Public school teachers paid twice hourly wage of private-sector workers

Today’s lesson is: how do you spell corruption?

According to a Bureau of Labor Statistics report, teachers are now being paid twice as much as private sector workers in the United States.  And government workers generally get nearly 50% more than private-sector workers.

Little red schoolhouses are now but a branch-plant subsidiary of militant labor unionsBut that’s OK because as we know, teachers do twice the work, are twice as important, are twice as valuable to society, are twice as educated, and/or are twice as smart as the rest of us. All of them. Equally. Merit aside. And outcomes notwithstanding.

At a rate of $56.59 per hour in combined wages and benefits, public school teachers enjoy a rate of pay even higher than other state and local government public-sector workers.  The average state and local government public worker gets an average of $40.76 per hour.  Private industry workers get an average $28.24 in wages and benefits.

Makes sense, as public-sector workers are generally about 50% smarter and harder working than shlubs like you and me.

In fact, all of that hilarity aside, many of the public-sector workers should be fired simply on the basis that their attitude seems to be that they’re 50% smarter and better and more put upon than us in every way. Well that and their eyebrow piercings, and those ever so fashionable new tattoos adorning their necks. Of course you can’t fire them though. It’s really only private-sector workers who can be fired if they’re lousy at their jobs or choose to look like irreverent douches.

This arrangement makes sense only in China or Cuba, and only you’re a government official. And/or you have pierced nipples and are an irreverent douche currently occupying Wall Street or a port.

Read more below the ad.


I suspect that this perversion of sanity and logic is a result of a dangerous compound of (1) militant left-wing unions who contribute tons of cash to sympathetic  –  almost always left-wing or so-called “progressive”  –  politicians and political parties, and which also spend tons of their union cash incessantly lobbying way-too-big governments for their ever-higher wages, benefits, and limits on competition.  And (2) the fact that public-sector worker unions are among the biggest and richest “enterprises” in the land, and are the biggest political donors and government lobbyists.

This power is a result of unions’ absurd and some say ill-gotten mandate to legally plunder their forced membership of a portion of their earnings under the guise of maintaining those workers’ “rights” and their interests, but which is now really more to serve the purpose of building and using the union as nothing short of a left-wing political machine which, owing to its massive power, has the ability to elect and continue to corrupt governments.  It has thus become self-sustaining, by design. And the worst part is that it turns its members, whether wittingly or unwittingly, into far-left political lemmings; politic minions and tools whose personal political interests may be in direct opposition to their union’s.

The unions are corrupt, and they’re gaming the system with the aid of compliant (usually left-wing or progressive) politicians in way-too-big governments. And a compliant membership.

The problem is, in fact, “progressive.”  And that’s one spelling of corruption.

Unions such as teachers’ unions get their way  –  and their wages  –  by buying it. Public-sector unions like the teachers’ unions can essentially buy their own bosses  –  the governments  –  who in turn know they don’t even use have to spend their own money to pay (pay back) those who bought them. And many of them  –  the progressives  –  don’t care. In fact many of them have an agenda which exactly equals and is entirely sympathetic to, and which often includes exactly this sort of arrangement.

Private-sector workers, whether unionized or not, cannot buy their own bosses who then use taxpayer cash to pay their employees.

This huge union and its collective bargaining concept results in massive unions buying government, in what is often a monopoly market. In the case of schools, it’s particularly true in the absence of a school voucher or school choice plan. But even then, it’s difficult or impossible for any kind of enterprise, whether academic or not, to compete against their own government and their profligate ways.

It’s perverse. And it’s corrupt.

And that’s why collective bargaining in the public sector should be eliminated.  And it’s partly why I’m a conservative.

It’s also why government should reverse its exponentially increasing size and scope and its growing meddling in what should once again be a fully private-sector-based competitive, free-market economy, where things like merit and value and efficiency are the determinants of wages and benefits and profits, rather than power and pay-offs and systemic corruption between governments and any collective.

Government is the target of so much of this union and corporate lobbying, and so much political campaign cash, and is subject to so much corruption such as this, simply because it has grown to such an extent, and become so pervasive in our daily lives and that of our whole economy.  Government has grown to such a size and scope that it is now so central, so intrusive, and has worked its way into so much of what we do and think, that many of us are completely reliant upon government for our jobs or the success of our businesses  –  and the rest of us are to at least a some extent.

