Nobody should delight in the prospect that someone will be laid off — even if that “someone” is part of a bloated government bureaucracy.
Government has undoubtedly gotten far too big and has many employees who never should have been hired in the first place. But that is more the fault of lawmakers who decide how to spend your tax dollars than of individuals who are hired by government. Regardless, it is unpleasant to see the rug pulled out from under any worker who is trying to make ends meet.
But with all that said, can you believe that Democrats in Congress have been demanding that billions more dollars be spent to prop up jobs in state and local government around the country? President Barack Obama supports the spending and “did not propose to offset the cost of any state aid with savings from other spending cuts or tax increases,” The New York Times reported.
Has it escaped Democrats’ notice that most of the millions of layoffs over the past couple years have come not in government but in the private sector? Are they unaware that Congress’ so-called “stimulus” spending has often protected government jobs rather than “created or saved” jobs in the productive private sector?
Do they not realize our nation faces a debilitating $13 trillion national debt, on which we must pay hundreds of billions of dollars in interest every year? Those monstrous payments require money that cannot be used for constitutional purposes such as national defense, nor be left in taxpayers’ pockets so they can invest in job-creating ventures.
When politicians want to raise taxes, they often talk of “shared sacrifices” by everyone. But when will government — especially the federal government — begin “sharing in the sacrifice” by tightening its belt? Is there any reason why government workers ought to be provided special protection (courtesy of taxpayers) from the economic crisis that is taking a painful toll on everyone else?