Colorado Named a Top 5 State for Business

Republican cries that Colorado’s whole 8 percent union membership is destroying the business climate in Colorado have proven…well, that they probably need new talking points. As it turns out, businesses aren’t actually fleeing the state in order to escape the terrible Democrats and their labor union enablers. Colorado moved UP in the rankings this year.

From the Governor’s office:

Gov. Bill Ritter today praised a new report that names Colorado to CNBC’s prestigious annual list of America’s Top States for Business, which ranks Colorado No. 5 and specifically cites the state’s New Energy Economy.

CNBC analyzed 40 factors in 10 broad categories. Colorado’s highest rankings came in the categories of business friendliness (Colorado ranked 5th) and quality of life (Colorado ranked 7th).

The report said Colorado’s New Energy Economy was one of the biggest reasons the state climbed to No. 5 from No. 7 last year. “Colorado has been actively courting what it calls the New Energy Economy, like wind and solar, and the efforts are paying off.”

In all, Colorado scored among the top 15 states in six of the 10 categories, including overall economic climate, access to capital, workforce quality and state support for technology and innovation.

“This is great news for Colorado,” said Gov. Ritter, who was in Spain this week on a New Energy Economy economic-development mission. “It’s another positive sign that our aggressive efforts to build a New Energy Economy by attracting local, national and international companies and expanding our employment base are paying off. One thing that separates Colorado from other states is our unique combination of intellectual capital and entrepreneurial Western spirit. The CNBC recognition is an acknowledgement of that.”

Last month, the Milken Institute ranked Colorado No. 3 in the country for its strong technology sector, citing the state’s highly educated workforce and high percentage of scientists and engineers.

80 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. parsingreality says:

    Smart (mostly Democratic) leaders, smart business people, smart residents.  Dumb (mostly)Radical Republicans.

    But this proof won’t stop the ideology lobby.  What what the Wadman thinks an appropriate response is?  

    • Libertad says:

      85% of the Top 10 states have Right to Work, Amendment 47 would make that 90%!

      note: Colorado gets half credit because state employees have the protection of no union security clause (aka the Right to Work).

      Amendment 47 moves Colorado in with the best of the Top 10: TX, VA, UT, ID, NC, SD, GA, and IA.

      Come on unionists, blog the report and shout me down. There are a few tidbits of ammo for you in that report. Take off the Union hat, time for a lil assholes & elbows, show me some crack with a drop of sweat and I’ll credit you some seniority.

      • ClubTwitty says:

        After all, that’s where your hero Governor (Bill Owens) is from and the BEST PRESIDENT EVER…W

        • Libertad says:

          “Over the five years from 2002 to 2007, private-sector jobs in Right to Work states increased from 40.92 million to 44.85 million, or 9.6%. (Since Oklahoma was a Right to Work state for the entire period, this time it is included.) Meanwhile, jobs in forced-dues states increased by barely more than a third as much. Over this entire period, forced-dues states’ private-sector employment went from 67.27 million to 69.72 million, a gain of just 3.6%.”

          • bob ewegen says:

            From the U.S., Bureau of Labor Statistics:

            The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that an average worker in the 22 states with right-to-work laws earns about

            $7,131 a year less than workers in free bargaining states ($30,656 versus $37,787). Nationwide, union members earn $9,308 a year more than non-union workers, $41,652 versus $32,344.

                 Right-to-work states have a poverty rate of 13.5 percent, compared with 12.2 percent in free bargaining states. The infant mortality rate is 7.94 percent higher and the uninsured population rate is 15

            percent higher on average in right-to-work states. And they spend $1,680 less per pupil in elementary and secondary school.

               

            • Libertad says:

              CBNC report, Cost of Living:

              States ranking #1-10 are all Right to Work states.

              States ranking #40-50 are Forced Unionism States(CO #30).

              On Wages, I know those folks in NY, MI, OH, etc… have higher wages. Too bad unemployment is so high, tax regiemes so brutal and new job formation so tough.

              Hint: continue on the dead baby theories, there are a few nuts for the blind squirrel in the education and healthcare areas. Nothing a little social engineering on condom usage and abortion access won’t cure. I know those damn southern religious values are keeping the people stupid. Stated with a 😉

              • streetcleaner says:

                Ever seen the living standards of those cheaper states?  Not as good as those with higher costs of living.  Better living standards and higher costs of living almost always go hand in hand.

