Same-sex ‘marriage’ activists are celebrating a Gallup poll, which indicates that 4.5% of Rhode Islanders identify as LGBT. The claim is that this somehow supports the lobbying effort for same-sex ‘marriage’ in Rhode Island. It does not. In fact it helps us calculate how weak the economic claims about same-sex ‘marriage’ are. (View the Infographic below to visualize just how weak these claims are.)
Rhode Island’s Domestic Product for 2011 was approximately $50,091,000,000. According to TheWeddingReport.com in 2011 there were 6,633 weddings in Rhode Island at an average total cost of $26,400. Bringing the total wedding industry contribution to the economy to $175,111,200. There were 1,050,646 people in Rhode Island in 2011, which means that 1.26% of the population, got married.
If same-sex ‘marriage’ was legal in 2011, and the same percentage of the estimated 23,106 gays and lesbians (bisexuals removed from stat according to national averages) in Rhode Island got married, the potential contribution to the overall Rhode Island economy would have been 0.0077%. The same “economic boost” would have been generated if everybody in Rhode Island had bought a hotdog at 7-11 or if every employed person had worked for just 5 more minutes during that year.
The economic benefit of encouraging families and marriage as it is currently defined would be $206,000,000 or 0.4% of the total Rhode Island domestic product that’s about 54 times the effect same-sex ‘marriage’ stands to have, or $31 million more than the entire Rhode island wedding industry.
As we’ve pointed out already, 9 of the top 10 states for business have protected marriage as one man and one woman by a public vote and the 10th will vote next year. However, did you also know that 8 out of the Moody’s Analytics “Top Ten States for Job Growth” have amendments to protect marriage as one man and one woman as well?
Governor Lincoln Chafee was featured on MSNBC recently claiming that same-sex ‘marriage’ would improve the economy, but the only evidence offered for this declaration was that same-sex couples would pay less in taxes and spend that money in the local economy. However, if they pay less, then everybody else would have to pay more so the effect on the majority of households would therefore be an increase in taxes. The fact that same-sex ‘marriage’ activists continue to push this bad math on the people of Rhode Island just goes to show how desperate their campaign really is for a good reason to support same-sex ‘marriage’.