Please provide a listing of WI's biggest expenses so we can see where all of the tax payer money is really going. That is the only way in which we can all determine what cuts will have the biggest affect. In other words, I'm not sure how you can balance the 3.8 bil. dollar WI shortfall without making cuts to the category that is causing at least 40% of the state's spending and nearly 50% of the local government's spending.
BTW, I would agree in a sense. It really isn't just the public sector employee, it's also the public sector union bosses and the tax payer representitves at the bargaining table that enable them and give away the farm.
From what books are you gleaning your information?
Let me guess, the books presented by the local and national news media.
The only possible way that the public employees in the State of Wisconsins can represent 40% of the state's budget is if the state is paying about ten times fair market value for public employee health benefits. While I have no doubt that the state is paying considerably more for health insurance for its employees compared to the same
exact health insurance package offered to employees in the private sector by their employers, I seriously doubt it amounts TEN times fair market value.
You need to clear your mind of all the propaganda that has been spoon-fed into your credulous mind and start using a bit of common sense. How many public employees do you know that so much as rise to the level of upper middle class, let alone come anywhere close to the sort of wealth enjoyed by the upper class?
BTW: Most public sector "union bosses" make an absolute pittance compared to private sector "lobbying bosses." You want to know where all your tax dollars really go, you might want to start with the lobbying firms.
Let me tell you how it works,
BUCK: Company X wants to win a sweet public works contract to build a tunnel, or a bridge, or a freeway, or a whatever. It hires a lobbying firm to do its dirty work in procuring the contract. This is expensive because there are risks involved, namely the risk of criminal prosecution and serious jail time. The lobbyist has a sit down with the local party boss. There is no direct
quid pro quo stated and nothing is signed, but by the end of the meeting both parties understand that Company X will make a considerable donation to the political party which will be split between the local party boss, and the elected public officials who will ultimately steer this very lucrative contract to Company X.
Now, in order to make all this corruption economically sensible for Company X, and worth the risk of criminal prosecution and public disgrace for both the lobbying firm, the political party boss, and the elected public officials, the state MUST overpay Company X for whatever goods and services it provides. This way, everyone gets paid---
everyone but the middle class tax payer who unwittingly pays through the nose for the very political corruption and grand larceny that is waged against him and his family.