                Industrialized nations cost more to live in than rural, developing nations.  Same is true with our states.  Free bargaining states are generally more industrialized and thus have higher costs of living, but they have more unions and consequently higher pay.  

                True, there are exceptions, but usually lower pay equates with lower standards of living and vice versa.

                • Libertad says:

                  YES on 47 AFFIRMS THAT COLORADANS CAN’T BE FORCED TO JOIN A UNION.

                  Amendment 47 text from State website:

                  Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado:

                  SECTION 1. Article XVIII of the constitution of the state of Colorado is amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION to read:

                  Section 16. Right to work.

                  (1) THIS AMENDMENT SHALL BE KNOWN AND MAY BE CITED AS THE “COLORADO RIGHT TO WORK AMENDMENT”.

                  (2)(a) NO PERSON SHALL, AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT, BE REQUIRED TO:

                  (I) BE A MEMBER OF A LABOR UNION; AND

                  (II) PAY ANY DUES, FEES, ASSESSMENTS, OR OTHER CHARGES OF ANY KIND TO A LABOR UNION OR TO ANY CHARITY OR OTHER THIRD PARTY, IN LIEU OF SUCH PAYMENTS.

                  (2)(b) NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL PREVENT ANY PERSON FROM VOLUNTARILY BELONGING OR VOLUNTARILY PROVIDING FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO A LABOR UNION.

                  (3) ANY PERSON WHO DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY VIOLATES ANY PROVISION OF THIS SECTION COMMITS A MISDEMEANOR AND UPON CONVICTION THEREOF SHALL BE PUNISHED BY A FINE IN AN AMOUNT EQUIVALENT TO THE MOST STRINGENT MISDEMEANOR CLASSIFICATION PROVIDED BY LAW.

                  (4) THIS SECTION SHALL APPLY TO ALL UNION EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS ENTERED INTO AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION AND SHALL APPLY TO ANY RENEWAL OR EXTENSION OF ANY EXISTING UNION CONTRACT.

                  (5) AS USED IN THIS SECTION, “LABOR UNION” MEANS ANY ORGANIZATION OF ANY KIND, OR AGENCY OR EMPLOYEE REPRESENTATION COMMITTEE OR ORGANIZATION, THAT EXISTS FOR THE PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, OF DEALING WITH EMPLOYERS CONCERNING WAGES, RATES OF PAY, HOURS OF WORK, OTHER CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT, OR OTHER FORMS OF COMPENSATION; ANY ORGANIZATION THAT EXISTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING OR OF DEALING WITH EMPLOYERS CONCERNING GRIEVANCES; AND ANY ORGANIZATION PROVIDING OTHER MUTUAL AID OR PROTECTION IN CONNECTION WITH EMPLOYMENT.

                  SECTION 2. Effective date. This amendment shall take effect upon proclamation of the vote by the governor.

                  • Libertad says:

                    Mr. Ewegen,

                    I am sorry I forgot to properly use this quotes button on this post “U.A.W. = U Ain’t Workin”.  

                  • parsingreality says:

                    Your passion on A47is suspicously psychotic.  Why do you care so much?

                    Are you stuck in a union shop and can’t get out?

                    Or not at all?

                    Inquiring minds want to know.  

                    • Libertad says:

                      It is a choice issue.

                      Ones choice may be viewed as good, bad, or neutral depending on the perspective of the subjective commentor.

                      As an example: There maybe CP bloggers who feel your mother chose wrongly in choosing life for you when (illegal or not) she could have chose to abort you.

                      The contra positions of other CP bloggers are don’t care or support you mothers choice not to abort you.

                    • parsingreality says:

                      1. Is there any other issue out of many that you care about or have posted on?

                      2.  Have you ever been “forced” to join a union?

                      3.  Do you work in a business segment that has union membership?  If so, are you managment or a worker?  If so, do you own the business?

                      4.  Are you receiving payment or any other form of compensation for blogging on this ad nauseum?

                      Just trying to get a handle on why you are so mouth frothing on this issue…..

                    • Libertad says:

                      1. Yes employee free choice. Mark Udall supports the removal of the secret ballot to unionize. I may have commented on other things too, I will review.

