Surly Sunday

Told ya I'd come back to it.

I managed to watch some of the talking heads today.  One of the topics, due to the fiasco occurring in Wisconsin, is unions.

One pundit plaintively proclaimed that private-sector union membership had plunged from 35% a generation ago to about 12% today, and that the unions had been "de-fanged", lost their potency.  He seemed to indicate that this was a bad thing.

Newsflash, meathead!  Does it take a rocket scientist to posit that there's a strong correlation with the shift of manufacturing jobs to foreign factories?  Does it seem plausible that union labor in the manufacturing sector priced itself out of the market, and that in so doing, the union bosses put their workers out of jobs?  I'm not saying all of those jobs would still be on U.S. soil without the union influence, but I do believe it's fair to say that the union leaderships' demands hastened the exit of many industries from our borders.

Elsewhere, it's reported in the Fort Worth Startlegram that an El Paso State Representative is proposing an increase in the State component for traffic fines, from $30 to $45:  ""With a statewide budget crisis and ever-increasing healthcare costs, helping our local governments and local hospitals bear new financial burdens is incredibly important,"  [representative] Gonzalez said."

Notice that the representative refers to the State's budget crisis, but not to the citizens' economic woes.  And while her rationale speaks of helping local governments and local hospitals, I'm willing to bet a box of doughnuts that in the bill there's no language dedicating the proposed increased funding to such use - it would simply go into the general fund.  Just like the lottery proceeds that help education.

In 1765, the British Parliament passed the Stamp Act, to try to recoup some of the debt incurred from the Seven Years' War (1756-1763), to be imposed on the American Colonies.  Since the Colonies had no representation in Parliament (no George Clinton or Bootsy Collins), they saw this as a naked money grab, and took a dim view of the Act, their increasing displeasure later culminating in The American Revolution.

We appear to be on a similar path today.  Governance of a population of sovereign, free individuals relies on the consent of the governed.  For over two centuries, the citizenry of the United States have assented, for the most part, to the collection of certain funds with which to operate essential government services.  However, in recent times, the necessity of certain services has come into question, as well as the lack of fiduciary responsibility in handling the funds.  Topping things off, many Americans are struggling for economic survival, while government seems to have no spending restraint whatsoever.

I don't think it's going to be smooth sailing.