cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Senior Advisor

Never enough

snip-The flames from Greece’s debt-crisis protests have cast new light on the perils of our own overspending and overborrowing. You know the litany. California is imploding. Public-sector unions there, and across the country, are swallowing budgets. In California alone, pension costs have gone up 2,000 percent in a decade. At the national level, Obamacare has done little to fix — and much to hurt — America’s long-term entitlement mess. Already, America’s structural deficit has tripled since 2007. Economist Price Fishback has just published a paper finding that America spends more on social welfare than socialist Sweden (though we spend it differently).

According to USA Today, “paychecks from private business shrank to their smallest share of personal income in U.S. history during the first quarter of this year,” while government benefits rose to a record high. In fact, government employment is becoming a method of redistributing wealth. In 2009, the federal payroll grew and the number of federal jobs paying over $100,000 a year doubled.

The average federal worker earns over 70 percent more than the average private-sector worker, writes Arthur Brooks in his new book, The Battle: “To find this acceptable, you must agree that the average federal worker is much more productive or deserving than the average person in the private sector.”

snip-Governments do not generate wealth; they can merely distribute it. The challenge for both liberals and conservatives is simply to define how much distribution is “enough.” What would an acceptable safety net look like? Who should be taken care of by taxpayers and for how long? Paul Ryan offered an answer to that question, and liberals scoffed because they reject the question. There’s no such thing as enough, as far as they’re concerned. That’s what the Greeks thought.

 

http://article.nationalreview.com/435297/in-a-welfare-state-how-much-is-enough/jonah-goldberg

22 Replies
Senior Advisor

Re: Another blame the unions post.

Why not blame those fools that signed on to those contracts.  Pension obligations are supposed to be funded during the period of employment , not decades later. If they were funded as they should be there should be no problem. Pension provisions are won by negotiations. THe funding is earned and paid for by the sweat of the unions brow. Are You saying that you want to default on the deal after the fact.

 

Did you ever stop to consider that you shouldn't sign a contract that you cannot honor?

Senior Advisor

Re: Another blame the unions post.

The government should not be in the pension business. Period. Now the people are left to honor agreements they had no say in to start with. The people who signed them have long since retired, to recieve from the agreements they signed to start with. How they are paid is of no concern of theirs, just as long as they are paid. Worked out well for them, the fire fighters, police officers, and teachers all help to fund their campaigns and were well compensated for it. Same way it worked in Greece. Now the bills are due and the grand kids money is all spent, time to print or riot in the streets.

Senior Advisor

Re:Governments have employees

That is a fact of life.  WE authorize our government to act in our behalf. I think you best run for office yourself if you don't approve of their methods.

 

Meanwhile if you expect different terms the time to negotiate is before they are enacted. Don't expect to change them after the fact. Try telling your landlord that you are renegotiating the terms of your 2001-thru 2009 contract. Let me know how that works out.

Senior Advisor

Re: Re:Governments have employees

I don't have landlords Mr Kraft, and as far as blame, let's put it squarely where it belongs.....liberalism. It is a failure. Give people something for nothing, do it long enough, they no longer appreciate it, the DEMAND it.

Senior Advisor

Re: Your confused

Wages and benefits are not a social gift. They are earned by the workers.  I suggest you get a better definition of socialism and liberalism and what falls into that classification. You're talking limbaughese and its rather ignorant.

Senior Advisor

Re: Your confused

Liberalism leads to socialism, they are not one and the same but one leads to the other. Yes, wages are earned but these wages are not being set by the market, they are set by politicians. Most of the people pay little attention to city/county meeting setting the wages, they expect fairness and integrity from their elected leaders. They are now realizing that has not been the case, they have awaken and now the politicians have their attention. The people are telling them you are providing more services than we need or can afford. They are making their dissatisfaction known at the ballot box, and there are going to be a lot of politicians and government employees that don't like it. As you said, the anger needs to be directed to the self serving leaches that signed these unbearable, ridiculous contracts.

Honored Advisor

Re: Never enough

Hey 3020, a liberal problem needs a liberal solution. If pensions and entitlements are too high...tax them at a 100% rate just like the Dems wanted to do with Wallstreet bonuses. That way the entitlement bums get what`s coming to them and the government meets it`s obligations without costing a dime. Everybody happy ?

Senior Contributor

Re: Your confused

This is why government employees should not be able to vote.

Senior Advisor

Re: Great idea BA

 You forgot something though. Remember how Obama was going to tax those Cadillac health plans to help pay for the poor?  Well, some how, these government workers got exempted. The dumrats have truly become the party of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. Us peasants are to keep quiet and like it, if we don't they will haul their thugs in by the bus load to protest in our house yards. They are going to get theirs. Just ask the Greeks.