In a recent speech to 70 students and labor activists at Harvard Service Employees International Union President Andy Stern had this to say:

"I understand that people wonder about union ideology," Stern said. "The punch line is this: they work. As a distributive force in this economy, they work. If there are any other ways to [solve the economic crisis], I dare someone to step forward." There are three ways to distribute wealth equally, Stern said. The first two, increasing worker productivity to increase salaries and using government intervention to equalize worker benefits, are unreliable, Stern said. The third and most reliable way is unions.

Certainly union ideology is a joke in need of a punch line, but the rest of the opinion is contradicted by Austan Goolsbee, staff director and chief economist of the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, and the Chamber's Marty Regalia in this post and, well, um, the state of Michigan; but to be fair to Mr. Stern, he goes on to spell out the conditions for which his statement is true:

"During the years 1935 to 1945, the Great Depression was followed by a post war boom," he said. "Combined with a tripling of union members, the standard for workers doubled in one decade. That was good work."

So, according to Stern rapid, mass, unionization is the best mechanism for creating shared prosperity provided that:

• There is a global depression lasting at least ten years;
• There is a world war which lasts six years and kills over 60 million people;
• Brazil, India, China, Japan, and Germany reset their economies to post-WW2 levels;
• Britain and France reset their economies to post-WW2 levels, and agree to re-experience economically the breakup of their colonial possessions;
• "From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic" an Iron Curtain descends "across the Continent."

Egad, I hope we don't do that again, but sure, bring up EFCA then. For now, can we table it?