Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Tea Farts don't get it. Right to work isn't about helping the worker....
While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):
7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi
This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48
Source: Poverty Rates By State:
List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to find the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.
Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.
The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.
While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):
7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi
This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48
Source: Poverty Rates By State:
List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to find the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.
Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.
The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.
Didn't France have riots in the streets when they tried make it so a buiness owner could fire useless employee's?
Mass welfare, never ends well, thanks for pointing that out man.
While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):
7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi
This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48
Source: Poverty Rates By State:
List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to find the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.
Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.
The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.
Interesting numbers. Right to Work states. Only 9 are above the middle, 25 rank. Union states, 15 are above the 25 line. And 7 of the top ten are union. But only 3 Right to Work states are in the top ten.
Steel industry. Strange you should choose the steel industry for an example of 'union caused' job decline. You see, I am a millwright in a steel mill. And it is not unions that caused the job declines, but automation. In fact, working as a millwright in sawmills, construction, and steel mills, I have watched fewer and fewer people produce more and more as we move increasingly into an automated world. At the same time, the people remaining have not seen their wages go up to as they have produced more and more. The increased profit has all gone to the top.
At some point, the people that are left, the millwrights, electricians, and automation people are going to realize the fact that the managers do not have a clue as to how to keep the production going, and we will see a reversal, with much stronger unions than at present.
Tea Farts don't get it. Right to work isn't about helping the worker....
List of U.S. states by African-American population - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
List of U.S. states by African-American population
1 Mississippi 1,074,200 37.3
2 Louisiana 1,452,396 31.98
3 Georgia 2,950,435 30.02
4 Maryland 1,700,298 29.44
5 South Carolina 1,290,684 28.48
6 Alabama 1,251,311 26.38
7 North Carolina 2,048,628 21.60
8 Delaware 191,814 20.95
9 Virginia 1,551,399 19.91
10 Tennessee 1,055,689 16.78
Great, I guess this makes you a racist because the majority of the states have the highest black population...
Tea Farts don't get it. Right to work isn't about helping the worker....
NIce try..Hey dick nose, these states had poverty issues long before right to work laws were even thought of.
While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):
7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi
This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48
Source: Poverty Rates By State:
List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to find the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.
Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.
The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.
While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):
7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi
This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48
Source: Poverty Rates By State:
List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to “find” the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.
Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.
The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.
Interesting numbers. Right to Work states. Only 9 are above the middle, 25 rank. Union states, 15 are above the 25 line. And 7 of the top ten are union. But only 3 Right to Work states are in the top ten.
Steel industry. Strange you should choose the steel industry for an example of 'union caused' job decline. You see, I am a millwright in a steel mill. And it is not unions that caused the job declines, but automation. In fact, working as a millwright in sawmills, construction, and steel mills, I have watched fewer and fewer people produce more and more as we move increasingly into an automated world. At the same time, the people remaining have not seen their wages go up to as they have produced more and more. The increased profit has all gone to the top.
At some point, the people that are left, the millwrights, electricians, and automation people are going to realize the fact that the managers do not have a clue as to how to keep the production going, and we will see a reversal, with much stronger unions than at present.
While it is true that of the ten states with the highest poverty rates, eight are right-to-work (RTW), that means that two of them are union. The following list shows the 23 RTW states and their ranking relative to poverty rates (the lower the number, the lower the poverty rate):
7 Utah
8 Virginia
10 Nebraska
12 Idaho
17 Nevada
18 Wyoming
19 Florida
20 North Dakota
22 Iowa
26 South Dakota
31 Kansas
32 Indiana
34 North Carolina
37 Georgia
40 Tennessee
41 South Carolina
42 Arizona
44 Oklahoma
45 Arkansas
46 Texas
47 Alabama
49 Louisiana
50 Mississippi
This means that unionized states have the following numerical ratings:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 43, and 48
Source: Poverty Rates By State:
List of U.S. states by poverty rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
As can be easily seen, there are a number of RTW states above the average of 25th place, and there are a substantial number of unionized states below this same average. Thus, it is impossible to prove that a lack of unions is a direct result of, or even a contributing factor to, poverty levels. Of course, anyone who really wants to can manipulate the data to “find” the results they want. For example, Utah is in 7th place which means that there are only 6 union states with lower poverty levels but also 17 union states with higher poverty levels. Can residents of Utah use that statistic to discredit organized labor? I don't think so, though some might try.
Besides, poverty lines calculations include those who are unemployed and on welfare. Unless you can prove that unions are responsible for job creation, the poverty rates prove nothing. My research shows that unions do not cause more jobs to be created; rather, they have historically caused a decline in the number of jobs (the steel industry for example). Further, even a state-by-state comparison of the WAGES of RTW and union states is more complicated than some people might think. In states with a higher cost of living and higher taxes, employers must pay higher wages to attract workers. The increased wages in these states cannot be attributed to unions, but to the factors aforementioned.
The only legitimate and meaningful comparison is the difference in wages between union and non-union workers within the same occupation and same geographic area. But that is another issue for another thread.
In the same geographic area?
Why?
Tea Farts don't get it. Right to work isn't about helping the worker....