Government now engineers and controls and regulates so much of lives and our businesses and our economy generally, that it practically runs our lives and owns our businesses, or might just as well own them. This is not a sustainable model, witness the Soviet Union, North Korea, and Cuba.

For citizens it leads to servitude. We’re losing our freedom. And the bigger the governments continue to grow, the more this becomes true.

Reduce governments’ growing size and power, and much of the corruption, such as that enjoyed by teachers’ unions, would disappear.

Class dismissed.

Read a summary of the Labor stats here.

.

Exposing Edward Larkin

Tenure must go. And so must Professor’s unions. If you don’t agree with me then perhaps you have yet to familiarize yourself with the case of Professor Edward Larkin. This tenured psychopath will keep his job despite exposing himself in public in front of a 17-year old girl and her mother.

The University of New Hampshire (UNH) did the right thing when they tried to fire him. But then the Professor’s union got involved. And that led to arbitration. The arbitrator’s decision was based on a single line in the contract with the UNH Professor’s union, which says a professor has to show “moral delinquencies of a grave nature” to be fired.

The arbitrator found Larkin’s behavior didn’t meet the standard of grave moral delinquency. That bears repeating: An arbitrator determined that pulling your penis out in front of a teenage girl and her mother in a public place is not a “moral delinquenc(y) of a grave nature.”

Edward Larkin

Edward Larkin

The union decried the decision. I’m just kidding. They actually applauded the decision. Union President Deanna Wood defended the decision by noting that Larkin was convicted of a misdemeanor and it was a first offense. She fails to understand that felonious conduct is often pled down to a misdemeanor during plea negotiations. None of that serves to mitigate the “grave moral deficiency” of pulling your penis out in front of minors. One wonders whether Wood would defend Larkin if he had shown her his wood. One also wonders whether she has a teenage daughter.

“If you use state law as a benchmark this was not moral deficiency of a grave order,” Wood said to a local TV station. I’m not sure what that means. There are felonies. There are misdemeanors. But, technically, there are no “grave” offensives – at least the New Hampshire Criminal Code doesn’t use that language.

But most normal people – not academic unionists defending the indefensible – realize that pulling out your penis in public is a grave moral offense. If someone did that in the presence of my daughter, he would be in grave danger of having his penis shot off with a 240-grain hollow-point. Then, the whole question of re-instatement would be settled.

But, alas, after suspension without pay, Lurking Larkin has been reinstated. And everything is okay, according to some fellow unionists. Why? It’s because he has undergone psychiatric treatment. But this is not a psychiatric issue. This is a moral issue. And that is why most university professors are in such a bad position to offer sound judgment on the case.

The president and the provost of UNH have publicly stated that Larkin’s behavior constituted “moral delinquency of a grave order.” Good for them. The Board of Trustees has also condemned Edward Larkin’s behavior. And that has raised the ire of one UNH professor. He responded to the UNH Board of Trustees with the following:

I believe (Edward Larkin) is capable of returning to that level of service, and re-earning the trust and respect of his students and colleagues. Being a leader of a public institution requires moral leadership, particularly during difficult times. I believe you have failed in this regard. Instead of cowering from public opinion, or even pandering to it, you might have attempted, early on, to shape it and educate it.

The preceding paragraph was written by Philip J. Hatcher, UNH Professor of Computer Science. In defending Edward Larkin, he makes no attempt to condemn the professor’s decision to expose himself. He only condemns the UNH Board of Trustees for condemning Larkin. He goes so far as to say “by joining the clamor against Professor Larkin, you have now damaged all the faculty, particularly when you denounce the faculty union.”

In other words, the true offender is not Edward Larkin. It is the UNH Board of Trustees. Nor were the lady and her 17 year old daughter victims. The true victims were the faculty in the UNH Professor’s union.

Over the last ten years, I have been talking about the rapid moral decline in higher education. I’ve enjoyed exposing the universities. But, truth be known, they are better at exposing themselves.

Unions joining anti-bailout mobs? Now we KNOW it’s just more extreme left-wing politics.