                      2. Never worked in a union shop, but family members have and do.

                      note: I have been told not to come to work because a union was planning a strike and my employer felt it was safer if we stayed away. I worked alongside forced unionism workers from another company, they said they’d protect us, but the company I worked for shut down during the strike instead.

                      I do own a percentage of a group of businesses – not related to politics other then they pay taxes and operate under the various local, state and federal laws.

                      3. I am not in a labor relations or human resource function nor is my personal success based on the success of Amendment 47. I am not Ms. Kelly Harp either.

                      4. Absolutely not.

                      YES on Amendment 47 is the right choice for Colorado – thats my choice. You see it as the wrong choice, fair enough.

      • Arvadonian says:

        which begs the question, if things are so GREAT in Texas, why are there so many former Texans here in Colorado?

        • bob ewegen says:

          Let’s make it like Pinochet’s Chile and other Libertad fantasies where workers are little more than slaves at the disposal of a handful of billionaires?  

          • Libertad says:

            A couple of weeks ago, Will Collins blasted Denver Post deputy editor Bob Ewegen for his misleading column denying the economic boom underway in Right to Work states. This weekend, Ewegen once again spouted the talking points of compulsory unionism:

            Despite the label, “Right to Work” laws don’t guarantee anybody a job – unless you’re a lawyer. Unions have filed a lawsuit alleging widespread fraud by the petition gatherers hired by the anti-union forces. The challenge could knock the initiative off the ballot, though sponsors have asked for the right to seek extra signatures to “cure” those defects.

            Big Labor and its media stooges love setting up a tired false dichotomy about Right to Work. The Right to Work principle is not at all “anti-union.” The Right to Work principle makes no judgment on whether workers should join/support a union for whatever reason. That is a decision best left up to the individual. The Right to Work principle is therefore anti-compulsory unionism and pro-freedom of choice.

            Whether he knows it or not, Ewegan actually ends up highlighting an injustice flowing from forced unionism later in his column:

            Amendment 27, the 2002 Colorado campaign finance law written by Common Cause and the League of Women Voters, allows labor unions to contribute up to $4,000 to candidates to the legislature. Businesses and private citizens are limited to one-tenth as much as unions can contribute, no more than $400 per election season.

            That’s because Amendment 27 allows “small donor committees” to give politicians 10 times as much as any other person or group if they get only $50 or less per contributor. Unions are well positioned to exploit that loophole because, for example, the Colorado Association of Public Employees/Service Employees International Union, can deduct $4 a month from a member’s $15 monthly dues for political purposes and count the resulting $48 a year as a “small donor” contribution from a member who may not even be aware that she made that particular “donation.”

            Let’s sum up: Colorado law (1) limits the amount of money an individual person can choose to donate to a political campaign and (2) refuses individual employees the right to decide whether they want a union’s “representation.”

            But when it comes to unions, Colorado law (1) allows unions to donate up to ten times as much as individuals to political campaigns and (2) grants union officials the government-backed coercive power to seize dues from individuals and divert them into the union’s political agenda.

            Ewegen also laments that Right to Work does not guarantee employment. That’s true, and Right to Work doesn’t guarantee rainbows or sunshine either, although it is worth pointing out that Right to Work laws certainly do help create jobs (http://nilrr.org/node/77).

            Next time, instead of shilling for Big Labor and complaining about Right to Work laws’ lack of mystical powers, Ewegen should acknowledge the fact that compulsory unionism guarantees special privileges for Big Labor at the expense of individuals’ freedom of association.

            • Oliver says:

              and why should I care what he thinks?  

              Bob Someguyiliketoquote says:  

              Libertad is a damn fool

              • Danny the Red (hair) says:

                Libertad ment Phil Collins

                former drummer for genesis and solo hit maker.

                Now working for the independence institute as a labor policy advisor.

                But seriously perhaps it is a sock puppet quating his real identity: now that would be surreal. Or is that post modern?

                • ClubTwitty says:

                  deconstructing his real identity to be post-modern

                • Libertad says:

                  The post was from Nick Cote. I thought it was relevant to Mr. Ewegen’s position.

                  Anyway, check out the Chile post below, Bob was right.

                  Chile clearly has reformed itself into a sustainable, responsible, and fair labor rights nation. I applaude their laws, but they really need to work on trafficing and child protections.

