According to the Governor's FY2013 recommended budget, our expected Revenue for FY2013 is around $3.5 Billion, the spending in the budget amounts to around $7 Billion(both numbers are rounded, and the revenue amount is estimated by the Governor of Rhode Island's staff).
Raising taxes in one of the most harshly taxed states is not an option, as a matter of fact tax reductions will be needed (and will be discussed in later steps). The best way to raise revenue (and as a side effect, reduce unemployment) is to attract businesses to Rhode Island.
While other means of doing this will be discussed,, the easiest and most beneficial is listed as my "Step 1".
A "right-to-work" law is a statute that prohibits union security agreements, or agreements between labor unions and employers that govern the extent to which an established union can require employees' membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring.
This would mean, no more "closed shops". It also means that both the employer and employee would have more flexibility.
Research by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (Part of the Department of Commerce) shows that Right to Work states out preform "Compulsory Unionization" states in these categories from 1990 to 2010.
• Employment growth of 25.9 percent for right-to-work states vs. 7.9 percent for all other states
• Per capita income growth of 117.8 percent vs. 104.3 perecent
• Population growth of 29 percent vs. 23.6 perecent
• Manufacturing employment growth of 84.0 percent vs.19.4 percent
• Manufacturing wage per worker growth of 108.7 percent vs. 96.1 percent
As illustrated in a January 20th Article by Susan G. Arledge in the economist section of D Magazine.
Source data can be found here.
Unions, of course, are against this. They want to maintain their lock on labor, especially in states like Rhode Island where they enjoy considerable power. They have been known to call Right to Work States, "Right to work for less States" or "Right to Fire States". As you can see, the data doesn't support their view.
Businesses move to Right to Work states because they enjoy more flexibility and aren't held hostage by Labor Cabals. The wages are set based on the Free Market and not artificially.
Meaning, they place the wage at a point where they are able to get the necessary workers needed. If their compensation in both pay and benefits are not high enough, the quality and quantity of labor needed for production will suffer.
This is as opposed to wages set artificially, meaning because a Labor Union is able to hold these businesses hostage by threat of strike, they are able to exact wages and benefits that the business can't afford at risk of losing all production by a striking Union.
If you were wondering why it is cheaper for US Companies to produce items overseas then have them shipped half way around the world just to sell them here. This is partly why.
This is, mostly likely, one of the hardest parts of the plan to implement simply because of the aforementioned power of Unionized Labor within our state.
Raising taxes in one of the most harshly taxed states is not an option, as a matter of fact tax reductions will be needed (and will be discussed in later steps). The best way to raise revenue (and as a side effect, reduce unemployment) is to attract businesses to Rhode Island.
While other means of doing this will be discussed,, the easiest and most beneficial is listed as my "Step 1".
A "right-to-work" law is a statute that prohibits union security agreements, or agreements between labor unions and employers that govern the extent to which an established union can require employees' membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring.
This would mean, no more "closed shops". It also means that both the employer and employee would have more flexibility.
Research by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (Part of the Department of Commerce) shows that Right to Work states out preform "Compulsory Unionization" states in these categories from 1990 to 2010.
• Employment growth of 25.9 percent for right-to-work states vs. 7.9 percent for all other states
• Per capita income growth of 117.8 percent vs. 104.3 perecent
• Population growth of 29 percent vs. 23.6 perecent
• Manufacturing employment growth of 84.0 percent vs.19.4 percent
• Manufacturing wage per worker growth of 108.7 percent vs. 96.1 percent
As illustrated in a January 20th Article by Susan G. Arledge in the economist section of D Magazine.
Source data can be found here.
Unions, of course, are against this. They want to maintain their lock on labor, especially in states like Rhode Island where they enjoy considerable power. They have been known to call Right to Work States, "Right to work for less States" or "Right to Fire States". As you can see, the data doesn't support their view.
Businesses move to Right to Work states because they enjoy more flexibility and aren't held hostage by Labor Cabals. The wages are set based on the Free Market and not artificially.
Meaning, they place the wage at a point where they are able to get the necessary workers needed. If their compensation in both pay and benefits are not high enough, the quality and quantity of labor needed for production will suffer.
This is as opposed to wages set artificially, meaning because a Labor Union is able to hold these businesses hostage by threat of strike, they are able to exact wages and benefits that the business can't afford at risk of losing all production by a striking Union.
If you were wondering why it is cheaper for US Companies to produce items overseas then have them shipped half way around the world just to sell them here. This is partly why.
This is, mostly likely, one of the hardest parts of the plan to implement simply because of the aforementioned power of Unionized Labor within our state.
No comments:
Post a Comment