Quote:
Originally Posted by michiganmoon
The worker's unions supported this poor policy and the union refused to allow it to be fixed. How much blame belongs to the workers for not telling their union to be responsible?
|
100%.
In fact every Detroit resident is responsible.
There are consequences for making bad decisions, and what you're going to see for a long time to come, is these very bad decisions coming around to smack people in the face.
It's true what they say, you know, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Cities -- municipalities -- are a great idea, so long as everyone stays in their lane.
Basic economics...it's everywhere you are. After you've been working all day long, when you go home, do you want to spend 4 hours on fire watch? And then 4 hours playing town constable? Do you want to dig ditches and pour concrete?
When would you ever have a minute of free-time for yourself?
There's a better way.
You and others in your community each chip in $0.25/day and then hire others to provide the services you need or want, like police, fire, safety, road maintenance etc etc etc.
So this is a matter of Opportunity Costs -- what is it worth to you to have 10-16 hours of free-time every day where you can pursue your hobbies and other interests? But there's still the matter of contracting and arranging --- coordinating -- the services you need. That could take up a lot of your time as well, and worse, you may have to take a day off work and lose pay in order to meet with companies willing to provide services to you. And if no one is an attorney or has legal skills, the contracts could mess with your head.
There's a better way. Choose people -- appoint or elect them -- to represent you and empower them to negotiate and enter into contracts on your behalf to provide the services you need.
That is sole purpose and function of municipalities.
That is not Socialism, rather that is Capitalism -- private persons control the Capital.
It only becomes Socialism when the people you choose to represent you over-step their boundaries and start providing those services to you, instead of arranging and contracting the services that you need. Because you see at that point, it is government who owns the Capital -- the snow plows, salt trucks, highway maintenance vehicles and whatever else they have....including Labor.
And even that wouldn't be so bad, except that here comes a Soviet-style Command Group, like unions, who start dictating the price of Labor, which is always far higher than what the Market bears. The Market says a guy who rides a bush-hog and cuts down high weeds gets paid $16/hour, but then your Soviet-style Command Group demands he be paid $26/hour and then another $26/hour in benefits like sick days, vacation pay, pension and stuff on top of that.
You end up paying $52/hour for a job that's only worth $16/hour and then no one can figure why cities are bankrupt or why residents flee high tax rates.
It is impossible to escape the penalty when the Laws of Economics are violated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Anyone want to explain how the Social Security trust fund is any different?  |
It's an insurance plan, not a pension plan.
Are you talking about solvency?
That's the beauty of unfunded liabilities.
That money....it is coming out of your economy, one way or another.
That's why I advocate Austerity. It's just like a Plea Bargain. Would you rather do Life with no parole, or 15-25 with the possibility of parole at 12 years?
If Austerity is undertaken now, it will be unpleasant, but at least you can control it it, and implement it in such a way as to minimize economic damage. If you wait, then Austerity will be forced and it will be severe.
It's like the Free Trade Agreements -- those jobs are gone and you can't stop it. Your choice is lose 7 Million jobs, or sign the Free Trade Agreement and lose 2.5 Million....but one way or another you're going to lose jobs.
Same with Social Security. The Silent Generation was slammed with
520% FICA tax increase to make sure Social Security would be there for them.
The Boomers suffered a
71% FICA tax increase to make sure Social Security would be there for them.
How much of a FICA tax increase was dumped on Generation X-Box and Generation Y-Work?
0%.
Instead of 2% FICA payroll tax reduction, Obama should have increased it to 8.2%.
This is an unprecedented 23rd Year without a FICA payroll tax increase. If it ain't 9.0%-9.2% by December 2016 you're all hopelessly utterly screwed.
Just crunching some numbers, my best estimate is that Boomers created/maintained 19 Million to 22 Million jobs in your economy solely based on their life-style and spending patterns.
As Boomers retire, you will permanently lose a few Million jobs over a period of about 10-12 years. Increase the FICA payroll tax in steps, and it will cost a few Million jobs. Wait until the last minute, or cut benefits, you'll lose triple the amount of jobs...permanently.
See what you got to look forward to? And the best America can come up with is Billary and Palin. I'd be looking real hard into emigrating to another State.
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
It not uncommon for some municipalities in some states to be seriously underfunded, while the state looks reasonably good, and vice -versa. Michigan is not in that bad of shape compared to most states.
|
Yes, that is quite true and most troubling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
The general voting public does not react well to municipal strikes. They want their schools open, their trash picked-up and their public transport ( if any) to function and for their Police and Firefighters not to come down with the flu at the same time.
|
And the solution to that is elect officials who will fire them all.
Civic-mindedly....
Mircea
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
