this is a good run down, with one nit, probably caused by availability of data. Gdp per capita is not a good metric, because its a mean, so verp vulnerable to outliers, and because it represents generation of wealth regardless of if that money stays in the state.

North Dakota is an oil state.

It has a median household income of $68,000, meaning half of all households bring in less than that.

It has a mean income per capita of $37,343

11.5% of people in north dakota live in poverty

north dakota ranks 39th for poverty, which is better than middle.

This is an example of how different stats will have different results. When looking at poverty rates, out of the ten worst, only New Mexico is not a right-to-work state.

Michigan is the first state ever to repeal their "right to work" laws and it will end next March

It's the who's who of shithole states!

That’s a great summary!

In the context of labor law in the United States, the term "right-to-work laws" refers to state laws that prohibit union security agreements between employers and labor unions which require employees who are not union members to contribute to the costs of union representation.

That's so fucking confusing...

Unlike the right to work definition as a human right in international law, U.S. right-to-work laws do not aim to provide a general guarantee of employment to people seeking work but rather guarantee an employee's right to refrain from paying or being a member of a labor union.

Okay, little less muddier now. The whole vibe is quintessential USA—some dodgy law with a misleading name.

English (US)

English (International)

Ton (US)

Tonne (International)

Right-to-work (US)

Right to Work (International)

This is where we find out Aluminum is trademarked and royalties given whenever used and that's how Aluminium phased out...

Yes, but think of billionaires! Why won't anyone think of the poor billionaires!?

There's actually nuance here, this is a GDP per capita metric which means not that people are poorer in these states but the people actually produce LESS even for the stakeholders and the shareholders in these states.

So (1) the workers are poorer no fucking surprise there but crucially (2) the companies are poorer and the shareholders are poorer for it as well

Now correlation is not the same as causation for sure, but it certainly seems that their greed is actually counterproductive. That's the lesson here

Union that's run by management.... That's not a union my guy, that's an extortion outfit.

What the hell kind of Union is that?

It wasn't the company running it, it was because they signed a labor agreement so at that point you had to join the union as per the contract. Kroger may have informed you but it wasn't a "company union" which makes no sense.

It's not a union if it's run by the company, that's just management board but with an accent.

And any law what allows such a thing is anti-union by default, it's just an internal misuse of the words meaning (plus it lowers the chances of an actual/additional union to form and on top of that it collects fees from the paychecks it itself gives to the workers for their work? lulwtf). I don't know if any EU county where such thing is remotely allowed, however unions are (mostly) not enforced in the private sector, even in some cases where the law actually predicts one to be in place (so, company in such a situation is technically breaking the law but at the same time also can't force or do anything towards starting a union since that would just make it their puppet & regulators would act immediately).