A quarterly magazine of urban affairs, published by the Manhattan Institute, edited by Brian C. Anderson.
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
The Battle for Chicago and Beyond « Back to Story
Showing 10 Comment(s) Subscribe by RSS
Just reread this fascinating article and ordered the book. Oddly enough, my thinking on this has led to the conclusion that things have become so bad that it may be time to leave - there just may be a need to have a real division, where those who believe one way of governing to have it their way, and those who don't live somewhere under laws that reflect their beliefs.
Yes, it has come to that - there may be no other way.
I have led public unions, large ones, and except for the vituperation, I agree. It is not good to advocate the impossible even if it might win one votes. If it is impossible, it won't happen. A "good" demagogue can maybe get away with blaming the results on "enemies", but eventually Union men and women, loyal but not stupid, see through that stuff.
Far better for members and their leaders to fight hard for their desires but to stick to what is in fact possible.
Since there is no one representing taxpayers, the simplest and fairest solution is to ban all public sector unions. It would also remove the biggest source of corruption that plagues many communities and bankrupts them.
There really is no way to be fair to the taxpayer with unions. To be honest since taxpayers are paying the all the bills and receiving the "services" they should have first rights. Often the "services" are costly and lousy ones at best.
Why do I read your comment and see "Otter" at the PanHellenic Disciplinary Council in Animal House:
"I put it to you Greg, isn't this an indictment of the entire United States?!"
@Jay - The problem is that privatization is not showing positive results, particularly with the poorest performing students in the system. In fact, about half of charters perform no better than the public schools they replaced or are surrounded by.
Don't be fooled by the charter school media blitz.
Again - if public unions are allowed to donate what is essentially taxpayer funds - and donate enormous amounts of such money - doesn't that corrupt the entire political process, since the money buys votes?
Haven't we seen this happen - everywhere? To such an extent that the whole political process is now almost unfixably corrupted?
But, why doesn't anyone suggest that unions NOT be allowed to donate? Am I missing something here? If we must have them how about taking away their fangs - or at least cutting an inch off?
Because public unions are destroying the country - we are on a one way path to destruction and it is own fault. Why hasn't the Republicans thought of this? Where are they when it comes to public unions - have you heard anything?
if privatization (i.e. charter schools) show positive results - and they do - who cares if people make money?
the free market has made America great. why shouldn't be applied to fix our education system?
Your argument is incorrect. The strike is about who controls the schools. Collaboration between union, city and administrators would put an end to the so-called reform movement which is just another word for privatization or let's make some money off a $600 billion educational system
The so called reform,is nothing more than politicians covering up their mistakes and screw ups of the past. Ex; new Jersey not contributing their share into the pension funds. Governor Christe calls it pension reform!
Assuming your argument that teachers and their unions are the reason public education is such a mess is a valid one, then it is equally valid to argue that the real blame for the state of our schools rests with politicians and their appointed administrators who are supposed to manage the school system. And, if the school system is in such a mess, then it is the officials and bureaucrats who should be punished or fired, not the teachers in our classrooms.