You don't have to be an economist to see this coming soon. Cities, counties and states all over the USA are going bankrupt and/or have serious finance issues. They simply don't have the tax revenue to pay ever-growing payrolls and benefit plans for employees. And in most cases, those payrolls and benefits account for 70-85% of all expenditures. Despite this fact, public employee unions are being difficult about taking pay reductions or loss of work days; which is too bad for them. Because in some cases, they will eventually find themselves out of a job. Vallejo, CA is already in the pricess of going bankrupt and will likely hire an entire new Fire & Police force unless the current people cave in to lower pay and benefits. And Harrisburg, PA is following soon after. And in the case of a school district back east, the
Superintendant fired all 160 teachers when the union refused to accept a pay cut.

Until we get rid of public employee unions here we are doomed.

She may be right for the wrong reasons. I've heard this same argument over and over again as justification to save costs by privatizing formerly governmental functions, and those usually end up costing even more than under the old system. Here in Texas, for instance, our idiot governor decided that a good way to save money on the state food stamp program was to outsource the whole thing to a company owned by a friend. He made any amount of noise on how this was going to save taxpayer money, but within a year, this company did so much damage due to managerial incompetence that it'll have to work for years to fix it.

(And yes, some may argue that Rick Perry did this deliberately as a bootstrap measure for Texas's poor. The problem is that while as vindictive and mean as he is, the last thing he wants to do is irritate the Teabagger contingent that keeps voting him back into office. You'd be amazed at how many of those "Get government off my back" and secessionist whackos would starve in a week if not for government disability checks and food stamps.)

That said, I can't say she's wrong. The problem is that when it comes to these issues, the ones that already benefit the most aren't about ready to give back what they feel is their right, and the greatest complaining comes from those who are maybe a year or so away from eligibility. Problem is, no compromise is going to make both groups happy, and if they're not happy, any reform simply won't happen.

It doesn't take a arch-conservative to figure this one out. The current system is unsustainable. The times they are a changin... Mish blogs about the often: http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/03/ohio-mayor-seeks-to-eliminate-public.html

An unintended consequency of Reagan's successful firing of the Air Traffic Controllers was that it forced public employee unions to recognize that unlike private sector unions, they could not use the strike and threat of the strike as a collective bargaining tool.

Consequently they took a different route, becoming a strong political force supporting candidates who would give them competitive wages, but more than competitive fringe benefits and pensions. The fringe benefit costs were under the radar, and thus more acceptable than high wages, while the pension costs were government expenses deferred to the future.

Well, the future is now. Local and State governments have the choice of reducing pesnions, which is probably not legal, raising taxes to pay for the promises of yesteryear which is not politically feasible, or cutting services. The decision will be to drastically cut services. This will even involves early release of violent felons fromprison because of lack of fundng to continue to incarcerate them. Don't beleive it? See article in Friday's NYTimes.

The service cuts are already upon us. Portland is threatening to close down parks programs.

Frank there are developers with boondoggle projects that need the parks money. It's really for the best, just ask them.

"Are public employee unions' days numbered?"

Yeah, one day after the govt collapses. There is not one politician that will stand up to the pub employee unions anywhere.

And the Governor of the formerly liberal lovefest in the state of New Jersey is lurching down that road as well.

It is coming public employees and public pensioners. I don't think that politicians will have a choice but to stand up to the public employee unions. There just is not enough money to pay for their perks i.e., annual 3% COLAs, and defined benefit retirements.

What parent is going to hang out in a state that pays govt retiree pensions (or govt employee salaries/benefits) to the detriment of the schools? Hey were not the worst in this state but that doesn't mean the intelligent are going to ride it out here. http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/02/public_pensions_it_gets_worse.html

Right, only the elite deserve all the money and along with it all the benefits!

Bring back serfdom!

Long live the Feudal States of Amerika!

I think we're seeing this the same way, Al.

Undermining unions, public employee or otherwise, is not the answer to our ecomonic problems--and would in reality make things much worse.

A lot of common people in this country don't know who their real enemies are.

If you're anti-union, you're either a wealthy capitalist or a sap.

Call me a sap then. How many members are there left of the UAW now?

"How many members are there left of the UAW now"

And how well are the working classes doing now compared to when unions were strong? And how well do the working classes do in this country compared to comparably wealthy European countries in which unions are strong?

Maybe the problems with US auto manufacturers have more to do with the lack of national health care in this country and lousy decisions made by company executives than with unions. The German car industry has managed to thrive with a highly unionized workforce.

You're a sap. Or a wealthy capitalist.