe pain to a few individuals to line the pockets of the decently well of).

Get rid of free trade? That's a brilliant way to make people in your country far worse off! If another country can produce cars relatively more efficiently than you (and similarly you can produce something else relatively more efficiently than them), then you each focus on the areas you're best at, and trade. The end result of this is that both countries can end up much better off than before. I'm also a bit confused as to what giving everyone healthcare has to do with american manufacturing.

Anyway incase you're not sure on the reasoning behind comparative+absolute advantage (and hence free trade), here's a simple analogy:

You have two people on a desert island. One of them is a brilliant hunter, one of them a brilliant builder/craftsman. Lets start with the 'free trade' principle first: The hunter spends his time catching meat, the builder spends his building sound shelters+furnishings. They then trade - the hunter gives the builder some meat, the builder gives the hunter a home.

Now lets take the 'anti-free trade' route: The hunter decides he doesn't want anything to do with the builder, he'll do it himself. So he spends some time hunting, and the rest trying to build a home. However he's a poor builder, so it ends up taking him much longer to get a home, and it's of worse quality than the builders, while he has less time to hunt so doesn't eat as much. Meanwhile the builder has a nice home, but he sucks at hunting, meaning he ends up going hungry many nights, and as a result has less time to spend on his home and it ends up of worse quality.

Why would anyone want the second of the two options? Because of some notion of 'patriotism', that somehow means the US must manufacture various goods, even if someone else can do it better and for less? Or because they're short sighted and don't see that propping up jobs in the manufacturing industry costs more jobs in the rest of the economy? Or because they have some vested interest in the particular industry which means they're quite happy to see it benefit at the expense of everyone else?

funny you mention vested interest, as the person making those statements professes to being a car manufacturer.

I love it!  Just open the door and let them stick their foot into it.  Either that, or you have a reading comprehension problem.  I vote for the former.  A liberal being a conservative!

But in your own jihad, you might want to point out where anyone is talking about "rolling back" (except you).  I think everyone is talking about moving forward.  And right now, the only ones that seem to pine for the "good old days" are the liberals.  Yes, let's get back to sweat shops and 90 hour work weeks - like apparently you want.

Too bad the world has moved on and left you in the dustbin of history.  But dont let that stop you from being a good old conservative!  Make the best buggy whip you can!  NO one will buy it, but you can take pride in making them I guess.

Perish the thought!  They made damn good buggy whips 100 years ago!  What is good for the gramps is good for the goslings!

You make good points.  But their rationale is not "patriotism" or anything so noble.  It is the aversion to change.  It was good enough for Grandpa, so it must be ok.  Society must freeze and stay static as some arbitrary point in time where they think everything was perfect.  They really are anachronisms, that are so stuck in their myopia, they dont even realize what they have become.

Probably a line employee deathly afraid of working for a real living.