My point is simply that places that embrace innovation will outperform places that don't. The Unions in the US do not embrace innovation. Look at what the Teac

My point is simply that places that embrace innovation will outperform places that don't. The Unions in the US do not embrace innovation. Look at what the Teacher's union in California has done to education here. If the US did not have the Unions destroy innovation in the car industry, perhaps the US would have the best and most reliable cars in the world. Japan embraced innovation as part of the DNA of how they work, and they make incredibly good cars. The question to ask is: who is the customer of the Union in the US? There is a conflict of interest between the Union in the US and the customers of the products created by unionized companies. In Japan, the focus is on the customer and creating the best product. In the US, the focus is on being in the Union hierarchy, "saving jobs", getting money for the Union, etc. It has nothing to do with making great cars. The construction Union in New York destroyed new modular appraoches to building in the late 60's (I worked for the architect who tried to bring that innovation in). Even today, if you want to bring modules not build in NYC in to town, it won't happen. There is a conflict of interest between the union and the construction companies' customers. This is quite apparent in California where the Teacher's union is in a conflict of interest with the students being taught, which is why the Union has destroyed the product of public education consistently for decades.