← 009-140009-142 →

Conversation 009-141

TapeTape 9StartThursday, September 23, 1971 at 12:58 PMEndThursday, September 23, 1971 at 1:06 PMTape start time04:44:36Tape end time04:50:40ParticipantsNixon, Richard M. (President);  Shultz, George P.Recording deviceWhite House Telephone
AudioNARA Description

On September 23, 1971, President Richard M. Nixon and George P. Shultz talked on the telephone from 12:58 pm to 1:06 pm. The White House Telephone taping system captured this recording, which is known as Conversation 009-141 of the White House Tapes.

Nixon Library Finding Aid
Conversation No. 9-141

Date: September 23, 1971
Time: 12:58 pm - 1:06 pm
Location: White House Telephone

The President talked with George P. Shultz.

[See Conversation No. 280-13]

     Economy

          -Detroit
          -Positions
                -Leonard Woodcock
                -George Meany
                -Challenge
                -Phase II
                -Profits
                -Excess
                -Administration’s approach
          -Increase in spendable earnings
                -1971
                -Past figures
                -Record high
                -1965
                      -Wages related to prices
                -Record high
                      -Decrease in inflation
                      -Productivity increase
                      -Wage increase
          -Retail sales
                -Percentage increase
          -Increase in spendable earnings
                -Shultz's statement
                -1968 campaign
                      -Wages
                            -1965 to 1968
                -Record high
                      -Productivity increase
Transcript (AI-Generated)

This transcript was generated automatically by AI and has not been reviewed for accuracy. Do not cite this transcript as authoritative. Consult the Finding Aid above for verified information.

Yeah.
George, with regard to the, a question that probably is very hot in Detroit is the attitude of Woodcock and to a lesser extent, Meany.
Do we, do you still feel we have to take a kid glove position toward these people?
I mean, in view of both Woodcock and Meany being pretty rough in the last couple, three days in their statements.
Let me say, politically, it's dynamite to take a kid-glove attitude.
Now, the only question is, do we have to from the standpoint of getting their cooperation if it is obtainable?
Well, I don't think we have to take a kid-glove attitude toward the substance of what they say.
I don't see any...
real point in kind of personalizing, because we do, at least in certain ways of operating phase two, we need to have their cooperation.
And I think that we're fairly well assured that if we go along some lines, we'll get it.
Is there any problem in saying that if they're in Miami, ask about specific criticisms and so forth that they've been making that I
to follow up on the idea that they do have objections but that as far as the but that they that insofar as they as this program is concerned that the majority of the country and I believe a majority of their members support the program given that they're out of step with their country and their members well I think that the
The notion of being out of step is a particularly irritating one to them because that challenges their position within the union.
It's a special kind of a challenge for them.
But it seems to me that all these statements about profits being excess and all that kind of stuff, I don't see any reason not to just take the gloves off and say that's nonsense.
and they ought to know better.
If they want jobs for their members, they want those members to work for profitable companies.
I wouldn't hold off at all on that.
There's one other thing that I've been working up today, and I'll send you a memorandum on it this afternoon, having to do with the increase in real spendable earnings this year.
And I think a real point can be made of the fact that while these have just sort of wandered within a narrow range for the past five years or so because of inflation, that this year, for the first time, we seem to have broken out on the upside.
And the figure announced yesterday is a record high, the increase in real spendable earnings.
And compared with what years?
Well, we can go back to 1965.
Spendable earnings.
And I will send you over.
I don't want to get too much.
I just really need a sentence.
An increase in real spendable.
I'll send over the memo.
It's all right.
But I meant increase in real spendable earnings, the highest since 1965.
No, it's the highest ever in the history of the country.
In the most recent month, August.
Highest in history.
And how does it compare then?
What's the 65 thing about?
Well, because if you go back to 1965, and we can kind of date the current inflation from there, that since that time, while there have been a lot of wage increases, there have been price increases.
And if you just take these numbers, you see people have been spinning their wheels all this time.
And now, this year, we have had a steady upward movement
so that by August we're up at an all-time high, and we seem to have broken out of that treadmill of wages and prices.
Yeah.
That's because the inflation, instead of being six, is four.
Well, the inflation has receded somewhat.
Productivity is picking up, and...
Their wages have been going up.
Right.
Incidentally, when you talk about retail sales, I have two figures that seem to be mixed.
One says they're up 15%.
That can't be right.
It's basically 8% or 9%, isn't it?
The 8% or 9%, 8%, I guess, is the safer figure.
Yeah, fine.
Represents year over year, month over month comparisons through the year compared July with July and so on.
No, the 15% represents what has happened since the beginning of the year.
What is the increase?
I get it.
Oh, okay, fine.
Both figures are right then.
8% over last year and 15% over the first of the year.
Right.
Good.
I think this real spendable earnings thing has got some real meaning in it, and I'll try to get you over a punchy sentence or two on the information behind it.
I can see that very, because we used to make the point in the 68 campaign that the wage increases between 65 and 68 had been totally used up in almost all areas by price increases.
Right.
Now, in this instance, we have real spendable earnings, the highest in history, and that's because...
finally, because of productivity and so forth, they're moving up.
Okay.
That's fine.
That's fine.
All right, George.
Yes, sir.
← 009-140009-142 →