Your not knowing any of this explains a lot.
Senate GOP blocks bill that would promote less outsourcing
...The latest jobs bill from Senate Democrats - a plan to punish firms that ship jobs overseas - failed to clear a key procedural hurdle Tuesday after even some Democrats complained that the measure would hamper the ability of U.S. companies to compete in foreign markets... Four Democrats and Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.) voted with a united Republican caucus to block the bill...
Take a look at businesses moving from Union to RTW states and ask yourself "why".
A Brookings Institution study of large corporations’ location decisions, based in part on interviews with prominent corporate location consultants, found that right-to-work laws did not figure anywhere in the typical decision process of big businesses (Cohen 2000). Even small manufacturers—those thought most likely to base location decisions on low wages and the absence of unions—don’t identify right to work as an important criterion in deciding where to locate plants. Area Development magazine conducts an annual survey, asking primarily small manufacturers to rank the factors that most influence their decisions about where to locate facilities. In 2009, right to work was ranked 14th in importance, below such factors as highway accessibility, available land, and construction costs. Indeed, in the years for which Area Development reports data, right-to-work has never made it into the top 10 most important factors shaping location decisions (Gambale 2009, 2008).
In fact, Site Selection magazine reports that the best locations for the type of high-tech industries that are now a priority of most states’ recruitment efforts are predominantly found in free-bargaining states (Burns 2011). The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation’s 2010 State New Economy Index—measuring each state’s economic dynamism, technological innovation, digital transformation, knowledge jobs, and integration into global trade—ranked free-bargaining Massachuse s, Washington, Maryland, New Jersey, and Connecticut as the most desirable and best positioned locations for the globally competitive industries of the 21st century. Indeed, nine of the top 10 ranked states are free-bargaining states—states with strong education systems, world-class universities, robust digital infrastructure, and a skilled and stable workforce. Michigan ranked 17th, ahead of all but two of the 22 right-to-work states (Atkinson and Andes 2010).
Funny that decreased demand is an argument to kill unions but it's nowhere to be seen when discussing increasing taxes on the middle class and lower income workers. :roll:It decreases.
no, but there is a point at which it is no longer worth the cost to have a teacher for every 15 students vice a teacher for every 25. That point comes long after you realize that it is no longer worth the cost to have nearly as many administrators as teachers.
And sometimes they won't get it, either. That, after all, is the purpose of the N.I.C.E. and the Independent Panel Advisory Board; to decide when you are no longer "cost effective". Raise the cost of plastic surgery by 100,000,00% and see
But you are trying to make this about very specific services, when the subject was broad unionization. Take a look at businesses moving from Union to RTW states and ask yourself "why". It's not because they're evil. It's because they want to succeed, and a unionized workforce makes that harder.
It decreases.
no, but there is a point at which it is no longer worth the cost to have a teacher for every 15 students vice a teacher for every 25. That point comes long after you realize that it is no longer worth the cost to have nearly as many administrators as teachers.
And sometimes they won't get it, either. That, after all, is the purpose of the N.I.C.E. and the Independent Panel Advisory Board; to decide when you are no longer "cost effective". Raise the cost of plastic surgery by 100,000,00% and see
But you are trying to make this about very specific services, when the subject was broad unionization. Take a look at businesses moving from Union to RTW states and ask yourself "why".
It's not because they're evil. It's because they want to succeed, and a unionized workforce makes that harder.
It decreases.
Funny that decreased demand is an argument to kill unions but it's nowhere to be seen when discussing increasing taxes on the middle class and lower income workers. :roll:
Do you mean to say that if the upper class nabobs were to lower the prices they charge middle class teachers for everything from housing, to utilities, to healthcare, to food, that it would make high quality education more affordable since the teachers would not need to be paid as well in order to maintain a middle class standard of living?
But what do you do when the cost of housing, utilities, healthcare, and food is maximized by monolithic multinational corporations, who own the means of production for all of these essentials (in spite of anti-trust laws) for no other reason than to maximize profits?
What is evil is nonsense anti-union propaganda orchestrated to scare union workers into thinking RTW policy bears any weight whatsoever in where a business sets up shop.
Because any worker with any degree of intelligence or sense of self-preservation will voluntarily join the union because it serves his interests to do so. Having a union is always better than not having one, at least for the worker that is.
In order to contain salary costs, instead of attacking the teacher's union and other middle class union workers, try attacking the upper class real estate developers who set the cost of housing for middle class union workers according to their salary increases, artificially raising the cost of living for the middle class worker after every wage increase his union negotiates, and for no other reason than unabashed corporate greed.
Class size has only a minor connection to demand. Class size is related to how many students can you manage and still be effective.
No, that is actually not what N.I.C.E. is for.
...Cost Effectiveness
...As with any system financing health care, the NHS has a limited budget and a vast number of potential spending options. Choices must be made as to how this limited budget is spent. By comparing the cost effectiveness in terms of health quality gained for the money spent.[14] By choosing to spend the finite NHS budget upon those treatment options that provide the most efficient results, society can ensure it does not lose out on possible health gains through spending on inefficient treatments and neglecting those that are more efficient.
