This is a subverse designed to encourage adult discussion spanning the entirety of the political spectrum. All are welcome, from Libertarians to Authoritarians, Democrats to Republicans, An Caps to Anarchists, Socialists to Fascists to Communists, Green, Blue, Black, White, Purple with Yellow Polka dots, whatever color, persuasion, or affiliation, this is a place for you to post your thoughts, articles, and engage in discussion meant to foster understanding.
Politics is best when we try to avoid personal attacks, limits on discussion, censorship, trolling, shilling, racism, homophobia, antisemitism, or any other forms of bigotry and malfeasance.
Election 2020 Politics Sticky
Politics 2017 Christmas Theme sticky
Nov 2016 sticky on new CSS
This subverse belongs to the community of users. Users are invited to post meta-threads about v/politics and I will gladly sticky them. @flyawayhigh
Use the "Report Spam" link to report spam and someone will review the report. J-mods have the ability to remove duplicate noncommercial spam.
v/politics is for all politics.
v/uspolitics is for US politics only.
v/worldpolitics is for international or non-US politics.
v/politicalnews is dedicated to virtually censor-free politics and news
v/news is for news around the world.
v/usnews is for domestic news only.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] catechumen 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
I misread the data. It was comparing unions in non-right-to-work vs right-to-work-states, I corrected it in an edit about 15 minutes back. That's how much more unions cost when joining is mandatory.
Except the abstract states it's only about 10% more:
I wish I could just see their mathematical models and see what is all being factored in and what isn't.
[–] flyawayhigh [S] ago
The study I posted actually responds directly and in detail to the Heritage Foundation link you posted, which in turn, responded to an earlier EPI study.
Author and attorney James Sherk is in the business of promoting RTW laws and he gets paid for it by none other than the Koch brothers. This should sound familiar. Thus, when EPI did its authoritative study a few years ago, Heritage called for an expert to 'debunk' it. That's the history.
His lengthy analysis of the pay of union officials is really beside the point -- I would say a deliberate distraction -- a personalization of finger-pointing to gain an upper hand on morality. We can now become angry at the highly-paid union officials and miss the boat about whether we too get more pay.
Having done that, he then goes on to use non-standard methods, which are specifically laid out in the submission, including a notion that RTW laws change the economy is ways not supported by research available.
No doubt unions take advantage -- and the media will generally rush to point it out. Generally speaking, issues of corruption are often minor in economic terms, but they too tend to confuse the big picture. Just to give a sense of this, take a look at recent profit gains or rates by businesses and compare those to aggregate corruption.
Unions are also democratic -- something James Sherk defies in the first few paragraphs of his article.