By Darrell Minor, Columbus State Community College
According to 2009 data, the GDP per capita for worker-friendly states
collectively was $43,899, while the GDP per capita for the RTW states
was $38,755 or 13.3 percent lower. It is worth emphasizing that GDP
represents goods and services produced, and is not the same as per
capita income. Thus, the initial analysis of this measure indicates that
the worker-friendly states appear to be significantly “more productive”
than the RTW states.
Poverty rates: Obviously a state with a high
standard of living would be expected to have fewer residents living in
poverty. Using U.S. Census income data, and applying it to the two
groups of states, we find again that RTW states have a lower standard of
living. Eleven of the 15 states with the highest poverty rates are RTW
states, while nine of the 11 states with the lowest are worker-friendly.
Furthermore, the percentage of the 2008 population living in poverty in
RTW states was 14.4 percent, while the percentage in worker-friendly
states was 12.4 percent. To put this difference in perspective, if the
rate of poverty in RTW states was extended across the nation, an
additional 3,670,000 American men, women, and children would be living
in poverty today.
Health insurance: One would expect that a state with
a high standard of living would have more of its citizens covered by
basic health insurance, giving them access to preventive care and swift
medical treatment. And, once again, the Census data show that the
worker-friendly states have a higher standard of living. Fully 11 of the
13 states with the lowest uninsured rates are worker-friendly states,
while 11 of the 15 states with the highest uninsured rates are RTW
states. The median uninsured rate for worker-friendly states is 12.6
percent, while for RTW it is 15.7 percent. Again, to put this in
perspective, if the rates of non-insured citizens in RTW states were
spread across the country, then an additional 8,640,480 Americans would
be uninsured and suffer a lack of access to affordable health care.
Life expectancy: While there may seem to be little
reason for a correlation to exist between RTW laws and the life
expectancy of citizens in those states, life expectancy data from the
Harvard School of Public Health was included here because it is a very
common measure of standard of living. And, as it turns out, the data
reveal a surprising trend. Of the 13 states with the highest life
expectancy rates, 10 are worker-friendly states. Conversely, of the 12
states with the lowest life-expectancy rates, only two are
worker-friendly states. In worker-friendly states, citizens can expect
to live 77.6 years (the median), while citizens in RTW states can expect
to die at 76.7.
http://neatoday.org/2012/08/14/right-to-work-laws-increase-poverty-decrease-productivity/
No comments:
Post a Comment