Tuesday, November 30, 2010

Suck it in, folks

By Carl 

There are times I part company with both my leftist friends and my union buddies. This is one of them: 

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Monday announced a two-year pay freeze for civilian federal workers as he sought to address concerns over high annual deficits and appealed to Republicans to find a common approach to restoring the nation’s economic and fiscal health. 

...The move would save $2 billion in the 2011 fiscal year that ends Sept. 30 and $5 billion by the end of two fiscal years. Over 10 years, it would save $60 billion, according to Jeffrey Zients, deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget and the government’s chief performance officer.

Now, I get the objections. Federal workers are, compared to the private sector, substantially underpaid already and they have not been exempt from some of the economic crisis.

There is one thing they ARE exempt from, and that has to be acknowledged by our side: federal employees are much much harder to fire or lay off.

And it doesn't save much, and so why are federal workers, mostly working and middle class family people, being forced to shoulder the burden of a wage freeze?

Again, in the private sector, jobs are being cut, so are wages and benefits, and hiring is seeing very slow progress. We have chronically unemployed people whose benefits run out in a few days. None of this is really affecting the federal bureaucracy.

Obama makes a symbolic gesture to Republicans. Since the lame-duck Congress has kicked deficit reduction forward, Obama took a step that was calculated to deflate a Republican negotiating chip, one that is very popular with the base.

Remember, these are innumerian idiots who think that 19% of them are in the top 1% of wage earners, among other really insane and wacky mathematics. Somehow, they think that $60 billion will balance the budget painlessly. 

Fareed Zakaria points out the underlying problem, the one that Republicans will have to settle with their base:

Americans have an appetite for government benefits that greatly exceeds their appetite for taxes. For more than a generation, we have squared this dishonest circle by borrowing vast amounts of money. As more people age, this gap between what we want the government to provide and what we are willing to pay for is going to widen to an unsustainable level. Over the next 75 years, benefits under entitlement programs will exceed government revenue by $40 trillion. The federal budget deficit, if unattended, will reach 24% of GDP in 2040 — well beyond Greek and Irish territory. At that point, the measures it would take to close the gap are so punitive — we're talking tax hikes of 70% or spending cuts of 50% — that it is inconceivable that we will make them. If by some chance we were to make them, they would put the economy in a death spiral.

In many ways, the GOP winning the House is a great thing for the nation as a whole. Now, they have no choice but to roll up their sleeves and get involved, as opposed to sitting back and criticising everything Pelosi and Reid did, and by retaining the Senate, Obama has political cover to avoid vetoes (altho you have to know he's itching to stamp a bill or two hard for all the shit he's been taking).

If the Republicans take this seriously, and that's a big -- no, huge grey area, then this next Congress could conceivably get much of the necessary heavy lifting done. If the Republicans decide to risk the House by trying to capture the Senate thru obstructionism and deferral of these issues, the Democrats will rightly point out that they had skin in the game, and did nothing, whereas the past Congress got more done for Americans than any Congress since LBJ.

And we'll be back to one-party rule for the forseeable future. The Republicans are on the clock too, now. Their base has become more rabid, and won't put up with much compromise, and yet, it will have to be compromise to get anything done. By taking a chip off the table, Obama has given them one less accomplishment to tout to these whining mewling babies.

This is why the Party of Children is such a fascinating topic to watch.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

Labels: , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share

5 Comments:

  • The only problem I see here is that we desparately need qualified regulators right now, especially as the healthcare reforms kick in and Wall Street is back on it's feet, and regulators are far, far underpaid compared to who they regulate. It's a recipe for more private sector shenanigans.

    JMJ

    By Blogger Jersey McJones, at 2:32 PM  

  • This was a bad move economically and politcally. Economically, our main problem isn't with deficits, its the unemployment and underemployment caused by the recession. As economists like Paul Krugman point out, there is a time to be concerned about deficits but that time is after you have an economic recovery. With interest rates at historic lows, now is the best time for the government to borrow money. There is so much good that can be done with more government spending. We could repair our roads, bridges, invest in renewable energy, education, etc. These are investments that will benefit us in the future.

    Politically, its a bad move because government employees are some of the Democratic party's biggest supporters. As the late Molly Ivins once said, "you've got to dance with them that brung you." Ever since he was elected, Obama has been making it a habit of selling out his supporters.

    Finally, if the idea was to get GOP concessions, you don't start a negotiation by making concessions up front without getting anything in return. All he is doing is encouraging the GOP to be even more intransigent.

    By Blogger john horse, at 4:11 PM  

  • One more thing I wanted to add. Federal government employees do have more job security than many private sector employees. So whats you're point? Is your solution to make everyone worse off until we reach the lowest common denominator? How is freezing federal wages going to help out workers in the private sector? If our system can no longer provide decent wages, benefits and job security to those in the private sector then we need to change our present corporate capitalist system. If there are workers who have it better than we do, then the solution is to demand what they have, not to demand that it be taken away.

    By Blogger john horse, at 4:58 PM  

  • I agree with John Horse - in particular his take on the "race to the bottom" argument. Americans have taken to hating and loathing union and government workers for what they have, rather than demanding those things for themselves. They have been suckered into believing that somehow other working people's gains are their loss. It's time we stopped blaming each other and start demanding better for ourselves.

    JMJ

    By Blogger Jersey McJones, at 7:33 PM  

  • Health care is always a alarming issue in almost every part of the worlsd and it should be given concenteration must : !

    By Anonymous Magento themes, at 6:37 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home