Employees In Right-to-Work States Are Richer

When adjusting for the cost of living, workers in right-to-work states have 4.1 percent higher incomes

Scores of right-to-work critics ranging from politicians to economists have cited lower per-capita incomes in right-to-work states as why the new law is not good for Michigan.

However, not factoring in cost-of-living exposes a flaw in that analysis, said Mackinac Center for Public Policy Fiscal Analyst James Hohman. Once that is considered, Hohman said the per-capita income is higher in right-to-work states than non-right-to-work states.

For example, Texas per-capita income was $37,098 but would have a purchasing power of $49,700 in the state of New York in 2007, according to Hohman’s analysis. New York’s per-capita income was $47,852.

Hohman found that in terms of Michigan dollars in 2000, right-to-work states had 4.1 percent higher per-capita personal incomes than non-right-to-work states when factoring in cost of living. Michigan was considered a non-right-to-work state because the law was passed in late December 2012. Hohman said the right-work-states didn’t surpass non-right-to-work states until 2003.

Stay Engaged

Receive our weekly emails!

“One of the most basic arguments repeated time and time again by right-to-work opposition is that Michigan is going to lose income by passing this law,” Hohman said. “That just isn’t the case. When you adjust for what a dollar can get you, the difference reverses itself."

Hohman used the cost of living index done by political scientists William Berry, Richard Fording and Russell Hanson. They adjusted for cost-of-living in every state from 1960 to 2007.

The idea is that costs vary state to state. For instance, gas on Friday in Connecticut was $3.66 per gallon compared to $3.37 in Michigan. Connecticut’s gas tax is 6.1 cents higher than Michigan’s and Connecticut’s sale tax is .35 percent higher than Michigan’s. Prices on items like milk, eggs, peanut butter, Tylenol, detergent, diapers and other goods are also higher.

~~~~~

See also:

Facts On Right to Work vs. Forced Unionization States

Republican Senators Against Right-to-Work

Republican House Members Against Right-to-Work

Right-to-Work Law Would Help Ensure Government Unions Could Not Elect Their Own Bosses

Union Right-to-Work Protest Turns Violent

Union Leaders: 'There Is Going To Be Retribution'


Related Articles:

Right-to-Work States Have Faster Income Growth

Americans are Moving to Right-to-Work States

Vernuccio Testifies on Right-to-Work in West Virginia

Mackinac Research Cited by Wall Street Journal

West Virginia House Vote Could Tip National Scale on Right-to-Work

As Right-to-Work Expands, So Do Union Membership Rolls

Stay Engaged

Simply enter your email below to receive our weekly email:

Facebook
Twitter

There aren’t many policies that get near unanimous support from economists, but free trade is one of them. Despite this, a central theme of the 2016 presidential campaign, heard from both political parties, was that free trade was somehow harmful to the United States and corrective action was needed. Mark Perry, an economics professor at the University of Michigan-Flint and scholar with the American Enterprise Institute, makes the case for why President Trump’s assessment of free trade is misguided.

Related Sites