We’ve all made fun of the abject hypocrisy of some of the complete idiots in the occupied territories of New York and other cities in America, inasmuch as they are among society’s chief beneficiaries of the taxpayers and their progressive cowardly governments’ myriad social welfare programs. But we’ve simply held our noses (literally) and laughed many of them off, as so many of them could easily (and by numerous YouTube examples) be explained away as being naive, simpletons, and abject ignoramuses.  We’ve seen example after example of many of them who, if they didn’t drop out of sixth grade, were taught (mostly “art” and “social justice” classes), extremely badly, in our failed taxpayer-funded public schools and colleges, by so many militant, unionized, left-wing ideologues. All funded by taxpayers.

But for huge labor unions  –  the direct beneficiaries of most of all of that ongoing government “stimulus” (ha, FAIL) and ongoing taxpayer bailout cash  –  to join those mobs?  Well now that’s just preposterous.  Now they’re mocking us.  They’re thumbing their noses at us all.  It’s actually insulting.

I can easily take all those ludicrous, horrid insults from liberals, progressives, and socialists in the media and as robotically regurgitated by useful idiots in the general public as they hurl them at our tea party and tea party rallies, because their insults and reports have been and are so demonstrably false.  I think they actually hurt their own cause and help ours, with each passing demonstration of their intolerance and unintelligent non-debate.  But this is seriously hideous.

There is at least a level of consistency here:  much like the progressive governments they elect, they think you’re all complete idiots.

Let’s talk about “greed.”  Well let’s not even, because that just makes them look even sillier, if that’s even possible.

This is betraying itself as nothing but an organized political distraction designed to redirect our attention away from what has now been proven, once yet again, to be the another example of a complete failure of successive progressive governments, and the Keynesian, progressive government policies they have demanded be enacted over the years.  And not just since Obama, but mostly, since I think he was the impetus for this mob-fest.  Regular voters were lured by him and his leftist mobs to buy into his bogus rhetoric.  They invested so much in him, and relied on him to prove their grand, Utopian socialist theories would work.  Again: FAIL.  Their frustration is being directed at straw men and fallacies now. They can’t look themselves in the mirror.

Indeed, the excuse-maker in chief, President Barack Obama, has endorsed this mob-fest.  As have his cohorts Nancy Pelosi, and Michael Moore, and so many other students of the left-wing radicalism as taught by radical militants like Van Jones and Cloward–Piven. And Marx.

Today I read where the militant and extremely left-wing political union, the Canadian Auto Workers Union, is throwing its weight behind the planned Canadian mob protests staring today and this weekend in various cities in Canada.

The CAW and its Marxist-sounding boss Ken Lewenza have previously blamed “the right wingers” for all of Canada and the world’s economic woes, leading my wife and I to buy a car that we were sure was not made by the CAW, last time we bought a new car. (We studied the matter for a few minutes, and bought a Ford Escape  –  Ford because they didn’t get a government bailout  –  and an Escape because it wasn’t built in Canada by the militant left-wing political labor union, the CAW, but rather by the UAW in Kansas City.)

But alas the UAW has also endorsed the left-wing mob.  Japanese cars made by non-union labor (Toyota, for example) are sure to make our next car-buying short list.  Hopefully built in a right-to-work state.

One of the all too many inconvenient truths is that unions are, themselves, among the biggest and most powerful businesses in North America, to say nothing of them being among the most powerful special interest groups, and richest, biggest lobbyists in Washington. And the most frequent guests at the Obama White House. And the biggest funders of Obama and the Democrats.  And unions and their members are the direct beneficiaries of a huge percentage of all the government bailouts.

This is known as crony capitalism run amok, though it barely adheres to any notion of capitalism at all. It’s really known as liberal fascism, and insanity.

More?  And those huge unions totally depend for their livelihoods on “rich” investors, and banks, and all the big huge financial institutions which are the rent-paying tenants and owners of many of those building on the Wall Street the “occupiers” have taken over and literally crapped on.  That all goes right over the heads of some of these naive hypocrites. Or at least they pretend it does, in many cases (a point which becomes embarrassingly obvious when you confront them directly with these facts.  You’ve never seen anybody change the subject, hurl invective at you, and then tootle off, faster in your life).