                  Too bad the unions are more interested in striking at the ports then advocating for trafficing/illegal immigration and child protections.

                  • ClubTwitty says:

                    Of the National Right to Work Legal Foundation

                    a lawyer funded by union busters…  let’s look at their web site and learn how they are funded, because I’m sure if they are legitimate they will give some indication of who they represent.  Thus the FAQs

                    The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation receives no tax money. The Foundation is a private organization, financed entirely by the voluntary generosity of its contributors.

                    Oh, that clears it up.  Fighting the good fight for the right of American workers to work for less or associate freely in the soup line…

                    • Danny the Red (hair) says:

                      Nick Cote is Deputy Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.

                      funny that he is quoting Will Collins

                      Will Collins is Deputy Legal Information Director for the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation.

                      His colleage

                      Why do I think so he is directly quoting the the Nick Cote blog.

                      Either he is Nick Cote or he is a plagirist.

                      Either way he’s wrong and a propagandist.  I hhope he’s getting paid to be a propagandist and not just a plagirist.

                    • Danny the Red (hair) says:

                      lovely bunch of humans

                    • Danny the Red (hair) says:

                      On the NRWLDF’s blogroll is the the Union Free Workplace, a group dedicated to keeping workplaces union free.  These winners put to lie the idea that Right to Work is about those “union bullys.”

                      Right to work is about suppressing unions plain and simple.  It is about denying workers the right to choose to work in a union shop.  It is about the “Union Free Workplace.”

                      By the way anyone that has accolades for that minion of Hell Jesse Helms on there website is no friend of the worker and no friend of mine.

                    • parsingreality says:

                      We used to have them here.  Before child labor laws, before higher wages which built the middle class, before OSHA protections, before the 40 hour work week, before the OEO,

                      almost before civiilzation.

                      What assholes. Like it’s so terrible for people to make a living and not live in fear of being fired or maimed or killed in the workplace.  

                    • ClubTwitty says:

                      they do it regularly and with impunity.  Pretending they are for ‘choice’ when they want to get rid of unions altogether, for instance, is a lie.

                      I still find it amusing how badly and sloppy they are at it…as if no one can check up on where their rap comes from and what their true motivations are.  Liars and incompetent to boot.

                    • Libertad says:

                      http://www.denverpost.com/alle

                      By Al Lewis

                      The Denver Post

                      Article Last Updated: 06/16/2008 11:03:52 PM MDT

                      Jay Hesterman, a technician at Qwest, resigned from a union 14 years ago, but he still pays about $500 a year in dues and gets the union’s newsletter anyway.

                      “I’m not necessarily anti-union,” said Hesterman, 47. “My dad was very strong into the union. . . . What the unions did, historically, proved a great balance against large corporations. . . . But I don’t like the direction they are headed in now.”

                      Hesterman, who has worked at the telephone company for 28 years, is a conservative Republican. And unions generally give their money to Democrats.

                      He could apply to have the portion of his dues given to political causes refunded, but that requires paperwork. And why should he have to give any money to a group that supports causes he doesn’t?

                      “They’ve drifted from . . . protecting the main interest of the working man into the outskirts of politics,” Hesterman said.

                      But it’s not just about politics.

                      “I don’t know how to say this without sounding harsh,” said Hesterman. “They represent some people who shouldn’t be represented. . . . They represent some people who are looking to be nonworkers.”

                      Give us your tired, your lazy, your entitled-to-every-sick-day.

                      Scores write back

                      Hesterman would no longer have to pay his union dues if Amendment 47, the right-to-work initiative on Colorado’s November ballot, passes.

                      I have heard from scores of people in Hesterman’s situation since my Sunday column solicited responses from people forced to pay union dues.

                      Now they’re on my phone, in my e-mail and on my blogs.

                      Many of them say they will vote for Amendment 47 because they just don’t like paying dues. Others seem to wish unions didn’t exist.

                      “Unions use the same methods as street thugs,” wrote one reader. “They steal the money of hard working people through lies and intimidation.”

                      Wrote another: “Every now and then, I complain to a manager about a worker who shows up late and is sometimes lazy. They give him a warning. He still shows up late and gets fired. He goes to the union tells them he was tired . . . and gets his job back.”

                      “I unwillingly have $44.75 taken out of my pay check every month,” wrote another. “My opinion of the . . . union is . . . we are nothing more than a ‘cash cow.’ ”

                      Clearly, these sentiments will shape November’s election. So will more pro-union sentiments.

                      One caller said it best: “People who don’t want to pay union dues . . . let them go work at Wal-Mart and get paid nothing.”

                      Just 8 percent of Colorado’s employees are in unions, but all of the state’s voters will have to decide how they feel about unions.

                      “Unions do good,” Hesterman said. “They hit the nail on the head sometimes. But sometimes they are very anti-company. . . . They give us the feeling that somehow we should hate (the company). That it’s us against them.”

                      Whether Amendment 47 passes or not, taking money from unwilling dues-payers is bad business.

                      It loads union ranks with dissenters. Instead, unions should do more to actually appeal to people.

                      “If the union had to earn its money,” said Hesterman, “it would really make them a better union.”  

                    • bob ewegen says:

                      he will be silence d forever. he has absolutely no ideas of his own _ and no qualms about violating copyright laws as he did by stealing the Al Lewis column above.

                      Those who obey the law, Libertine, know the procedure is to quote a section and then provide a link. But they didn’t teach you that in Sockpuppet School, I guess.

                    • Libertad says:

                      Its Libertad.

                      Further sir, as noted in other posts I ma heartfully sorry in my failure to follow CP and/or national blogging protocols.

                      Perchance you may direct me to a blog posting standards url?

                    • Libertad says:

                      You claim I lie based on my intentions, illogical, false and basically a lie on your part.

            • ClubTwitty says:

              does right to work [for less] create?  

              the freedom to associate in soup lines?  at the rescue mission?

              libertad-pro [corporate] choice!

            • bob ewegen says:

              by claiming to support a “right to work” law that doesn’t give anybody, anywhere, anytime, a right to work?

              At least you’re honest, sort of.

              • Libertad says:

                Right to Work guarantees workers the right to keep their job be their choice to join or not join the union.

                Even the Governor’s moral choice was to retain basic choice rights for state employees by not granting the unions the USC – aka giving them the workplace protection of Right to Work.

                If you want a job guarantee I suggest you apply with Hugo Chavez.  

                • streetcleaner says:

                  shows how much state workers despise unions I guess.

                  Let us clear one thing up.  No one is forced to join a union or is denied a job because they will not join one.  This right wing lie has to be eliminated if we are to have an honest debate on this issue.

                  Also, Mr. Ewegen gets one thing wrong.  Well, he omits a crucial piece of the puzzle.  Workers can refuse to pay the political part of their dues by choosing to pay only ‘agency’ fees.  Thus, in the scenario he describes about unions taking $4 from each worker’s dues and lumping them together only applies to those who agree to have those political dues taken out.

                  • Libertad says:

                    The issue is not those joining in droves. Some in Colorado have a choice to join or not join. Shouldn’t all Coloradans have equal workplace rights?

                    If Becks is such a great process why did our governor give state employees the Right-to-Work?

                  • bob ewegen says:

                    The scenario  I outlined referred to workers who “may not even know they made that contribution”. Most don’t know they can opt out under the Beck decision.

                    I think, though I wouldn’t swear by it, you can actually refuse to pay the dues that go to political purposes and still stay in the union. And, of course, you can opt to pay the agency fee.

                    I would also mildly disagree with your claim that “This right wing lie has to be eliminated if we are to have an honest debate on this issue.”

                    The last thing the right wing wants is an honest debate on this issue!  They’d be blown away the same way they were in 1958!

                    Look at Libertine, he’s only got one lie and he’s stickin to it!

                  • Libertad says:

                    Unions harassing a 16 year old girl, not backing off on Beck. Still forcing unionism.

                    So now why don’t the Unions offer an opt out programme – like Don’t Call List or Unsubscribe function for mass emails? Would that amendment be in the EFCA?

                    Hoffa, Hoffa, Hoffa!

                    Oh yes. Quite lovely partnership approach this Mr. Hoffa tacts to. We’ll make the company pay, we’ll get someone else to do the maintenance.  

                • bob ewegen says:

                  Right to work does not guarantee that workers don’t have to join a union. Federal law already guarantees that.  

                  Since your only source of information on the subject is right wing websites and Wikipedia, I suggest you goggle “agency shop” to learn the real facts.

                  Likewise, the governor didn’t give employees the right not to join a union.  That’s already in the Colorado constitution under the civil service laws.

                  Now, go make Jonathan Coors his coffee.  If I recall correctly, he takes two sugars.

            • Libertad says:

              Mr. Ewegen,

              I am sorry I forgot to properly use this quotes button on this post “Wed, 07/09/2008 – 10:46 – Nick Cote”.

              • Libertad says:

                Mr. Ewegen,

                I am sorry I forgot to properly use this quotes button on these posts:

                “Grinding axes over unions – Al Lewis”,

                “Keeping them on the horn”, and

                “Chile has strong unions, like Colorado”.

                I assume I need to be quoting the video and wikipedia stuff too or is it public domain. I’ll defer to you good sir.

                p.s Mr. Ewegen, I hope our banter does not push you to another opinion piece in the Denver Post. This is not personal. I think you are a fine man and rather enjoy your print work.

                Cheers.

                • ClubTwitty says:

                  Its the same shit over and over and over and over.

                  Are you capable of an original thought, sir?

                  You’re a frickin’ idiot.  Jesus.

                  • Libertad says:

                    You take the GOPers’ Lords name. You take the Democrats’ Lords name in vein. In some cultures that might earn you a prison timeout or worse death as prescribed by religious law.

                    You resort to censorship? Shame, you are un-American.

                    You likely support employee free choice too.

          • Danny the Red (hair) says:

            being number 50 for workers rights, I’ll take the gentleman’s C.

            We need to balance workers rights with employer rights–the survey shows that right now this is a great place for business, maybe we could look at workers position in this great environment.

            • Libertad says:

              As he gave Unions access to state  employees, he gave the employees the protection of no union security clause (aka the Right-to-Work).

              Speculatin here, but maybe the governor believes the moral case for Right-to-Work is based on employees inalienable right to choose whether or not to associate with a union.

              • Danny the Red (hair) says:

                You have a choice of employers–if it is a union shop and you don’t like unions–don’t work there.

                However in colorado and you want to work for a union, your options are more limited.  Personally I want Union protection so that you don’t get fired for trying to use your health insurance, sick days, vacation or FMLA.

              • BlueCat says:

                because a union negotiated them for you, paying dues in exchange is both fair and a very small expense that  increased wages make up for many times over. Ewegen’s figures  comparing workers pay in states with and without right to work are correct.  

                Better pay is good for everybody since workers who make more money put more money into the economy.  Having the lowest cost of living often just means having the most poor and the least educated.  In the third world, poor uneducated masses who can never get ahead  funnel all the benefit of increasing wealth to a small elite who get more bang for the buck by keeping everyone else poor.

                No wonder Reagan is the Republican saint. He actually got working America to vote for the party that represents that formula for society.   Now that party’s presidential candidate has, for his top economic adviser, Phil Gramm, a guy who basically tells  Americans they really aren’t struggling to make ends meet, it’s all in their heads and they should stop whining and do their job: making the rich richer.

              • Libertad says:

                The moral case for Right-to-Work is based on employees inalienable right to choose whether or not to associate with a union.

                Our Govenror agrees with the Right to Work theory.

          • Libertad says:

            Labor rights in Chile (based on Wikipedia as a source)

            Workers have the right to form and join unions without prior authorization; 10% of the total work force is unionized.

            The law allows unions to conduct their activities without interference, and the government protects this right.

            While employees in the private sector have the right to strike, the government regulates this right, and there are some restrictions.

            The law prohibits forced or compulsory labor, and there have been no reports that such practices occurred. The law restricts child labor, but it is a problem in the informal economy. There are reports that children are trafficked. The minimum wage is set by law and is subject to adjustment annually. The law sets the legal workweek at six days or 45 hours; the maximum workday length is 10 hours. The law establishes occupational safety and health standards.

            Right of association. Chile workers have the right to form and join unions without prior authorization, and approximately 10 percent of the total work force (estimated at 5.9 million) was unionized in more than 16,000 unions.

            Police and military personnel may not organize collectively.

            Members of unions are free to withdraw from union membership. The law prohibits closed union shops.

  2. ClubTwitty says:

    packing up their bags, firing employees, selling homes at crazy rates, ruining families…

    Hell, I’ve seen the full-page ads myself, I have.  Doom. Doom. Doom.

    I am so confused…should I believe the world’s richest industry who just happens to be installing billions of dollars of infrastructure to ship Colorado’s gas and money out of state at ever increasing rates as they threaten economic havoc raining down on their (fungible) workers, or mere businesspeople?

    • bob ewegen says:

      precisely because the energy economy is pouring so much money into ads proclaiming the economy is going to hell. It’s sort of a self-UNfulfilling prophecy!

      One more full page ad from them in The Post and I’m trading in my Honda for a Mercedes.

  3. NoOn47 says:

    will almost assuredly decline if we let Amendment 47 pass.

  4. DavidThi808 says:

    Out here in Hawaii I get all the horror stories of trying to make a go of it as a business and it makes me realize how lucky we have it in Colorado.

    We have problems here but an anti-business climate in the normal meaning of the phrase is not one of them.

    We do have an anti-business climate here in the true meaning of the words. But the anti-business climate here is TABOR and the poor funding for education (K-12 and higher).

    I’d like to see the supporters of the Romanoff & Ritter initiatives sell them as the pro-business efforts they truly are. And paint their opponents as anti-business as they truly are.

  5. Moxie says:

    I was in a meeting two weeks ago with a large research firm located in Colorado.  We were working on keeping them in the state.  They love Colorado, they love doing business here but they might have to relocate. The reason is they have to import all their employees from other states because our higher education system isn’t turning out the quality of employees they need.  This was straight from the Human Resource Managers mouth.

    • bob ewegen says:

      PAss a right to work for less law like Arkansas and you’ll attract all the jobs you want.  Okay, they’ll be jobs plucking chickens at the minimum wage and no benefits, but think how happy you’ll make the absentee owners in Switzerland.

      Yeesh, you liberals make me sick. Next, you’ll want some goofy statement from the government guaranteeing you the “pursuit of happiness.”

    • DavidThi808 says:

      There are really good people available here. The problem is we don’t have anywhere near enough of them.

      We need both better schools so everyone gets a quality education and we need about double to triple the number of higher ed schools.

    • parsingreality says:

      That’s a strange phrase and weirder concept.  Like, you know, a $300 airplane ticket brings them here.  And if the job pays well, they will only be too happy to live in Colorado.  

      I certainly understand how a great university system practically breeds innovation.  CU was such a place for many decades and still can reclaim such an honor.

      Frankly, it sounds to me like the company you met with is just trying to wring out some benefits by using threats.  They learned well from the sports team owners!  

  6. Gilpin Guy says:

    Check out http://www.shadowstats.com if you want to get really really scared.  John Williams is a rogue economist who made a reputation debunking government statistics and is predicting hyperinflation with depression level unemployment.  It is one ugly scenario and all the hoopla over right to work laws is basically foam on a wave.  Whether you are for or against unions your money is going to be about as worthless as a peso so gnash your teeth and lick the boots of the oil companies because it is going to get much worse for the majority of Americans.  George Bush the curse that keeps on hurting.

    • parsingreality says:

      I’m sorry I can’t recall the authors or specifics, but it boils down to this:

      Our presidents, of both parties, since Eisenhower have been cooking the books on matters of inflation, unemployment, etc.

      For instance, although a car costs a lot more than once upon a time, the fact that you now get radial tires, fuel injection, safety features are figured as compensating factors.  Ditto TV’s, radios, anything that gives us more bang for the buck.

      Clinton screwed those on SS by using a dishonest set of COL standards.

      Our real unemployment rate is probably in the 10-12% range, just like the more honest Europeans.  At least an unemployed Frenchman has health insurance!

      Our real inflation rate, especially of late, is at least double the official.  

      The feds tell us those rates aren’t too bad.  My lying anecdotal eyes in the grocery store, at the gas pump, all tell me and millions of Americans that we are really deluded, right?  

  7. streetcleaner says:

    maybe we should leave well enough along and vote No on Prop 47.  Just a crazy idea.

  8. 6thCDwatcher says:

    we’re leading the country in business success, then we sure as heck don’t want to elect Mark Udall who supports EFCA which hurts small business.  it seems like the logical explanation.

  9. ClubTwitty says:

    blah blah blah blah blah blah

    and one more thing

    blah blah blah

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.