Quote:
Originally Posted by njbchbum
Re the first part of your statement about unions refusing to take a decrease in their [negotiated - my reminder] increase and their lack of sympathy for the people who pay their healthy wages.....
my first point is that the members of any municipal/county/state pension plan is probably a taxpayer of that municipality/county/state who is and has been paying their taxes there all along. in the words of jimmy buffett - we are the people our parents warned us about.
Re the last point of refusing to give up viagra, i contend that giving up any prescription drug begins the slippery slope - what drug will you want eliminated next? it reminds me of the arguments during the health care legislation debates about diminished care for the elderly or the newborns who have little hope of survival because of serious birth defects.
this point could be one that might be better addressed by asking the union members to pay a greater share of certain categories of drugs. where do you see shame in the desire or need to take viagra? who are we to judge whether a public employee should live with or without the benefit of a fulfilling sex life?
i usually find that people frequently seek to claim to have the right answer or the wrong answer and rarely will they seek to find what is the best answer.
Get Rid of Incumbent Politicians |
Are you saying that paying taxes with taxpayer money is the same as private sector paying taxes with private sector money?
That is almost like the argument of the stimulus money creating jobs. Taxpayer money does not create jobs, it only redistributes taxpayers money.
With unemployment at 22% and millions of people without jobs and losing their houses, I would think there would be more empathy from public employees.
Maybe a drastic cut in public employees would straighten out their priorities. Sex enhancing drugs are for pleasure should not be subsidized by taxpayers of any sector.