People  –  including unions members  –  should be protesting against the massive labor unions who benefited from the massive government bailouts.  They’re a huge part of the problem.  Progressive governments are at least half the problem.  That “1%”  –  the rich people the mobs so resent, represent almost exactly 1% of the problem.  And I’d bet a thousand dollars they mostly fund and vote Democrat  –  which circles around again to them being the problem.

The left-wing mobs’ object of derision should really be themselves  — unions and the progressive governments they elected and funded, and all the lazy bums and the people who made stupid and irrational decisions in their lives, like taking “art” and “sociology” in taxpayer-funded colleges.  They should really have an “Occupy Mirrors” protest, and hold mirrors in front of their faces, right in front of the Obama White House, and at all government and union offices.

NewsQuips for Sept 16 2011

Here’s some NewsQuips for Friday Sept 16. Keep checking as I add more through the day, maybe, usually, depending.

1. New poll: Take this union and shove it!  78% of Americans would not like to join a union. 48% think unions have outlasted usefulness, just 30% disagree.

…Yet while 68% of Republicans and 54% of adults not affiliated with either of the major political parties believe unions have outlived their usefulness, 52% of Democrats still see a need for them.

… Data released a couple of weeks ago shows that 45% of adults have at least a somewhat favorable opinion of unions, with 18% Very Favorable.  Forty-eight percent (48%) viewed unions at least somewhat unfavorably, including 23% with a Very Unfavorable opinion.

That’s a Minus-8 favorable rating using Rasmussen’s Presidential Approval Index math. And by the way, President Obama’s Presidential Approval Index is Minus-17 today.  I wonder if he’ll get a raise and more job security in 2012, or just tons more paid vacation time.


2.
Uh-oh! Solyndra “Lite”?  Or should I say “Lights Out?”  News from up in the great white progressive government meddling in the private free market north…

“McGuinty” in the following National Post (Toronto) headline is the very progressive-left, big-government loving, Liberal premier of Ontario, who is currently running for re-election against a not quite as liberal Progressive Conservative candidate named Hudak.

McGuinty’s clean energy poster child starving for work

OTTAWA — The solar energy company touted this week by Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty as a flagship of the province’s clean energy economy has halted production because of slow demand.

Mr. McGuinty was flanked by Eclipsall Energy Corp.’s workforce when he visited its Scarborough solar panel plant Tuesday, but there was no mention that the production line is temporarily shut down. When my colleague Tamsin McMahon visited the plant she found the reception desk was empty, the cafeteria was closed and only a handful of employees milling around inside the sparsely furnished building. …

Polls show a neck and neck race in the election.  You can’t see much light between them, politically.  Solar or otherwise.


3.
transit busI have to take the government bus transportation and societal benefit program again today.  To the doctor.  To go over last week’s terrible blood test results, showing my cholesterol levels so high they’re off the charts.  I’m distracted by the impending doom… with regard to taking the bus.  Please keep me in your thoughts.

(I will later ride my bicycle to the pharmacy to buy my Crestor, but I’m gonna leave it running while in the store).

4. It’s like Fruit Day comes earlier and earlier every year.  But yes apparently it’s already Fruit Day.  Says Google.  Happy Fruit Day.  No, I didn’t have a clue what the F (which stands for fruit, natch) they were on about either.


5.
Me likey.  Michael Reagan  –  son of Ronald Reagan  –  considering a run against dinosaur era career politician Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein of California.  Speaking of fruits.  By which I mean there’s lots of fruits in California.


6.
…more NewsQuips coming… maybe, depending.

Unions are moving left, welcome higher taxes, because they rely on gov; But…

…It might well be asked why so many CEOs and huge corporations are also happily supporting the Left, and donating so much of their and their shareholders’ cash to Democrats  –  even the most left-wing or progressive Democrats.

It’s clear to me why that is: Thanks to progressives, and short-sighted people who think with their wallets instead of with their heads (or their kids’ and grand kids’ wallets), corporations more and more rely on government for corporate welfare and bail-outs, such as in the case of GM and Chrysler; and for left-wing political agenda-driven spending (or what the progressives all call “investment”) contracts. A great example is the case of General Electric and its CEO, Jeffrey Immelt (who Obama has taken in as an advisor), which has been engaged in massive lobbying for wind-power projects and other technologies in which they are actively engaged. Obama promises massive government “investment” in “green” technology wind power.  Coinkidink.

