Before the ink was dry, Delaware Talk Radio struck up the conversation over making Delaware a Right To Work State. Several callers responded, and here are the pros and cons.

“Right to work” means “right to work” with less money…..

Right to work states have simply come to the conclusion…. ” Hey, if we drop the price of our labor, then businesses will come to our state.”

Texas did, and bragged it grew the most jobs over the past couple of recession years… It did away with benefits, it did away with pension, it did away with high wages, and it allowed cheap cross border labor to work for companies and lower their labor obligations…..

Now, Texas is having to adjust to the new growth. It has to build roads, sewers, parks, schools, and do it on the same income… Because even though Texas has more people working, the net amount of all their earnings, still amounts to what it had earlier, when people made more….

In perspective … paying 10 people at $30 an hours gives up the same amount of tax revenue as paying 100 people $3.00 an hour…. You get 290 people’s worth of extra expenses and no new money to pay for them….

Businesses benefit, but you get none of their profits. You gave those away as no-tax incentives to get the jobs….

Texas is facing hard times.

Simply put… when you go to “Right To Work” as your state policy, all you are simply doing is transferring the fixed cost of social responsibility away from private practices who can afford it, over to government who can’t…

Recently it was brought again to our attention that of the health-care costs upcoming in Obama-care, $2 billion will go to covering Wal*mart employees. One of the largest companies in the world, is going all part time so they will not pay a single penny in employee insurance, and throwing all those workers onto Medicaid, so their costs will be picked up entirely by the Federal government.

They are making money and keeping it, while the Federal government is paying their costs.

Can Delaware afford this?

Michigan is a laboratory experiment. The success or failure will be decided in the next election. There are so many variables in whether this law makes a difference.

Right now, talks are being held to make the port of Wilmington non union. It is part of the deal to bring in a corporate buyer for the port. If we go non-union, then labor costs for the buyer are lower. It helps their decision to come here as opposed to going someplace else where others are paying more…..

But, it lowers the economy of Wilmington. Those lost revenues not being paid to those workers, do not flow into Wilmington and do not circulate from business to business.. Taxes are not collected of each of those transactions. Wilmington loses big.

Now if taxes are increased upon the buyer, to compensate for the lost revenue siphoned off the workers, then for the city and it’s economy, the deal is revenue neutral…. Those taxes balance the lost wages….

Having a bustling port is meaningless if Wilmington is not gaining from it…. It is like selling a billion hamburgers at cost… an awful lot of work for no gain…

I use this example to show why keeping unions around to bargain higher rates, is beneficial to communities. Making an entire state drop its entire state’s personal income level, can only slow down the economy.

If a person makes $35,000 and can just barely make ends meet, wouldn’t it make sense to pay them $70,000, taking that out of corporate costs, thereby giving each person $35,000 a year to spend on goods and services pumping money directly into the economy?

If we doubled every working Delawarean’s income, we’d see a burst of economic activity amounting to $10.8 billion dollars.

The opposite occurs when you cut everyone’s pay in half….

That is what a right to work state does. Just look at Texas….. 😦