I think the that's commonly held, let me make the argument more generally, when you ask, why was the twentieth century so great in america over all? Despite horrible depression, two world wars, i ye, now lots of challenges, why did it turn out so? I just don't see that argument empirically. Nobody actually has an interest in competitive labor markets. Everybody would like to be a monopolist. And with thas coalitions force for certain non competitive elements. So at some points in human history, you're going to find yourself close to the extreme of the slavery system where coercion is very strong. There is huge in balance of power because employers are monopsonistic
Daron Acemoglu, the Elizabeth and James Killian Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about his new paper co-authored with James Robinson, "The Rise and Fall of General Laws of Capitalism," a critique of Thomas Piketty, Karl Marx, and other thinkers who have tried to explain patterns of data as inevitable "laws" without regard to institutions. Acemoglu and Roberts also discuss labor unions, labor markets, and inequality.