Report: Unions Kill Jobs

From Investors Business Daily:

…The U.S. unemployment rate is 9.1%. In right-to-work states the average is 7.9% — 8.6% adjusted for population.

Between 1977-08, employment grew 100% in right-to-work states vs. the national average of 71% and 56.5% in non-right-to-work states. That’s according to a January study that Ohio University economics professor Richard Vedder did for the Indiana Chamber of Commerce.

In this period, real per capita income in the right-to-work states grew 62.3% vs. the national average of 54.7% and 52.8% for non-right-to-work states…

If unions would concentrate on actually helping workers, the story would be different.  I would be a backer and member of a union if they were in favor of workers – I’m not because unions are not for me:  they are for, first, the union bosses; second, for the Democrat party; third, for corrupt deals; fourth, for various anti-American, socialist/communist political groups.  There is no place in there for an average, working man who just wants a strong business climate and good wages and benefits.

It is wise and logical for working people to band together to look after their own interests.  But the primary interest of a employee union is in strong economic growth – it is only by such means that the workers gain real leverage over the employers.  When the economy is thundering ahead and labor is in high demand, that is when the workers can hold back and demand higher wages and benefits.  Our unions, however, have decided that economic growth is pointless:  the only thing which matters is keeping the union bosses rich, the Democrats in power and the economy so controlled that non-union companies are essentially forbidden to compete with union companies.  A huge amount of our current economic misery can be directly traced to the unions corruption, political hackery and restraint of trade.

A real union actually for the workers would be calling for less government spending (government spending takes money out of the private economy which could be used to employ workers); for lower taxes (higher taxes on a business means it can employ fewer people); for less government regulation (when you tie up new businesses in regulatory knots it means fewer get started and employ fewer people).  It is to be hoped that the current unions – especially the private-sector unions (the government sector unions are probably beyond redemption) – will wake up to this, or that the membership will wake up and, if necessary, form new unions.  The working man does need his own organization…but the current groups which claim that role are actually harming the working man every day.


29 thoughts on “Report: Unions Kill Jobs

  1. Sunny July 5, 2011 / 2:11 pm

    Mark, you believe that unions kill jobs but without them we would be working for pathetic wages today with no benefits. (Wages have not gone up for years for the average worker.) No health care, no retirements, no restrictions on the conditions of the work place, work hours and no weekends off. I do agree that unions have strayed from what they started out to do – protect the workers. They need to get back to their original purpose. And complaining that unions support Democrats – lets not over look the fact that there are just as many organizations on the right that support the Republicans. Why would unions want to support Republicans when it is obvious that it is a goal of the right to totally eleminate unions. Do you believe that workers should no longer have the right to protest wages, benefits and other issues as a group. Everyone knows that there is more power with a group than with one individual going to management with a grievance.

    • retiredspook89 July 5, 2011 / 2:13 pm

      Sunny, long time no see. What brought you out of the woodwork>

      • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 3:03 pm

        test test

      • Sunny July 5, 2011 / 3:34 pm

        Missed the banter??? Not sure why – but I am back.

      • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 4:13 pm

        a check from media matters/soros?

  2. neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 3:08 pm


    unions = socialism
    unions = protect drones
    unions = disrupt work
    unions = big corporations that rake in millions while paying no taxes.
    unions = corporations which screw members out of insurance, pensions, benefits.
    unions = corrupt mob led money machine for the democRAT party/Communist party usa.

  3. Sunny July 5, 2011 / 3:33 pm

    What is killing jobs in this country more than unions are tax loopholes and incentives to outsource jobs to foreign countries. US citizens are not willing to work for the kind of wages these large manufacturing companies pay to workers in these third world countries. Is that what we want to go back to – low wages, despicable working conditions, no benefits etc. Who here is willing to work under these conditiond? CEOs are making record salaries by outsourcing jobs to foreign countries, and we think that is good?

    • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 3:40 pm

      what a crock of leftist crap

      what do the union CEO’s make?
      why is there tax loopholes for unions ?
      describe your work history and tell about all these despicable work conditions and no benefits you have encountered.

      low wages? get another job?
      cant? then you deserve what you get.
      low education?
      low mental abilities?
      low training?
      low morale?
      low ambition?
      ALL = LOW WAGES…….get a life drone.

    • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 3:44 pm

      BS flag on the “tax loopholes”
      all BS
      yet you fail to mention that 48% of those living in the US pay NO federal taxes…yet sucK hundreds of BILLIONS in benefits while producing NOTHING on OPM

      spoken like a good lil useful idiot withe mao’s red book in hand.
      EEEEEEEvil corps…..

