William Thien

An Observation on “Right-To-Work” Legislation

Posted on: February 24, 2015

The debate to legislate right-to-work is currently heating up in my state legislature. Right-to-work legislation basically says that you don’t have to be a member of a union to work in a certain location whereas previously, certain shops and factories required union membership.

Yesterday, while listening to local talk radio the pundit mentioned that the reason industry took their production overseas, the reason they “outsourced” their production overseas in the last twenty years was because unions here in The US were negotiating unfair wage rates for their employees. That is not quite correct.

The reason industry sent production overseas is due to the fact that when The Berlin Wall came down and The Soviet Union fell, suddenly there were six billion people willing to work for pennies on the dollar when before industry within The United States and most of the west was not allowed to work with those countries where labor was dirt cheap because they were communist bloc.

Industry in the US then realized that it could make massive profits by basically taking a relative elimination of the cost of labor by outsourcing and so industry flocked en masse to countries like China and many others where labor was cheap, when before industry could not utilize those sources of labor. Much of this also has to do with former President Clinton and the legislature at the time awarding China “MFN,” or Most Favored Nation Trading Status.

Companies blamed the unions for their decision to outsource because companies that outsourced knew such a move would not be well accepted by the public. Unions were a convenient scapegoat.

So, I just wanted to clarify the point that industry left The United States and went overseas to find labor so cheap that it seemed to almost zero out the cost of labor from the production equation, not because all labor unions were requiring unfair wages. Wages may have been high when unions were strongest, but now that The US has gutted industrial production on its own soil, it’s hard to find something that many can afford on their non-union wages that is made in America.

The talk show host then made the remark that Right-To-Work makes setting up shop in this state more attractive to producers who reside in other parts of the country, which may be true. But it raises the question, is it more important to gut labor’s ability to earn a living merely to attract a couple of factories or it is more important to make sure people can earn a living wage?

As a conservative, I must admit, my fundamental nature is to favor “right-to-work.”

But it’s not cheap to live here. They lie to us about inflation, which has been substantial over the last decade, and they’ve already done a pretty good job of getting rid of the working stiff in America by outsourcing. Who is next?

Copyright © William Thien 2105

Sign up to receive updates. It’s easy and safe Just go to the upper right hand corner of this page and add your email address. We will never give your email address to anyone.

And don’t forget to add your comments!

 

Advertisements

3 Responses to "An Observation on “Right-To-Work” Legislation"

Well, that about explains it, but now the damage is done. I mean, is it possible to get the corporate elite class to re-accept a U.S. protectionist economy and to make its profit in which it and its competition is paying wages three or four times higher than they are now, adjusted for inflation, in this globalist pennies-on-the-dollar age?
Fat chance; we’re now competiing with laborers in Beijing and Singapore and it ain’t pretty.

The only solution I see to that, particularly now that machinery is replacing the worker, is to remove the benefits given to women having children out-of-wedlock (last year 50 percent of children were born to single mothers and it has been close to 40 percent for the last decade) and remove the dependent child deduction and curb population growth. Otherwise, what you will have is too many people for too few jobs, jobs of any kind as the world becomes more and more automated. Then, you will have to have socialism or worse, communism and it will be enforced as it always had been in The United States, through the tax code.

Thank Bill Clinton for pushing this on the national and international scale. but that certainly doesn’t mean that one candidate, for God’s sake, is some sort of answer.
It’s scary but we’re screwed by both parties and supremely so; it’s basically a question of how do you want to go: lethal injection or the gas chamber? What a choice!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Find by month

Find by date

February 2015
M T W T F S S
« Jan   Mar »
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
232425262728  
Follow William Thien on WordPress.com
%d bloggers like this: