NewsHounds
We watch Fox so you don't have to!
  • Home
  • About
  • Archives
  • Forum
  • Blogroll
  • Donate
  • Shop
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
Home →

Fox News’ Love Fest For Wisconsin’s Anti-Union Bill

Posted by Ellen -7841.60pc on March 09, 2015 · Flag

RightToWork.png

Fox News loves Wisconsin’s “right-to-work” bill so much, they were blind to some of the facts about it.

In introducing the subject, Fox host Brenda Buttner, “just asked,” about the bill, “Unions hate it but should workers everywhere really love it?”

Panelist John Layfield thought so. He said right-to-work states, have a “percentage point lower unemployment.” He also claimed that a 2012 editorial in the Wall Street Journal found that compensation in right-to-work states had gone up four times more than states that were not right-to-work.

Emily Tisch Sussman, of the Center for American Progress and the lone liberal on the five-person panel (plus Buttner), disagreed. “The decline in unions has led to a decline in wages,” she said.

Buttner jumped in to “ask” panelist Gary B. Smith, “The numbers really do tell a different story, don’t they?”

Smith, predictably, piled on the right-to-work love. “In almost every metric you look at, right to work states are outperforming non-right to work states,” Smith said. “If you’re looking at employment rates, they’re growing much faster than in states that don’t have right to work. Per capita income, once you adjust for cost of living, it’s much higher. …Across the board, incomes are up, employment is up, what more could you want from a law? This is benefitting workers across the board. I think eventually every state will have right to work because it makes economic sense.”

But according to the Economic Policy Institute, the quality of life is worse in right-to-work states. The EPI notes that in a Politico ranking of the states on that score, four of the best states to live in are non-right-to-work states (as of January 2014) and eight out of the 10 lowest are right-to-work states.

Not surprisingly, “fair and balanced” Buttner never mentioned it.

Watch it below, from the March 7 Bulls & Bears.

Follow @NewsHounds

Follow @NewsHoundEllen


Do you like this post?
Tweet

Showing 5 reactions



    Review the site rules
Joseph West commented 2015-03-09 14:58:05 -0400 · Flag
@ Richard: Yeah. Have you ever noticed that FoxNoise doesn’t seem so interested in FULL-TIME employment numbers (unless they can use the lack of such to attack Obama)? I mean, that largely means there are decent benefits—maybe not great, but the Fed does protect “full-time” workers by covering them under overtime pay laws and FMLA laws. Again, not really much in the way of paid sick leave or paid vacations but knowing that your boss has to pay you for overtime work or allowing you to keep your job because you need to take time to care for a sick child or a sick parent because you’re counted as “full-time” is a pretty sweet deal.

BUT, when you look at overall employment statistics, there’s not really a breakdown in “full-time” versus “part-time” nor anything about “one-job worker” versus “two-job workers.” And those “income” stats shown in the still shot, I strongly suspect the income in the right-to-work states requires both spouses working to achieve the income. Also, “per capita” is extremely misleading. The “income” of a multi-millionaire is offset by the minimum wage workers’ incomes. You get someone like Sheldon Adelson or the Koch Brothers………well, let’s just say Adelson’s annual “income” is “just” half-a-millon. To average his income down to make the “per capita” income just, let’s say, $40,000, and let’s say the annual income for a 40-hour-a-week minimum-wage earner (at $10/hour min wage) comes to about $20,000, so you need TWENTY-THREE of those minimum wage workers (at $20K) to offset Adelson’s half-a-million.

And how much you want to bet that a lot of those right-to-work states just happen to have a whole bunch of millionaires and billionaires who can skew those per-capita incomes?
Erich Pomfret commented 2015-03-09 11:12:39 -0400 · Flag
Yes, indeedee, they love those low wage, non benefit billionaire-supporting jobs, until the employment numbers suggest Obama has reduced unemployment. Then, those jobs become meaningless crap.
Richard Santalone commented 2015-03-09 10:45:48 -0400 · Flag
@ truman AMEN TO THAT! Because in the world of Faux Spews and their reich-wing viewers, A JOB IS A JOB, no matter what it pays in wages and benefits.
truman commented 2015-03-09 10:37:58 -0400 · Flag
Minimum wage McJobs with no health benefits. All to swell the bank accounts of billionaires like the Kock Brothers. That’s the vision of the Fux Nation.
NewsHounds posted about Fox News’ Love Fest For Wisconsin’s Anti-Union Bill on NewsHounds' Facebook page 2015-03-09 09:00:11 -0400
Just pay no attention to quality of life.








or sign in with Facebook, Twitter or email.
Follow @NewsHounds on Twitter
Subscribe with RSS


We’ve updated our Privacy Policy
Sign in with Facebook, Twitter or email.
Created with NationBuilder