It used to be that innovative corporations would appeal to America’s greatest asset: it’s freedom;  and the free market, and the private sector to advance market demand for their new technologies and products.  But now they find a more pliable, easy target as a customer: big, and growing, government with progressive or left-wing ideologies and agendas.  Which is exactly non-market, really. And non free anything. It’s actually the makings of serfdom. So it’s weird that way.

Buy the book

Buy the book

Like public-sector unions, big, growing government, with massive central planning and social-engineering projects on their agenda, are becoming the prime market for some corporations who ironically have utterly no free-market or capitalist principles, and who are, through their short-sighted, blinkered and misguided ambition, working against themselves and their grand kids, and arguably America, ultimately. These corporations all got started, and thrived in a free-market capitalist system.  Governments were smaller and corporate reliance on government was minimal or non-existent.  It worked!  The system worked!

Now though those corporations are carelessly working in furtherance of a big-government, nanny-state, and Fabian Socialist state, in which they rely more on big government, the continued tax increases by government of the public, and of course massive new government spending. This is otherwise known as Liberal Fascism.  And this feeds on itself on grows. Like cancer. Or socialism. And it has never worked, and it’s not working now.

Their behavior is all very counterintuitive to me, but then I’m a conservative and a free-market capitalist.

Anyway, enough with my tangent.  Here’s an excellent article which got me off on that tangent:

Why the Labor Movement Moved Left

Unions weren’t so uniformly behind tax increases when most of their members worked for companies in the private economy.

By STEVEN MALANGA,
in the Wall Street Journal, Aug 26, 2011

Although the field of Republican presidential contenders is still in flux, the National Education Association (NEA) decided in early July to endorse President Obama’s 2012 re-election bid. The move by the nation’s biggest teachers union was entirely expected. The NEA—the fifth biggest giver to political campaigns in the past 20 years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics—supports almost no one but Democrats for federal office, having given just 5% of its campaign contributions to Republicans since 1990.

Don’t expect anything different from the nation’s other biggest unions, private or public, including the dozen unions on the Center’s list of the top 20 contributors to federal elections. Those unions, ranging from the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees to the Service Employees International Union to the Teamsters, overwhelmingly support Democrats. They have given only 3% of the $384 million they’ve contributed to candidates for federal office over the past 20 years to Republicans. Union advocates argue that this is because the Democratic Party looks out for the interests of union members. But a significant plurality of their members doesn’t always agree.

[...]

In recent years, as private-sector union membership has declined while public-sector union ranks have grown, the movement’s leadership has focused not just on traditional labor issues like raising the minimum wage, but also advocating consistently for bigger government and more public spending.

[...Read the rest...]

Militant left-wing auto workers union is all about politics, not workers.

I got a huge amount of angry hate mail from leftists a couple of years ago when I got into it with the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) union and their boss Ken Lewenza, who (as followers of my work all know) sounds very much like a communist to me (see link below!).

And I’m up for another round.

I just re-tweeted this CBC tweet this morning:

[blackbirdpie url="http://twitter.com/#!/JoelJohannesen/status/107121776290562048"]

The left-wing state-owned, socialism-reliant Canadian media operation, the dreadful CBC, routinely  –  reflexively –  reiterates any left-wing or socialist or progressive or communist or liberal or left-wing talking point or announcement or Ken Lewenza, CAWnews release.  They did it again this morning.  No of course it’s not “news” per se  –  even a first-year journalism student can see that.  It’s just that their left-wing ally, Ken Lewenza, who sounds very much like a communist to me, said something.  Something yummy in the context of an election in October in the province of Ontario, where Lewenza wants anybody but the “Tories”  –  that moderately, barely center-right party (the Progressive Conservative Party, which even has the word “Progressive” built right into their party name)  –  to win.

At the state-owned, taxpayer-funded CBC.ca website, they include this article this morning, which speaks to the amazing news story about the fact that Ken Lewenza said something yummy.  You’ll notice it is a “Politics” story:

Hey I wonder if anybody who supports a “Tory” win ever said anything!  Certainly not as reported at the CBC.  I’ve never seen any such article.  But just in case, I did a search at CBC.ca for “support Hudak” (the Tory leader’s name) and I got this at the top of the search results: “Ontario Tory leader admits he smoked pot – Politics – CBC …” (and nothing like anybody supporting him).

