Re: Unions are Not US Labor Problem
- From: "marcodbeast" <its@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 15:57:20 -0600
~FYIS~ wrote:
"Dave K" <dave.k@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ucnrp4ho624apk5r25aqdkc3e3i22q4r3o@xxxxxxxxxx
A fairly balanced intro by IEN. Some will find it good, some
amusing, and some will disagree. However, consider why US industry
feels like they have to exaggerate labor costs...
Mark Devlin, IEN Staff conveniently left out the following facts:
The ten most heavily unionized states saw 29.2% job growth and a
45.3% increase in GDP. The ten states with the lowest union
concentration had substantially better economic performance: a 36%
increase in private sector jobs and a 69.9% increase in GDP.
http://www.americansforprosperity.org/files/images/private%20job%20growth.png
Yes, employers will always go where it's legal to force wages down.
States that have allowed this freedom experienced tremendous growth
as business move their operations to states that promote a friendly
business environment.
http://www.americansforprosperity.org/files/images/state%20growth.png
Yes, employers will always go where it's legal to force wages down.
Right to work states have had more than double the population growth
of union shop states since 1990. The right to work states saw, on
average, a 65.5% increase in GDP over the 16 year period while states
with union shops laws only experienced an average of a 45% increase.
The wages of workers in right to work states rose an average of 23%
in right to work states while in union shop states average wages only
rose 15%.
Yes, employers will always go where it's legal to force wages down.
Top line summary of the research:
Studies have found that:
1) Real GDP was depressed by about $3.5 trillion dollars from 1947 to
2000 due to unions. If you added the decrease in real wages paid to
employees, the total impact rises to more than $50 trillion.
2) From 2001 to 2006, the economies of states where unionizing is
more difficult outperformed more than union-friendly states in total
economic growth, job growth, gross state product, and per-capita
disposable income. * One study found that union-produced "deadweight"
loss to the US economy of 0.91% of GDP in 1980 and 0.34% of GDP in
2000 (noting that the effect on GDP declined as union membership
declined). * The study also found a shortfall in real GDP of about
$3.5 trillion dollars from 1947 to 2000 due to unions. If you added
the decrease in real wages paid to employees as a result of unions to
the impact on the country's GDP, the total impact of unions for the
period 1947 to 2000 exceeded $50 trillion.
Now, get this:
[source: Richard K.
Vedder, Ph.D. & Lowell E. Gallaway, Ph.D., "Do Unions Help the
Economy? The Economic Effects of Labor Unions Revisited," National
Legal and Policy Center and The John M. Olin Institute for Employment
Practice and Policy (2002), ]
http://www.nlpc.org/
http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Olin_Foundation
ROFLMAO
.
- References:
- Unions are Not US Labor Problem
- From: Dave K
- Re: Unions are Not US Labor Problem
- From: ~FYIS~
- Unions are Not US Labor Problem
- Prev by Date: Re: Obama's Housing Assistance Plan
- Next by Date: Re: Ping: OS
- Previous by thread: Re: Unions are Not US Labor Problem
- Next by thread: Re: Unions are Not US Labor Problem
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
