Chattanooga will lay off "definitely less than 10" of its 2,300 employees because of budget cuts, the city's chief financial officer said recently. But don't panic: That's a worst-case scenario. The workers might only be shuffled around rather than let go, officials said in an article in the Times Free Press.
Beneath that not-quite-apocalyptic prediction, the story included this Orwellian passage:
"Councilwoman Pam Ladd, who voted for the budget, said layoffs are always tough, but that the recession has had widespread impacts in the private sector, too."
(Do tell.)
"There's hardly a company that hasn't gone through this type of staffing reduction," she said.
Begging your pardon, Councilwoman, but yes there is. Most companies would be stark raving thrilled if they faced only the meek "staffing reduction" that the city kinda sorta proposes. Fewer than 10, and maybe zero, Chattanooga workers will be laid off in the midst of the ongoing economic crisis. Yet that is somehow comparable to the hemorrhaging of jobs in the private sector?
A bit of perspective would help: The remarkably mild regimen of layoffs would amount to less than one-half of 1 percent of the city's ample workforce - and even the employees who could theoretically be out of a job would get a severance package unavailable to lots of private-sector workers.
Layoffs are "tough" indeed, but you wouldn't know that to look at government payrolls. The public is agonizingly aware that the recession has devastated the private sector. What is less clear is exactly when government employees will begin to share equally in the effects of that devastation. I doubt many Chattanoogans buy the notion that not even 10 workers can be found in the city's stable of 2,300 who are less than essential.
Equating the off chance of negligible government layoffs with the scalding reality of private-sector job losses is absurd. It's also evidence that we live in a time when words frequently have no connection to the realities they are supposed to convey.
'Change' loses its luster
Democrats hold the White House and suffocating majorities in the Senate and the House of Representatives. So you'd think the teachers unions would be pinching themselves and asking whether they've died and gone to that great teachers lounge in the sky, where it's always 3:45 in the afternoon.
Instead, here is what Dennis Van Roekel, president of the National Education Association, said at his union's summer convention: "Today, our members face the most anti-educator, anti-union, anti-student environment I have ever experienced."
News accounts from the gathering were bleak: Speaker after speaker called for the resignation of President Obama's education secretary, Arne Duncan. And union leaders didn't bother inviting any federal officials to speak, confident that government spokesmen would be booed.
"This is not the change I hoped for," Mr. Van Roekel groaned.
Not to get all technical, but if teachers unions - teachers unions! - think they are worse off under President Obama than they were under President Bush, Mr. Obama's party is in deep Dr Pepper.
And now, Step 2
From the Los Angeles Times: "The Obama administration Tuesday issued new regulations to protect Americans from the insurance industry ... ."
Now if somebody would issue regulations to protect Americans' insurance from the Obama administration.
Fed up with all those phony reincarnations?
Here's my nominee for the funniest beginning to a news article this year: "SHIGATSE, Tibet - Reincarnations of Tibetan spiritual leaders, including the dalai lama, must be approved by the Chinese central government, a senior Communist Party official said."
Yes, good reader, the officially atheist leadership of China now will decide which reincarnations are real and which are fake.
What was I saying a few lines ago about words losing their link to reality?
To reach Steve Barrett, call 423-757-6329 or e-mail sbarrett@timesfreepress.com.