    • Mark Noonan July 5, 2011 / 9:14 pm


      But it is the unions which support the Democrats/liberals/socialists who enact the policies which encourage the migration of our wealth overseas. Don’t you get it? Its why I often refer to “Ruling Class” – a collection of people, working from different positions and often with different interests, but which all have in common one thing: no particular concern for what happens to the United States of America and its people.

      Think of it like this – it is absurd to think that a hammer or a pair of shoes can actually be made so cheaply in China that after shipping it all the way across the Pacific it is still cheaper than something made in the United States by workers who are ten times more productive than Chinese workers. But, it happens – why? Because of absurd OSHA, EPA, EEOC regulations. Because of “tax the rich” policies which actually don’t tax the rich but punish the upper middle class. Because of liberal NIMBYism which prohibits the building of factories, the opening of mines and the plowing of fields. All of this is courtesy of liberalism and the Democrat party – and all of it is made possible with the active support of unions for the Democrats.

      If unions want to help workers then they need to ditch the Democrats. They need to start thinking in terms of insisting upon strong economic growth – and not tie themselves to either party but ensure that both parties have to actively bid for union support.

  4. Cluster July 5, 2011 / 3:43 pm

    Report: Obama’s Stimulus Disaster — Each Job Costs $278K

    “Those shovel ready jobs were not as shovel ready as we thought” – Obama

    Barry is doing a heckuva job!!

    • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 3:46 pm

      “tax loophole” new mantra from the DNC playbook.
      funny though the corporate jet “loophole” was given to us by piglowsey and 0chimpy in the stimulus package.

      amnesia? or deception?

      • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 5:09 pm


        It also has funded infrastructure improvements and factory construction, as well as investments in education

        AKA teachers unions and GE
        got it….DNC BS alert.

      • tiredoflibbs July 7, 2011 / 6:40 am

        Sorry, Montrose, but the CBO confirms the high cost of jobs. It puts the jobs’ cost at $228K each.

        Plus, WashPo is a liberal rag (using your pathetic argument against sources).

        You need a new talking point.

        Try again, drone.

  5. Amazona July 5, 2011 / 3:51 pm

    And yet more of the shrill hysteria of “despicable working conditions” etc.

    Yes, unions once had a place in the American workplace. And yes, perhaps one day they will again. But the unions created the anti-union backlash, with their corruption, with their thuggery, with their interference in politics, with their general abuse of the powers they assumed to be theirs.

    People are not reacting to the good things unions helped bring about. They are responding to the abuses. What do better working conditions have to do with paying union members to be bused into political rallies to bully participants? What do they have to do with union bosses, who are openly Communist in their political beliefs (“Workers of the world, unite!”) writing legislation?

    The only people responsible for the image of unions today are the unions.

    Quit whining and clean up your own messes and then come back with a solution to the existing union problems, instead of just complaining about the fact that people are fed up with the bullying, greed and abuses of today’s unions.

  6. Cluster July 5, 2011 / 4:53 pm

    This is from Monty’s link:

    “This study is based on partial information and false analysis. The Recovery Act was more than a measure to create and save jobs; it was also an investment in American infrastructure, education and industries that are critical to America’s long-term success and an investment in the economic future of America’s working families. Thanks to the Recovery Act, 110 million working families received a tax cut through the Making Work Pay tax credit, over 110,000 small businesses received critical access to capital through $27 billion in small business loans and more than 75,000 projects were started nationwide to improve our infrastructure, jump-start emerging industries and spur local economic development.”

    Sounds lie a lot of spin to me. Fact is Monty, the stimulus was a HUGE failure. It really only served to stimulate the debt, and energize the opposition to Obama

    • MontyBurns July 5, 2011 / 5:09 pm

      Somebody who, independent of facts, declares the stimulus to be a HUGE failure regards factual correction of his talking point as spin. I’m shocked–shocked, I say!

      • Amazona July 5, 2011 / 6:21 pm

        How about some specifics on those claims, “Monty”?

        Did that “tax credit” actually mean lower taxes or just lower payroll taxes?

        How about those “small business loans”? Through what programs? Would they have been made anyway through existing programs? If the SBA, for example, would have made these loans anyway, how can you honestly claim they were made due to Obama policies?

        How does this claim tie in with the fact that the SBA moratorium on initiation fees expired on January 1, adding significantly to the cost of getting such a loan? How does THAT contribute to increased credit for small businesses? It appears to me that the refusal to extend this fee waiver is in direct contradiction to the claim of assisting small business development.

        75,000 projects were started nationwide to improve our infrastructure, jump-start emerging industries and spur local economic development.”

        Really? And how many of these ‘projects’ were the direct result of the so-called “stimulus”? How many similar projects were started in 1005? 2006? 2007? 2008? 2009?