Even a pot-smoker can see that it is in this way (and others) that the left-wing state-owned media helps guide people’s votes. And helps “inform” citizens on how they should vote. The essence is that they write “news” report after “news” report like that, and try to build up that left-wing mob mentality, and an anti-conservative meme or cult.  It’s what the left does. Especially in the media and academia.

And it’s reason #8,486 why state-owned and state-run media should be banned in this country (or any erstwhile free country), and why that notion should be enshrined in the Canadian constitution. (I’ve also been saying that for years now.  Too many blog entries and columns to list here).

But now that I have most of the “new car”-related posts from the old PTBC site transferred to BoldColors.net, and many of the old links are  updated, this works out well.

That’s some of the posts explaining why we bought a Ford Escape (built in Kansas City by UAW)) a couple of years ago, rather than anything  the militant left-wing anti-capitalist, anti-conservative Canadian Auto Workers Union (CAW) built, and why we’ll never buy any product the CAW builds, to the best of our ability.  At least not until they embrace Canada and its free-market capitalism upon which it was successfully founded and built; and they stop working against me and half the country, and stop promoting the idea of fundamentally transforming Canada into a socialist state. And even then, I think we’ll keep punishing them a few years longer just for good measure. It’s a matter of principle.

 

Union Member Was F—ing Polite. Customer Was F—ing Lying.

Another big union blindly defends a union member  –  this member accused by a customer  –  a passenger on a regional transit system (Toronto’s “TTC”)  –  who saw him urinating in public while on duty in full view of at least that one passenger.  Who of course complained. 

Couldn’t happen on account of our members always abide by proper manners and decorum! claimed the union boss who wasn’t there but chose to slam both the customer/passenger/witness and those in management who dared sympathize with the passenger/witness, and who as management properly apologized on behalf of the entire taxpayer-owned and run operation.  The union held its ground, refusing to apologize.  Ya see he was just talking on his cell phone, see! claimed the union boss. In fact he was discussing work-related matters on it at the time!

“[T]he worker in question was using his cellphone to check on a work assignment … verified by an internal TTC investigation.”
– Union boss Bob Kinnear of the Amalgamated Transit Union

This is a perfectly reasonable explanation because as we know, new humans born after 1985 or so and who are union members have ears and mouths in their crotch area. It’s new! (And they must face a wall while using cell phones now  –  also new.  And the new “smartphones” leak.  Did not know that didja?).

But it was this remark, posted at a Canadian news site, which solidified the claim of union drivers always abiding by the principle of proper decorum.  Note that this is from the official union spokesman:

Union spokesman Bill Reno offered his own opinion on the attention drawn by the negative incident.

“It’s f—ing unfortunate. F—ing unfortunate,” he said. “The airwaves are filled with hatred for TTC drivers.

“It didn’t f—ing happen. And our people are getting creamed out there.”

See, the union always employs proper decorum no matter who they are f—ing addressing. F—ing always.

“Conservative” gov gives Toyota 10s of millions — to maintain massive profits & competitive edge?

Why is the government  –  any government but particularly a “Conservative” government  –  giving our taxpayer cash or what they’re calling “financial  assistance” to a massive, privately-owned car company that sells billions of dollars worth of cars every year and is massively profitable on its own and is at the cutting edge of technology and competitiveness in the global market?

“This investment will help Toyota maintain its competitive edge in the global market”
– a Liberal Ontario government spokesman as quoted in the 100% state-owned media, the taxpayer-funded CBC.

In fairness to the “Conservatives,” that federal government is being joined by the left-wing Liberal Ontario provincial government in this corporate welfare malfeasance.

All of the abject progressive-rooted BS aside, as a matter of fact, I wouldn’t even care if the company was the opposite of competitive, and if it weren’t massively successful and doing just fine on its own; if it was on the precipice of collapse due to a shoddy business plan, a crap product, and lousy management, a greedy workforce, a mammoth failure to foresee trends, bad science, a poor economy, or for any other such reason.  They still shouldn’t get government/taxpayer welfare or gifts.

