That's the conclusion drawn by this article from the Boston Business Journal. I've written before about how big business has been ahead of curve in realizing the value of offering benefits to same-sex couples, and this article is another validation of that approach. It could ultimately be the business lobbysts that move the needle in state legislatures as they grow to understand this phenomenon.
Massachusetts has a dubious reputation for losing talented workers to less pricey markets. But a trend that runs counter to the talent drain has emerged in the form of the state's controversial same-sex marriage law, a powerful lure for same-sex couples who want to live in a place where they can get married, gain legal rights and have access to spousal health benefits. In fact, some observers see the influx of same-sex couples as a boon for the state's economy.
"Since the marriage law passed, we see a lot more (gay) professionals moving into the Boston area," said Henry Hoey, a board member of the Greater Boston Business Council, a chamber of commerce for gay professionals. The organization's membership has increased 5 percent to 1,100 members since last year. "The effects of this law are starting to take hold."
The article is balanced enough to include the obligatory quote from a right-wing naysayer, but this trend bears watching. It could really bubble up if a warm weather state legalizes same-sex marriage. The overall population of Massachusetts is rather stagnant, but it would be very interesting to see the impact of that change on the work force of a state already attracting new residents.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It is not quit clear to me why so many right-wing conservatives are completely against gay marriage. They are essentially trying to convince people that mutually respectful relationships are not beneficial to the couple or the society around them. In addition, Democrats that favor civil unions over marriage rights are opening the door to straight couples entering into civil unions so that they can get the benefits alloted, without actually getting married. Civil unions, then , will actually lower the overall marriage rate. Who is to stop two straight "friends" from filing for a civil union in order to get work-related benefits in a state. Legalizing gay marriage would raise the overall marriage rates and civil unions would lower it. This is perhaps the goal of both political parties. Civil unions means no access to Social Security, whereas marriage does give access.
ReplyDeleteI'm a legally married gay man in Massachusetts, and because there is no federal recognition of our marriage, we will not contribute the bankruptcy of Social Security because we will not have access to the money that we pay for legally married straight couples tat into the Social Security Benefits of his/her spouse. Civil Unions may have nothing to do with gay rights, but rather may be a way of keeping money available in Social Security.
Jos76
www.jos76.wordpress.com