By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 11 June 2012
Edit Thread
rocketpig said:

I don't get the free market dualism of Walker's (and conservatives in general) argument. I really dislike unions 90% of the time. They're a monopoly on labor. But, on the other hand, how can a person tout "free market capitalism" while removing the rights of an organization to negotiate their own pay? Because they work for the government?

No, man. No. That's hypocritical. People deserve the right to negotiate how much pay they receive in the workplace. You don't get to trample their rights just because they're a "civil servant". There should be no exceptions to this rule because you "don't like their job" or "think they're paid too much".

You're either free market or you're not. In a free market, people are allowed to negotiate. The quality of government workers is already bad enough. What we should be looking at is removing tenure, ability to fire employees, and shaking up how quickly bad employees can be removed from the system. We shouldn't take away their ability to get good employees in the first place. That will just lead to more inefficiency and corruption because the government will be full of even more lazy, incompetent jackasses.

Except there is no such thing as a Free Market when your talking about the Government.  Which is why most "pure" free market people want the government out of nearly everything. (not me, but still.)

The whole point of government workers is they do jobs that the free market can't do.  (Or that we don't want them doing.)

I mean, say I think teachers are getting paid too much money where I live.  I decide to put my kids in private school.   This accomplishes nothing, because I'm still paying for those teachers pay through my taxes.

Government is a forced monopoly in which people have to pay into.

 

Unless we're suddenly allowing people to have volenteer funding for everything, you can't really make a "free market" arguement here.