It’s ridiculous. It’s abjectly unfair.  It’s anti-capitalist.  Anti free-market. Anti-freedom. Government meddling. Government central planning, Soviet Union-style.  Betting  –  “investing”  –  our taxpayer cash on business ventures the government deems to make on our behalf, because apparently we’re too stupid to do so on our own, and of our own free will.  Even though the company floats shares on stock markets and exchanges accessible around the world by all citizens and all businesses and private and commercial investors to ensure a steady stream of easily accessible private financing on its own merits.

This ensures the broadening scope of exactly this by increasingly progressive government.  Ensuring more of it will follow in turn.  And so on, and so on.  It’s the very definition of “progressive.”

Usually they (the progressives in government, and in their media) simply call these things “investments,”  as they did in the quote above, in their ongoing effort to fake us out as the dupes they think we are and they take us for.  Today I notice they’re also calling it a “financial contribution.”  Perhaps that’s because they aren’t actually getting shares in the company for their (our) “investment.”  It appears to be just a gift.  From you.  How nice of you.  Hope you can afford it, sucka.  But whatever it is, it’s certainly an abomination.

The government financing represents the first major financial contribution they have made to an auto maker since they spent about $13-billion to help bail out Chrysler LLC and General Motors Corp. during the recession that led to the auto industry crisis in 2008-09.
– An article in liberalvision CTV news network’s web site

Hideous.  Progressivism run amok.

The last car my wife and I bought was a Ford, built in America.  We did that partially because (A) we wouldn’t buy a car made by the far-left Canadian Auto Workers union after their leadership blamed “right wingers” for the recession, and I also believe they are led by folks who appear to me to be nothing better than communists;  and (B) we wouldn’t buy a GM or Chrysler vehicle after they accepted their state buyout or welfare, as though they were poor handicapped children who were starving, instead of being a huge company replete with executives and staff who are all making far, far more than me, with health and pension and other benefit plans that are literally insane.

Now I won’t be buying a Toyota either.

Soon, though, at this rate, most every company will be either state-owned or partially or even completely reliant upon the state for its very existence, much as a rapidly growing number of citizens are today.

Unless we act to stop them from this socialist/fascist lunacy, we’re screwed.

Take that to the bank.

Solution to the Canada Post strike: privatization – By A. Karabegovic & C. Lammam, Fraser Inst.

By Amela Karabegovic and Charles Lammam of the Fraser Institute. –

With the breakdown in negotiations between Canada Post management and the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, many cities across Canada have been subject to rotating strikes by the mail carriers. Naturally, it is Canadians who rely on the crown corporation for mail delivery that are adversely affected. It doesn’t have to be this way. To protect consumers, the solution is to privatize Canada Post.

Canada Post has the exclusive right to deliver letters by “snail mail,” meaning that its services are protected from competition by law. In other words, Canada Post has a monopoly on certain mail services. Private firms like FedEx and UPS, however, are permitted to deliver goods, newspapers, books/magazines, and “letters of an urgent nature” or express mail.

But postal services need not be delivered by a public monopoly protected from competitive pressures. In fact, Canadians would benefit tremendously from privatizing Canada Post and opening up all postal services to competition.

Piles of real world evidence show that private firms typically outperform their public sector counterparts. Research that has looked specifically at Canada Post suggests privatization would greatly improve services and benefit consumers.

The Mail Monopoly, an in-depth analysis of Canada’s postal service published in 1990, found that Canada Post has failed to provide Canadians with expedient and reliable services. As an example of poor service, the author, Professor Douglas Adie of Ohio University, noted that it took about the same amount of time to deliver a letter in 1990 as it did 200 years prior.

Adie pointed to New Zealand’s experience with privatizing postal services as reason for Canada to follow suit. After the New Zealand Post Office was privatized, it moved from a loss to a profit by reducing its staff by 20 per cent and its costs by 30 per cent. It also sped up mail delivery and increased “on time” delivery by 15 per cent. Professor Adie concluded that postal services are not likely to improve in Canada until Canada Post is privatized and subject to competition.

In a 2007 study, University of Toronto professor Edward Iacobucci and his colleagues also concluded that privatizing Canada Post would result in efficiency gains and improvements in service quality. The study found that labour issues, particularly the presence of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, make it difficult for Canada Post to improve efficiency and productivity.

