Showing posts with label urban growth. Show all posts
Showing posts with label urban growth. Show all posts

11 April 2013

A Large Writing Project for This Year. Detroit, Fallen Cities and the US Macro Economy.



I have finally begin to "ink" some ideas that I have for a large writing project this summer.
These preliminary ideas have a long way to go and I would happily receive comments thoughts from my readers.

My work will be threefold.

1. I will need to write a summary of the coinciding economic histories of the city of Detroit (housing patterns, taxes, etc.) and the corporations that dominate the auto industry (mostly GM, but also Ford and Chrysler) as they relate to Wayne county Michigan.  Numbers such as populations, employment numbers, etc. This is essentially to establish statistical correlation between these corporations and the county that houses them.  This will be an important aspect as it will (hopefully) numerically demonstrate how the people involved and the enterprises symbiotically both built and destroyed a major urban area.  Included will be analysis of both the corporations, but also public services etc. offered by local governments to their employees. 


2. I plan to update the Marxian conception of the corporation.  The generation of surplus labor takes place not only within the settings of the corporate environment, but also within a certain geographic area. I hope to contribute to the Marxist corporate literature from this perspective.  Topics such as type of labor available, as well as surplus generating policies of the enterprise need to be updated to discuss the relationship with the communities in which the enterprises are contained.  Surplus is generated by real people and they have to exist within a geographic area, this dynamic is not adequately discussed in Marxian economics or geography.  This section will also include an analysis of labor relations, relative bargaining power of the workers of these companies over time, union actions, etc.  Basically wage/labor relations history stuff, but in the context of these things affecting both the enterprise and the community (something new as far as I know>)
3. Finally, and this is vague still...I want to be able to say something meaningful about municipal policy, certainly as it relates to "fallen" cities like Detroit, Pittsburgh, Holyoke, etc. and how they should attempt to use the resources/factories that they have to stimulate recovery (with or without the gentrification pattern that is being followed in many American cities), but also, the future of other American urban areas that rely upon manufacturing today, as well as possibly some contributions on positives/negatives to the broader idea of the moving away from "real" production into the service sector that the American macro economy as a whole has experienced.

Comments very welcome!


16 February 2012

The Growth of Holyoke Continued:


Probably the last post in this short series.  Unless I decide to share some stuff on the decline: 

YEARS OF BIRTH AND GROWTH

            The first paper mill in Holyoke “Parson’s Paper” was opened in 1853, four years after the completion of the dam.  Many other mills followed, and within 25 years Holyoke had become the largest production center of writing paper in the world. By 1880 Holyoke had more paper mills than any other American local, including production of cheaper quality papers, with 17.
            This period is characterized by massive increases in the organic composition of capital and worker productivity in paper making.  The output of Parson’s Paper increased more than 25 fold from 1854 to 1884 without an increase in the physical size of the mill. By assumption the downward pressure put on the rate of profit by the increasing organic composition was more than offset by productivity gains and relative surplus value. 
The wage of paper workers was fairly stagnant through the second half of the 1800’s.  There were some small increases, especially in the more skilled jobs, but nothing close to the increases in productivity that went along side them.  There was some unionization of paper workers during this time, however workers remained mostly divided along skill divides as well as divides of ethnic origin.  The Holyoke paper worker was usually of Irish Catholic heritage (often first or second generation immigrants).  There was however a large French Canadian immigration wave into Holyoke during this period as well.  It seems a common complaint of the Irish that the French Canadians were willing to work for a wage that was far below V for the Irish workers.  The large population growth in Holyoke during this period seems to have put enough downward pressure on wages that they did not rise even as many more mills opened in the city. 
By 1880 the total population of Holyoke was 22,000 roughly 1900 of these people worked in paper mills.  About 9% of the total population and 25% of the total workforce!  The combined employment of the textile and paper industries totaled more than 50% of the total workforce.  This period, although characterized by increasing capital investment, was still a relatively labor intense one in paper production. There was also a vast difference in the types of labor and wages employed in the mills.   Machine tenders and beaters of the pulp were high skilled jobs and not easily replaceable.  Women in the “rag sorting” room and workers in the finishing departments (often French Canadian immigrants who were willing to work for far less) were easily replaceable.  Class antagonism seems to have been absent for the most part.  Most documentation of workplace disputes points to problems of the Irish owners and skilled workers with the French Canadian (and to some degree Polish) unskilled workers.  Class harmony between labor and capital and a blind eye to exploitation of workers was present from the beginning of Holyoke paper though much of the hundred years the mills were in operation. Even workers in more skilled jobs felt the pressure of a high local immigration rate, as well as ethnic bonds with mill owners.[1]
Profits were not just high because of being able to pay low wages.  During the first 4 decades of paper production in Holyoke the mill owners (in an informal, and sometimes formal, cartel setting) took actions to gain monopoly power.   The mills had a rising organic composition of capital that was lowering average costs for the mills as their production vastly increased.  In a competitive system this would result in a cheapening of the final commodity being produced, in this case cheaper fine writing paper.  The Holyoke mill owners prevented the fall in their profit rate that would come with such a result by colluding to keep prices for writing paper high.   For most of the 1870’s and 80’s most of the mill owners in town meet two or three times a month in a formal organization.  The stated purpose of the organization was to discuss marketing strategies and export markets, however it is well documented that price fixing took place.