What About Me?

We have a spectacular showdown going on in Wisconsin, where the socialist style union philosophy is going head to head with the capitalist theory of fiscal responsibility. First let's lay the ground work, this isn't a private labor force union but government workers. You know, back in the day they were the people you went to school with whom had little or no ambition and traded off a higher salary working in the private sector for the security of a lower paying government job with benefits. Now those jobs have morphed into the highest paying in their respective fields, in part because of government concessions to these unions in return for ballots and support on election day. These promised entitlements have begun to weigh heavily on state budgets, forcing many to the brink of bankruptcy. Something has to give!

The unions workers justify their tantrums with complaints that the government has mishandled funds and they should be held responsible for the shortfall. Their representatives voice the opinion that there is not a spending problem, simply a lack of revenue collected by the states, and conclude they need to tax the rich so they can have their just deserves. I have some serious problems with this convoluted thinking, here's why......

First if all men are created equal, and deserve equal justice under the law as defined by our founders; why would one man be taxed at a higher rate than another? A tax is defined by a law that has been approved by our government, so for justice to be served all citizens should be taxed equally. The union creed itself adapts this concept with their mantra, that all members bargain collectively and there is no reward for exceptionalism. The successful rich already bear the lion's share of the tax burden. Would the same union worker be as excited to raise the taxation level if the tax was applied only to union workers to pay for their benefits? It's time for shared sacrifice.

The government union worker has made the claim several times that the government shouldn't balance their revenue shortfall on the backs of the worker. The government is simply asking for the union worker to participate on a small level in their contributions toward their health care and retirement. If they don't benefit, then who does? When hard times hit any business their are either layoffs or compensation concessions so the evil business can continue to function and provide for it's employees. Again the concept of shared sacrifice. The government is a business. Either they accept this small concession, or workers will have to be dismissed lowering the level of service available to all the citizens. Again...who benefits?

What I see in this whole debacle is a bunch of spoiled brats throwing a tantrum and being unreasonable. There is a reason it used to be illegal for government employees to unionize. President Ronald Reagan dismissed government hired air traffic controllers when they tried to strike and shut down the nations airports. He didn't bargain, he fired them. I suggest these protesters who skipped work be fired for their dereliction, and be replaced with non union employees. With the level of unemployment this country is currently facing, it should be very difficult to make this transition to workers who would appreciate a job.

I haven't even scratched the surface of how wrong this whole situation is. The use of students by teachers to join them in the protest just frosts my backside, as the bulk of the kids don't even know why they are there. They are just darn glad to be AWOL from the classroom. The media coverage suggests this is a big deal that 25,000 people are causing an uproar in a state of millions. This is not the majority opinion! Lawmakers hopping a bus and leaving the state shirking their responsibility to bring this to a quick end. It all speaks to the poison that has infected the country in the form of "me first."

God Bless!
Capt. Bill