Utah has room to prove that it doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game.
(Leah Hogsten | The Salt Lake Tribune) The American Legislative Exchange Council will hold its Annual Meeting on July 28, 2021 at the Grand America Hotel in Salt Lake City.
A lovely older woman (well, about the same age as me) took the trouble to explain to me how astrology really works. It affects how life will be.
I explained that, due to the inverse square law of physics, the gravitational influence of the doctor or midwife who attends your birth is greater than any planet, far greater than any distant star or constellation.
“Oh hooey,” she replied. “I don’t believe in astronomy.”
It matters what you believe before you start thinking. Consider another example of an inverse relationship. It’s probably not as solid as Newtonian physics, but it’s certainly more solid than any astrological chart.
Utah’s political class likes to brag about how great the state’s economy is. Among the studies and reports that state leaders like to cite is the ALEC-Laffer State Economic Competitiveness Index, also known as “Rich States, Poor States.”
It is a tome published annually by the U.S. Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative group of state legislators Utah people are particularly active in, and a group of economists led by Arthur B. Laffer. The brains behind the tax cut experiment that put Kansas out of business years ago.
That rating is more or less based on what the state is doing to keep the rich from the poor. The state has a low minimum wage, a low and decidedly regressive tax structure (imposing a greater tax burden on low-income households than on high-income households), and laws that disempower unions. ALEC rated.
On that scale, no spoilers. Utah ranks him first in economic prospects and second in economic performance, as it has been for the past seven years.
Now, let’s take a look at the relative economic health of the 50 states (52 if you include the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico) published on August 31 by Oxfam, a global organization concerned with poverty and inequality. Compare with another report on
Oxfam’s criteria, frankly called “Best and Worst States to Work in America,” produce a list of states much like the ALEC criteria, only upside down.
not a direct correlation. But there is a lot of overlap between ALEC’s best state and Oxfam’s worst state.
Topping the ALEC list didn’t make Utah the worst state on the Oxfam list. Only the 8th worst. This relationship is a little more direct in North Carolina. According to ALEC, Tarhir is her second best place to do business. Oxfam says it’s the worst place for workers.
Five states are included in both the 10 best places to do business and the 10 worst places to work. In addition to Utah and North Carolina, that list includes Texas, Oklahoma, and Idaho.
Oxfam’s ratings are based on the things that affect the people who are trying to live. For example, it specifically downgrades states with so-called “rights to work” laws, like Utah. A law that might be better described as the law of hunger rights and no wages and economic power.
Oxfam also blames states for low wages compared to local cost of living. For example, in Utah, the $7.25 minimum wage does not cover 20% of the cost of living here for a family of four. Oxfam says Utah is a bad place for workers. Because it doesn’t allow local governments to set their own higher minimum wages, doesn’t require paid sick leave or paid family leave, and doesn’t offer workplace protections to workers. domestic worker.
ALEC’s ratings are clearly centered around the trickle-down theory of economics (or, more precisely, myth). This is based on the idea that efforts to make the rich get richer and the poor poorer lead to economic advantage.
As I say, states that are good for business and states that are bad for workers and vice versa are not a direct correlation. But a state that boasts of the health of its economy is a paradise only for those who already have money and are very resentful of being forced to part with it for the purpose of supporting a decent life for others. Like a progressive income tax, it makes the burden of education and other public services rightfully borne.
Such correlation need not be a zero-sum game. It doesn’t have to be a choice between eating only the foods you hate to avoid dying of heart disease, or eating only the foods you like to avoid dying of boredom.
Utah doesn’t have to choose between economic policy versions of raw cauliflower and pure chocolate. With a much more progressive tax system, better funding for education, and more complete support for very affordable housing, it could be a nice, delicious apple.
George Pyle reading The New York Times at the Rose Establishment.
George Pyle, The opinion editor of the Salt Lake Tribune compared his plain hat to the Salt Lake City edition. Axios For drawing attention to the Oxfam report.
gpyle@sltrib.com
Twitter, @debatestate
