Excellent series on "Why Unions." One issue you seem to be leaving out, however, is how unions improve workplace safety. I address the issue briefly in Confined Space (http://spewingforth.blogspot.com/)today (Sept 3).

Something to consider is that the concern with unions is not that they raise wages (which they clearly do), but that
a) they cut employment in a sector (higher wages means less employees - if, say, the non-union teacher equilibrium was half what it the unionized eqilibrium was, you could expect far more teachers to be unemployed). That is, *once you're in the union, great, but if you're not, it's tons harder to get a job in the first place*.
b) the raise final goods costs on the consumer (again with teachers as an example, class sizes are higher because of unionized equilibrium wage than they would be without). The costs of union wages are not borne by the CEO, but by the consumer.

A third concern (for the unionized) is that any industry where a large local premium exists (such as a union wage premium) is a prime choice to be moved overseas.

Unionized workers win with their unions (at least until their industry disappears because of frustration at the wage premium), but consumers and the unemployed pay. *That* is the problem with unions, and something that really needs to be covered.

As an aside, I've noticed a few mathematical errors in your post (or played fast and loose with them, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt): In the 31 Aug post on the Minimum wage, you cite a famous baseline of 2.2% jobs lost for every 10% increase in the minimum wage. You apply the 2.2% only to the 26 million jobs that pay under $8/hr, when it should be applied to the 130 million jobs in total. The final numbers come out quite closely when you run the numbers this way.

Kevs- starting with your last post, I've got to wonder about the rest of your arguments when you don't understand a conservative study I cite to. The statement was that "An elasticity of –0.22 implies that a 10% increase in wages results in a 2.2% decrease in employment of the affected group."

"Affected group" means those covered by the new minimum wage (26 million), not the whole population of workers who make more.

As for unions cutting employment in the sector, see the notes on minimum wage-- raises in wages do not always cut total employment. And moving towards higher productivity may decrease employment inevitably over time, but that drives growth in the overall economy, through the production of capital goods.

Also, it is the lowest wage sectors of manufacturing that are the most likely to be moved overseas, since sweatshops overseas far more easily compete against sweatshops in the US. It is high wage, high-skill firms in the US that have the best chance to survive global competition.

As for whether consumers pay for the increased wages demanded by unions, that's a more interesting question. First, there is plenty of evidence that employer profits fall due to unionization, so that means that consumers are NOT paying for at least some of the increased wage costs. Many employers are getting monopoly or quasi-rents from capital investments, so unions often bargain for a share of those above market prices, leaving consumers unaffected or minorly affected. As well, since many goods are exported, at least some of those consumer costs that might be increased are born by overseas consumers.

And happily, the answer to any inadequacies of partial unionization is more unionization. I agree that it would be better if all workers were unionized a la Sweden. A far better and optimal result all around.

Do unions raise wages, or do unions target higher paying jobs?

Your statistics only show a correlation in union membership and certain jobs, doesn't prove unions increase wages.

Soma tablets are available as 350 mg round, white tablets. Chemically, carisoprodol is N-isopropyl-2-methyl-2-propyl-1,3-propanediol dicarbamate. Carisoprodol is a white, crystalline powder, having a mild, characteristic odor and a bitter taste. It is very slightly soluble in water; freely soluble in alcohol, in chloroform, and in acetone; its solubility is practically independent of pH. Carisoprodol is present as a racemic mixture. The molecular formula is C12H24N2O4, with a molecular weight of 260.33.