Search Box

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Everything you need to know about politics

The standoff in Wisconsin has been a wonderful prism through which to view the Democratic mindset.

First, Governor Scott Walker's opponents have likened him to Mubarak and Hitler. This is a typically well-reasoned, cogent, liberal opinion, backed by indisputable fact. After all, Walker has undoubtedly enriched himself to the tune of fifty billion dollars or so while in office, in much the same way Mubarak did. And he does jail opposition journalists. Right?

And it's only right to compare Walker to Hitler: he did put a lot of Jewish people in concentration camps and then gas them. And, just as Hitler invaded Austria, Walker will probably march the Wisconsin State Guard over to Springfield Illinois and declare a coup d'etat in that state. Right?

Actually, the only Wisconsinites going to Illinois are the Democratic state legislators who have fled to neighboring states in order to prevent a vote on the union issue.

That too, provides a compelling insight. These politicians are simply refusing to do the job they were elected to do. When people in the private sector do that, they are fired. But the Democratic legislators don't feel that the same rules that apply in the private sector should apply to them -- or to the unions who helped elect them.

Let's hope the Wisconsin electorate takes this into account in the the next election.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

John.....
Perfectly Stated, Thank You.

Mad Dog

John Craig said...

Thank you Mad Dog.

Anonymous said...

John, the greatest irony illustrated by the Wisconsin situation is that the Democrats don't believe in Democracy.
G

John Craig said...

G --
Actually, they believe in Democracy, just not democracy.

Anonymous said...

Just for fun - can anyone think of a way to resolve the dichotomy between private and public sector benefits and compensation? We'll ignore the likelihood that these ideas could or would ever be implemented.

When the public sector faces a layoff or reduction in pay / benefits they can take to the streets in protest - and this protest could bear fruit. Think of the same behavior by non-unionized private sector employees. People would think they were crazy.

When the public sector takes to the streets, they are fighting against a direct threat to their next pay check. The private sector citizens, who foot the bill for excessive public sector compensation, are fighting against foggy threats of future hyperinflation, high unemployment and economic stagnation. The public sector is ready to fight harder - both because they are fighting for something immediate and because their fight can win (politicians are beholden to the large public sector voting block).

As distasteful as this sounds, uniform nationwide law governing benefits for all public and private sector employees would have the desired effect. It would give the private sector the same stake, and we'd have the full attention of private sector employers too. We'd be looking at a huge direct impact to every working person and to the economy. Nobody would want to kill the goose the lays the golden egg (the private sector) - the needed check / balance would be in place.

Another option would be to privatize as many chunks of the public sector as possible. The post office is a good example. K-12 education is not as clean, and some government functions are just not feasible for the private sector.

From what I see the pendulum has swung a little too far in private sector employer's favor. With a weak economy the private sector can cut salaries and benefits as well as heap on the work and employees have no where to go. Today you can be a working superman or you can sit home unemployed. Maybe a national labor collective bargaining covering all working people could have its place.

- Ed

John Craig said...

Ed --
I agree with you about privatizing as much of the public sector as possible. But I think we part ways there. I think the answer to the excessive power of the unions in the public sector is to simply abolish their collective bargaining power, not have states collect their dues for them, and somehow cut the symbiotic relationship between union management and Democratic politicians, probably by abolishing the right of unions to use their enforced dues collections to make political contributions (many of which their members probably disagree with). This would allow municipalities to bring public sector benefits back into line with private sector ones.

Having "national labor collective bargaining" is basically just socialism. We already have minimum wages, OSHA regulations, etc (all of which I agree with). But any sort of national collectivism would simply reduce the power of the free market even further.