You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] 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.