One moment, I need to fetch my pearls so I have something to clutch.

@1 Blue collar workers typically can't afford pearls so you're not the target audience anyway. Go outside and play while the adults in the room discuss important matters.

I don't care what a job pays, if it's in Michigan, you can have it. The weather sucks!

The governor did not "admit" that right-to-work "isn't about improving the economy";

He said: “Over 90 percent of the jobs that you’re looking at aren’t going to be in a situation where right to work is even relevant,” - that is, lower wages in Michigan (and other right-to-work states) aren't due to right to work laws, because 1) you probably shouldn't compare wages where there aren't unions (such as professional jobs like lawyer/doctor/upper management); and 2) any measure about wages will be skewed if New York and California are on the other side of the balance. Concluding that Right-to-Work depresses wages because RTW states have lower wages than non RTW states is the height of uncritical thinking.

If you want to attack RTW laws on their merits, do it. But not with lazy infographics. It's a discredit to the party.

The markets care nothing for their failed ideology.

Right now it's shorting conservative austerity policies in the UK and in MI.

Time for them to grow up.

But guys! The Ludwig von Mises Institute says that: "Unions are a matter of pitting one group of workers against other workers; it is not a worker versus manager phenomenon. Successful unions are those which are able to exclude workers, and the unions most able to exclude workers are those composed of skilled workers. Skilled workers are more difficult to replace than unskilled workers and thus are better able to succeed in a strike. As Milton Friedman has stated, "unions don’t cause high wages, high wages cause unions".

So them unions probably forced the Governor's hand in the matter, just to give the little guy a fighting chance!