Friday, June 19, 2009
Environmental Projects + Unions = Increased Costs
Seems like a pretty solid equation; even the New York Times thinks so, as they point out in this article about unions in California doing the kinds of things that unions do (only, the tactics have been updated, with lawsuits replacing lead pipes and baseball bats).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The relationship "Environmental Projects + Unions = Increased Costs" is wrong; it's a geometric function, not arithmetic. It should read:
ReplyDelete"Environmental Projects^ Unions = Increased Costs"
And on this I speak from professional experience. Especially if the Federal Gubbermint sets the goal post. Pretty soon, we'll be lucky to afford to buy batteries for a flashlight.
I think the incestuous relationship between government, environmental parasites posing as "private" businesses, and unions illustrate one of the fundamental problems with Obama-style socialism: these entities acting together accelerate costs in a way that no honest budgeting would be able to make palatable to the voters if they really knew what was going on.
ReplyDelete"incestuous" is an accurate term. The Bacon-Davis Act was one of the first steps into that snake pit. Obama is diving in head first.
ReplyDelete