Do Progressives Believe They are God-Like?

Many modern human beings do not believe in God or disagree with the idea of a higher power who has the ability to change the world. Once someone denies the existence of a higher power, s/he is left to rely on other human beings to implement change. Standing alone, an individual cannot produce wide-ranging, substantial change unless s/he is exceptional (e.g., founders of Google, etc.).

However, most of us are not exceptional. Therefore, most people who do not believe in a higher power rely on groups of people to create change. In practice, groups of people solicit their government to implement change via government programs. In short, modern human beings seem to have replaced God with man-made governments.

The idea of God required humans to be beneath a higher power and to accept certain limitations; in contrast, the idea of government as a change agent places human beings in a similar role as an omniscient or omnipotent God.

California Dreamin': Fiscal Irresponsibility

This is old news, but still worth sharing, because of California's upcoming special election:

http://online.barrons.com/article/SB123941269948510457.html

Chris Street, treasurer of Orange County, Calif., warns if the federal government backs California's debt, the market for city bonds will be harmed. "Why would anybody buy the debt of a local issuer if they can get federally backed debt sold by the state?" he asks. He should know. The OC declared bankruptcy several years ago. Barron's is too smart not to notice the irony of quoting an OC official about the demand for municipal bonds.

Just in case you forgot--the CS Monitor reminds you that taxpayers back and insure government employees' retirement plans. Ultimately, every dollar that goes to them--the police, firefighters, and teachers--comes out of our pocket. Other states besides California also pay disproportionate amounts for their public pensions, showing the system itself is fundamentally flawed. For example, Illinois had $40.9 billion in future general and special obligation bond debt service as of June 30, 2006 ($22.7 billion principal and $18.2 billion interest). $10 billion of that–almost half of the principal--was tied to public sector pensions. (From http://www.wh1.ioc.state.il.us/fiscalcondition/DebtLevels.htm.)

Meanwhile, in California, things keep getting worse:

San Jose officials said Tuesday that the tanking stock market could force taxpayers to pony up as much as $50 million extra the following year to cover losses in the city's retirement funds.

Things look even worse in the longer term, as city officials say the cash-strapped general operating fund could have to pour tens of millions of additional dollars into the city's two pension programs by 2013.

If it's not painfully obvious by now, the current government retirement system--which is tethered to the vagaries of the stock market--is untenable. It promotes civil war between taxpayers, Wall Street, and government employees. We need to eliminate the special pension plans given to public sector employees and let them have the same retirement plan most private sector workers have--namely, a 401k or a 403b plan. In exchange, taxpayers can boost some government salaries, which are easier to track and not tied to the stock market.

As for the upcoming special election, California's governor wants Californians to vote "yes" on all the measures in the upcoming special election. I've already voted by absentee ballot, but I voted "no" on some measures. I am sick of my legislature not being able to handle basic accounting. When your income declines, you need to cut expenses. Will Sacramento ever learn third grade math?

Bonus: Robert Frank on people buying property.

Bonus II: Steve Malanga on public sector unions:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124227027965718333.html

Government in Action

I don't know how I missed this tragically funny story about American immigration agents spreading the love, Homeland Security-style:

http://www.startribune.com/local/11592171.html

Erkki Maattanen, a filmmaker for Finnish Public Television who accompanied the musicians on the September trip, said his questioners seemed to think the entourage was smuggling drugs or intending to work without a permit. "I kept trying to tell them why we were here, but they'd just yell, 'Shut up!"' he said.

Ladies and gentlemen, your taxpayer dollars are hard at work.

Hat tip to http://thisiswhyiloveminneapolis.com/

SJ Merc on San Jose's Budget Issues

John Woolfolk talks about San Jose's budget problems:

http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_12058054?IADID=Search-www.mercurynews.com-www.mercurynews.com ["Top SJ management agrees to pay freezes and cuts."]

I am curious to see how cities expect to get more revenue. It doesn't seem like anyone has the stomach for layoffs and other spending cuts. Thus, Californians should expect higher taxes in some form unless they accept the fact that government has expanded too much over the last ten years. Cutting back on government unfortunately means laying off some government employees and/or reducing pension and COLA contributions. When times are flush again, we can afford to be generous. 

Government Gets Bigger

Greg Mankiw reminds us all why he's a Harvard professor and we're not. When government expands, it almost never contracts again. As a result, most new government programs lead to current and future taxpayers contributing more of their money to the government's coffers every year--and it doesn't stop. Thus, taxpayers should be ever-vigilant when it comes to any government expansion, even those purportedly for our benefit.

Cops and Robbers

In today's SJ Merc (October 27, 2007, page 2B), John Woolfolk talks about police officer pay in San Jose:

Basic pay for a San Jose officer is now $108,167, excluding overtime; with benefits, the total cost comes to $147,614.

Note that the basic salary excludes overtime pay, which can be substantial. The SJ Police Department is now asking for a 4% raise. Each 1% in raises costs San Jose taxpayers 1.9 million dollars each year. If the city is inclined to grant any raise, it should be in the form of a higher salary, which can be more easily tracked than benefits. The costs of increased benefits, such as pensions, are almost impossible to determine until they become due.

Government Unions and their Salaries and Benefits

Here is an interesting article, published in 2005, on government workers and their benefits:

http://www.city-journal.org/html/15_4_taxpayers.html

Astonishingly, the average state and local government employee now collects 46 percent more in total compensation (salary plus benefits) than the average private-sector employee, according to the nonpartisan Employee Benefit Research Institute.

Wages average a hefty 37 percent higher in the public sector, but the differences in benefits are even more dramatic. Local governments pay 128 percent more, on average, than private employers to finance workers’ health-care benefits, and 162 percent more on retirement benefits.

The Conspiracy Against the Taxpayers
by Steven Malanga
City Journal, Autumn 2005