Another difference between private & public sector.
If a private company decides that it cannot afford to do business in one state, it can move. It is not possible for the govt of Ohio to move to Wisconsin :-) Thus, whatever the cost of running the business of govt, they ain't moving out of state or overseas.
A private company does not have an unlimited option of raising its price to cover increased costs. At some point, it will no longer be competitive with other similar products/services in the marketplace. It can move or close its business. The govt, when faced with costs increasing, just raises taxes. Taxpayers have no chance to "opt out" as they do with other products/services.
Just read in the NYT that NJ state income tax is 8.97% ... add that to FIT; and property taxes; sales tax ... and one really doesn't have to wonder if the "rich" are paying their fair share of the taxes.
Interestingly, the states with the highest tax profile (like NJ, NY, and CA) are the ones who have the largest financial mess. Seems like the more $ the govt has to spend, the less wisely they spend it.
Just look at the companies that have had to move mfg. overseas because of unions.
One can thank the unions for the term, "rust belt", in the states they control. They have made us uncompetitve in every area.
The reason companies like Mercedes Benz, Nissan and Toyota chose the south to build thier factories is because they wouldn't be blackmailed by the UAW. Add the fact that pay at these factories are better then what is paid in Detroit.
The list goes on and on of companies moving to areas that are more buisness friendly than the unionized "rust belt".
"Do you believe that a person should be forced to pay to have a job? This means do you think that a person should be forced to pay money to a union in order to have job? Why is that not extortion?"
To me this question doesn't reference government unions but is a general statement about closed shops. I agree, unions based on government employees are different because the employer is not incented in the same way. So the union has had an advantage for so long and now their benefits are out of whack. However, I don't think unions alone are to blame. The public and our representatives are to blame. We are the other side of the table and we have to protect our interests too. We have to find a medium.
Unfortunately, for too long many locations have been electing representatives that are beholden to the unions which is much more common in the Democratic party but happens on both sides of the isle.