Also, post WWII, there was much less income inequality in the US than today. You're not wrong about the correlation between wages and cost, but it's not people like your father who are putting strain on payroll.
In Eisenhower's day we had the highest marginal tax rate for a century. Execs were taxed higher, and that money was invested heavily in infrastructure, education, social programs, and all the drivers that boost economic health. People could go to an ivy league school for a tuition in the hundreds, not the 5- and 6-digit shackles charged today. Eventually congressional Dems came to view Republican regulation of banks as stifling progress, and started moving to deregulate. Following that, Reaganite Republicans shifted to a belief in trickle-down economics (which Bush Sr. rightly used to call voodoo economics) and moved to bust up unions and lower the tax rate on the wealthy. Ever since, Republicans and Democrats alike have allowed further deregulation, allowing speculative banking lobbies to buy elections and dictate policy.
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn't exist. Likewise, the greatest trick the 1% ever pulled was convincing the middle class that the poor are the cause of their struggles. Strikes harm the company, so unions should be discouraged. Mexican immigrants are taking all our jobs and welfare, so we must build a wall. The cost of insurance is too high for us to subsidize people who can't afford it, so repeal Obamacare. And all the while, the job creators aren't creating as many living wage paying jobs as their tax breaks have paid for.
Post WWII, the taxes were high so the US could pay for the war and reconstruction of Europe. Pre-WWII, the average worker made about $squat.35/hour but we also lost a good number of people who had previously been in college or part of the work force but the up-side to the need for so much production (if you want to see anything about WII as 'good' this isn't a bad example, IMO) was that we really saw that people can step up when needed and learn to do things that were thought to be outside of their abilities. Once the war was over and most people returned, we needed housing- A LOT of housing. The attitude that people would live at home until marriage (and sometimes after) basically died with the war- if they could fight in a war, they could make it on their own and the optimism was rampant for most people and the US had a huge case of "We can do anything!". Unfortunately, some of the people who were building houses should have done something else- I bought one that was built in 1946 and OMG! Anyway, manufacturing was up, people were confident and they often got a job in a factory, which would eventually mean they joined a union. Union membership costs money, it puts a lot of leverage on manufacturers to pay more (which is often because of the union leaders' desire for more money and when the workers make more, they can pay a percentage and that increases, too). I have no problem with unions if the place treats the workers like crap, but when they strike for higher wages and benefits when the employees are already making more than ever, it's just a case of pitting the workers against management- the age-old battle.
However, I think you're a bit off in the last part-
Poor people aren't known for making a lot of great decisions, which keeps them in their position. Those who do make better decisions escape poverty and some do exceptionally well. Sometimes, decisions have nothing to do with them staying there, but I would bet that many would do better if they were to move to a different location where they might have better opportunities.
Strikes
can and do hurt companies and sometimes, the company actually closes because of this. If they have a good amount of competition, they can and do lose the orders that keep them going. Then, the workers are out of a job. Again, if the company treats the workers like crap, it can be deserved.
I don't know if you think that only Mexicans come to the US from Mexico, but that's not true. This link is only for California, but they have about 2.3 million illegals- how much can be extrapolated for the rest of the country?
http://www.gao.gov/assets/230/220582.pdf
It's not the cost of insurance that's too high, it's the cost of health care and drugs. The insurance cost reflects this and if it wasn't a shared pool, some people couldn't be insured at any cost. We need a good health care insurance plan, just not this one. It was rammed down our throats and it penalizes those who don't "participate" in a plan that's mandatory. Great- how does this work with "If you like you plan/Doctor, you can keep your plan/Doctor"?
Jobs aren't created unless there's a need and companies don't exist so people will have a job. If I create a job and don't have enough work, what happens? I'll have to close. The Federal government is a prime example of an organization that has zero understanding of containing costs in a way that keeps people employed, doesn't piss off the workers and contractors and to deliver a quality service or product. The Federal government is the single largest employer in the US, even if the military isn't involved.
If you know where I can get some of these mythical tax breaks, let me know. AFAIK, the ones that are given are because of favors given and payments made, present or future. Influence costs money and I don't have enough to be influential.