        What specific programs or financial allotments were to “jump-start emerging industries”? Which “emerging industries”? What IS an “emerging industry”? Is it a new industry, such as electric cars? Or some other “industry” that is more of a reflection on political agenda than a marketplace demand?

        We’ve never seen an audit of the billions set aside for the so-called “stimulus” package. We have never seen anything but vague, unsupported claims of where the money went, who got it, and whether it added to or merely replaced what would have been spent anyway from other sources.

        The “stimulus” package was PRESENTED as “ investment in American infrastructure, education and industries that are critical to America’s long-term success and an investment in the economic future of America’s working families…” And now we are told that this is exactly what it did.

        Yet, oddly enough, “American infrastructure” and “America’s working families” did just fine, thank you very much, with less government meddling, when they were allowed to proceed according to market demand and sound economic policies. Lefty policies derailed them, and it is foolish to think that more Lefty policies will fix them. On the contrary, Lefty economic policies have NEVER increased economic prosperity or national economic growth.

      • Amazona July 5, 2011 / 6:25 pm

        And, “Monty”, I think the discussion would move forward more smoothly if you would stop trying to define “biased opinion” as “factual correction”. You seem pretty gullible if you truly do accept the litany of opinion and wishful thinking as “factual correction”.

      • Amazona July 5, 2011 / 6:27 pm

        Before dolf jumps on it, let me assure you that I did not intend to ask about what projects were started in 1005. Just another case of those lightning fingers, flying like quicksilver over the keys…..

      • Cluster July 5, 2011 / 7:03 pm

        You (Monty) seem pretty gullible – Amazona

        Ya think? Anyone who has half heartedly followed this debacle of an administration can attest to the fact that the stimulus, stimulated nothing, with the exception of union bank accounts. Of course, you would first half to believe that the government creates sustainable jobs in order to believe that the stimulus did anything. I think the temporary census jobs were probably the most employment the stimulus created.

      • MontyBurns July 5, 2011 / 7:15 pm

        Being called “gullible” by people who mindlessly parrot talking points from the Weekly Standard certainly is amusing. But you have your talking points, and you have made it quite clear that you will stick with them no matter what.

      • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 7:24 pm


        “talking points” ????
        TALK about “talking points” funny stuff.

      • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 7:27 pm

        montypython is dat you?

      • neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 7:34 pm

        Thaddeus McCotter explains ‘how to speak Democrat’
        Thomas Lifson

        Maybe his fundraising base is not to be compared to Mitt Romney, and maybe he has never held an executive office, but Thaddeus McCotter has certain talents that commend him as a member of the GOP 2012 field. Alinsky taught President Obama and the rest of us that ridicule is a powerful political weapon. In that spirit, check out Rep. McCotter on “how to speak Democrat”

      • Amazona July 6, 2011 / 11:37 am

        Did anyone see Monty answer any of my questions?

        Neither did I.

        Clearly irony is not well understood on the far left fringes of the Far Left. I pointed out to Monty that he was merely quoting OPINION without the slightest shred of proof to back it up, and his response was to offer more opinion without the slightest shred of proof to back it up.

        He did attack the messenger, as if ascribing information to the Weekly Standard qualifies as rebuttal. But still, not even a hint of evidence, fact, or anything but typical Lefty cluelessness.

        But remember, to the Loony Left, disagreement IS “debunking”—no facts required.

      • MontyBurns July 6, 2011 / 1:15 pm

        The talking point you mouth did come from the Weekly Standard, Amazona. Are you claiming that it didn’t?

        And it’s rather humorous that you are attacking me over “providing opinion without the slightest bit of proof to back it up” when that’s all you’ve done here (and, of course, you got your opinion given to you by the Weekly Standard–there’s that conservative independent thought!).

        And evidence of the successes of the stimulus have been presented to you many times (look, here’s one such story from five days ago!); you simply refuse to accept it because the right-wing talking point was “the stimulus is a failure!” before the stimulus even happened, and you certainly haven’t changed that talking point now, have you?

        You seem to be unable to differentiate between right-wing talking points and objective reality. Is this an intentional inability on your part?

  7. neocon1 July 5, 2011 / 8:33 pm

    meanwhile back at the al-hussein RAUNCH

    No recession for 454 White House aides: They’ll make $37,121,463 this year…

    and the 0bamanation army continues…………

    Mob in Peoria shoots fireworks at police, firefighters…

    MAYHEM IN MOBILE: 300+ fight on street corner, man shot in face…

    13 stabbed, shot in Boston in just 5 hours…

    CHICAGOLAND: 5 Dead, 23 Hurt Over Violent Holiday Weekend…


    4-Year-Old Boy Shot While Watching Baltimore Fireworks…

    2 Shot During Massive Brawl Outside Atlantic City Casino…

    Dozens of teens loot store, then attack passersby…


Comments are closed.