Leftists do not accept that there are such things as ‘facts’.

Hard to believe that unions have provided income stability. Steelworkers strikes in 1952 and 1959 impacted more than just the U.S. steel industry. Many believe the latter led to globalization of the steel industry, as steel’s customers were forced to import Japanese and Korean steel.

The lengthy 1965 Longshoreman strike idled much more than just the 60,000 striking longshoreman. 130,000 maritime workers, truckers, and railroad workers were also idled. Other industries could not get deliveries of raw materials and cut back on plant labor.

I certainly believe our economy has stabilized as union power has declined.

I assume you are asking why the average annual increase in employment was larger in the 60′s and 70′s than it is now.

Boomers joined the workforce from 1965 to 1985. Their numbers were much larger than the generation before them. The impact was greatest in percentage terms in the 60′s and 70′s before tapering off. The same number of workers were being added by the late Boomersin the early 80′s. By then, though, the early Boomers had already expanded the base so much that the impact of 4 million new workers per year was much lower.

After 1985, those born in the post-Boomer baby bust started entering the workforce. Their lower numbers could not match the earlier gains from the Boomer generation. In fact, had immigration not offset the effects of the baby bust, employment growth would have been much lower.

At the same time that Boomers were starting to work, houeswives were leaving the home in greater numbers. After the 1970′s liberation movement, housewives began to remain in the workforce even after childbirth. The impact of that cultural change was complete by the mid-1980′s, aftrer which the percentage of women in the workforce leveled off.

Demographics and culture change fully account for the slower annual growth in the workforce since the mid-80′s.

Drunk Keynesian era, producing the most volatility. The Fed drives drunk, wildly overcorrecting the monetary steering wheel, trying to avoid hitting unemployment on one side of the road and inflation on the other. Sober Keynesian era, with less volatility after drinking a few cups of coffee, but still following an theory that doesn’t match up to reality. And Post Keynesian era, least volatility because it tries to focus on stable inflation levels by following the road instead of obsessing on the obstacles to the side.

All three suffer from business cycles because all three are trying to drive manually instead of letting the auto-correcting self-steering car drive itself.