For instance, in 2005 Canada Post lost 16 days per full-time employee to absenteeism in delivery and mail processing operations. This was 60 per cent higher than the Canadian average for manufacturing employees and 20 per cent higher than the rate for all unionized employees.

After reviewing the performance impacts of postal deregulation in other countries such as Sweden, Finland, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Australia, Germany, and the United Kingdom, the Iacobucci study found that postal companies increased service quality, adapted products and services to demand, introduced several mail-related innovations, reduced employment, and improved labour performance following deregulation.

Privatizing Canada Post will also result in decreased stamp prices. A recent report from the Montreal Economic Institute summarized the European experience with privatization and competition in postal services and found Austria, Netherlands, and Germany experienced an 11per cent to 17 per cent decline in the price of stamps for letter mail after privatization.

The benefits of privatization result from key differences between how private sector firms and crown corporations behave and the incentives each faces.

Crown corporations typically operate in a state-provided monopoly shielded from competitive discipline. This means they are not required to constantly update technologies and production processes or offer innovative products and services to customers.

In addition, it is impossible for crown corporations to go broke, as governments generally bail them out. If private businesses incur sustained losses, the decline of capital will push them into bankruptcy. As a result, the private sector must provide customers with the quality of goods and services they demand, in a timely manner and at affordable prices. The public sector simply does not face the same pressures.

Canadians have much to gain from the privatization of postal services; the current union strike only strengthens the case. It’s time to privatize Canada Post.

Let’s reduce Canada Post mail delivery to twice per week (and less)

Aside from privatizing mail delivery altogether, which would be my preferred option, here’s a great Plan B and a great way to reduce the size and scope of government without most of the public even noticing: reduce mail delivery to twice per week.

Everybody who even knows there’s a growing Canada Post strike going on right now acknowledges that, well, hardly any of us would even notice if Canada Post went on strike. True enough, but eventually we would notice, if only because we didn’t prepare and adjust for it (by, say, yawning).  So I’m sure we still need some mail delivery, but hardly at the rate of five days per week.

In rural areas or those places in Canada so far removed from the rest of the world, Monday-to-Friday mail service is still necessary.  Fine  –  leave that as is.  The rest of us in urban and suburban Canada can easily adjust to twice weekly mail delivery.  In fact it would be better.  Less dogs would escape from our front yards.  And less barking.  I could rest my case right there in my neighborhood.

And as a turnabout from government meddling in my life on a daily basis as it does now, I would also like to meddle with the state-owned, state-run Canada Post’s policies such that private-sector advertisers who currently use the postal service for advertising/flyer delivery be told they can find a contractor in the private sector, instead of using (and giving rise to another excuse to maintain) the state-owned letter-delivery monopoly.  That part of Canada Post’s business  — just judging from the amount of pure crap I get every week –  must constitute a huge part of what remains of Canada Post’s vastly reduced legitimate work load. And this is not at all a tangential point: none of us need that sort of work done through a huge state-owned operation, by highly-paid state workers with generous pension plans and nearly two months of paid vacations per year plus accumulated sick leave and more.

Businesses can easily find private sources for that kind of advertising.  It would no doubt become cheaper for them anyway, and it would strike up all sorts of income and business opportunities for young and old entrepreneurs, part-timers, students, and it would help stoke the private sector as a general matter.  We’d all win.

Moreover, it would help reduce the size and scope of that massive, dinosaur of a state-owned behemoth.

And this would all have the added benefit of reducing the power of the militant and extreme left-wing public sector union.

And hey here’s something I bet you never knew:  that state-owned, state-run government behemoth, Canada Post, owns and runs one of Canada’s big parcel delivery companies too.  You thought Purolator Couriers was a private outfit competing just like everybody else?  Think again.  It’s owned by Canada Post.  Why?  Who knows.  Likely the same sort of the socialism-based rationale used by progressives to attempt to explain why the giant state-owned media  — the dreadful CBC  –  owns nearly half of Sirius Satellite Radio in Canada.  What kind of a government competes against its own citizens in business for profits?  Do try to answer that.

So there’s a couple of ideas.  I’m sure you can think of far more to add to them, too.  So let’s do that.