NICE attempts to assess the cost-effectiveness of potential expenditures within the NHS to assess whether or not they represent 'better value' for money than treatments that would be neglected if the expenditure took place. It assesses the cost effectiveness of new treatments by analysing the cost and benefit of the proposed treatment relative to the next best treatment that is currently in use.[15]
Quality Adjusted Life Years
NICE utililises the quality-adjusted life year (QALY) to measure the health benefits delivered by a given treatment regime. By comparing the present value (see discounting) of expected QALY flows with and without treatment, or relative to another treatment, the net/relative health benefit derived from such a treatment can be derived. When combined with the relative cost of treatment this information can be used to form an Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) to allow comparison of suggested expenditure against current resource use at the margin (the cost effectiveness threshold).[14]
As a guideline rule, NICE accepts as cost effective those interventions with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of less than £20,000 per QALY and that there should be increasingly strong reasons for accepting as cost effective interventions with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of over a threshold of £30,000 per QALY.[16]..
As for unions, it really has nothing to do with supply and demand. Need will be there either way. And where there is a need, someone will supply it, if only for those who can afford it.
It should be - unfortunately not so much. If teachers existed in a sector where individual bargaining and set-ups like that were possible, then it would be more likely to do so. Unfortunately, teachers are overwhelmingly unionized, and so those kinds of things (merit pay for the ability to manage larger classrooms, for example) are impossible.
But you are incorrect that it has no connection to demand. The supply of teachers demanded by a school district will be directly connected to their ability to afford them, which in turn will stem directly from their per-unit cost.
actually it is.
You know how you and others talk about the reduced costs of single-payer? Government rationing, baby
At higher prices, demand is decreased. Unions (so Haymarket brags) raise the price of labor, thus decreasing demand for it.
Try to get yourself hired as a tutor insisting upon $100,000 per hour, and see how much "need" there is for you.
It should be - unfortunately not so much. If teachers existed in a sector where individual bargaining and set-ups like that were possible, then it would be more likely to do so. Unfortunately, teachers are overwhelmingly unionized, and so those kinds of things (merit pay for the ability to manage larger classrooms, for example) are impossible.
You will notice that the private sector union membership has been on decline for over half a century now, and public sector union membership drops dramatically as soon as its' members are given the option.
Only five states do not allow collective bargaining for educators, effectively banning teachers unions. Those states and their SAT/ACT rankings are as follows:
South Carolina – 50th
North Carolina – 49th
Georgia – 48th
Texas – 47th
Virginia – 44th
Meanwhile ground zero of the union battle, Wisconsin, is ranked 2nd in the country.
Read more: The Five States Where Teachers Unions Are Illegal Have The Lowest Test Scores In America* - Business Insider
I'm still trying to find national numbers CP, but here are states that don't even have a union. Are they overwhelmingly unionized?
You describing this as "ending a tax break for outsourcing" explains a lot, too.
from your article:
Has there ever been a political party more dedicated to the notion that the secret to getting all those gold eggs is killing the goose?
What's your point, are you blaming the 4 conservative Democrats or the entire GOP party for blocking the bill to stop providing tax breaks for outsourcing?
Where are these golden goose eggs you see that you think the GOP should continue to provide tax breaks for outsourcing?
What is the point of punishing outsourcing if it hurts the economy more than it helps?
How is outsourcing more US jobs better for the economy and the working class in this country?
Only five states do not allow collective bargaining for educators, effectively banning teachers unions. Those states and their SAT/ACT rankings are as follows:
South Carolina – 50th
North Carolina – 49th
Georgia – 48th
Texas – 47th
Virginia – 44th
Meanwhile ground zero of the union battle, Wisconsin, is ranked 2nd in the country.
Read more: The Five States Where Teachers Unions Are Illegal Have The Lowest Test Scores In America* - Business Insider
...During the recent struggle over collective-bargaining rights in Wisconsin, a number of left-of-center observers, including New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, pointed out that students in unionized Wisconsin do better on average than students in non-unionized Texas. The obvious conclusion, or so we were led to believe, is that teachers’ unions lead to better education.
There is, however, a problem with this argument. Drawing on data from the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress, the political commentator David Burge pointed out that white students in Texas outperform white students in Wisconsin, black students in Texas outperform black students in Wisconsin, and Hispanic students in Texas outperform Hispanic students in Wisconsin. This may look like a statistical paradox; Wisconsin does better on average, even though all groups do worse in Wisconsin. But there is an explanation: Wisconsin has a considerably larger share of white students than Texas, and white students tend to fare better than black and Hispanic students. This example highlights the increasing importance of demographics to the American education debate...
How is outsourcing more US jobs better for the economy and the working class in this country?
Nothing exist in vacum. Sometimes the "cure" hurts more than doing nothing.
It allows us to maximize our competitive advantage while lowering our cost of living.
Well then tell us the benefits you see to outsourcing US jobs? We are waiting.
Not wanting to get fully into this but where was the device you are posting DP with manufactured? That would certainly be a benefit to you, yes? And consider if it was manufactured in the US, would you be able to afford it? Oh, and assuming since you DID purchase it are you not promoting this 'outsourcing' problem that you are against (hypocrisy anyone)? Just sayin'.
I see how that has helped the 1%, how has it helped the working class in this country, whose standard of living has decreased while those at the top get richer?
Of what good is lower costs to the jobless?
Does lower cost mean unemployment payments can be stretched further?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?