Right-to-work vs forced-union

I live in a forced-union state, & with my current employment I am compelled by state law to belong to a union, which to make matters worse is the corrupt SEIU, linked as they are with ACORN.  You may remember them being front & centre among the public-employee unions during the attempt to shut down Wisconsin.

The union problem surfaced nationally as a side-topic during the early Republican debates in South Carolina, due to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), packed with pro-union members by the Obama administration, issuing a decision that Boeing cannot build a plant in the right-to-work state, because it would hurt the union in Boeing's Washington state.

Now comes Arthur Laffer (of the Laffer curve [see also here]) & Stephen Moore to explain the case, with solid statistics about how right-to-work states fare much better than forced-union states.

As of today there are 22 right-to-work states and 28 union-shop states. Over the past decade (2000-09) the right-to-work states grew faster in nearly every respect than their union-shop counterparts: 54.6% versus 41.1% in gross state product, 53.3% versus 40.6% in personal income, 11.9% versus 6.1% in population, and 4.1% versus -0.6% in payrolls. . . .

Right-to-work states are also getting richer over time. Prof. Vedder found a 23% higher per capita income growth rate in right-to-work states than in forced-union states, which over the period 1977-2007 amounted to a $2,760 larger increase in per-person income in those states. That's a giant differential.

RTWT