General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Mayor abruptly slashes wages to minimum for Scranton City Workers [View all]OrgExp
(3 posts)I find it particularly interesting to read through all of these comments and find that nobody even suggests the possibility of looking into the town's operations and finding out what, if anything, might possibly be cut in terms of spending.
Conceptually, you have to think about this first at the smallest possible level.
Let's say you live in a condominium building. Each month, along with every other condo owner in the building, you pay an assessment. This assessment is what funds the operations of the building. Electric, gas and water bills for the public areas. Cleaning. Garbage removal and/or recycling. Security. Elevator maintenance. On and on. All of these things add up to a monthly budget, and the assessments are paid accordingly to cover the expenses. This would be akin to the taxes of the town paying for things like police and fire and ambulance if the town has a hospital.
___________________________________________________
Please note as well, those of you who have never lived in a rural community, that these services are not human rights. They exist as towns are able to afford them. They do not magically appear out of the ether. I grew up on a farm, for instance, and fought a few fires with just our family and help from the neighbors.
___________________________________________________
Back to our condo board example. Let's say, for instance, someone on the board thinks it's a great idea to add two floors to the building, and he hustles up the board votes to do it, but they don't want to raise assessments on the building. They decide to take out a loan to fund the construction, figuring that they can charge the future tenants a higher assessment to make up the costs. Except then the downturn hits, and they can't get anybody to move in to the new floors, meaning they can't pay the loan. Except the building is on the hook for the loan, which means all the people who live in it. So the board tries to raise the assessment, and they're voted down. What are they to do?
There is a reckoning to be dealt with. They need to look at the services they pay for every month and decide what services they can forego. Perhaps they eliminate cable in the workout room, cancel the security guard contract, renegotiate the cleaning contract to be once a month instead of once a day, and cancel the recycling portion of the garbage removal. Services in the building are reduced dramatically, life isn't as comfortable, and people complain. But those people also don't pay any more than they already were, so everybody deals with it.
This is effectively what municipalities are dealing with. The spending was running rampant and unchecked, and now it needs to be reined in, because they don't have a choice. It's not a political issue, it's an economic issue. At the end of the day, you can't argue the numbers, no matter the political system. Outspending resources has ultimately collapsed every government, whether it has been authoritarian, totalitarian, socialist or communist. Capitalism has been the most resilient as it's able to generate the most overall revenue, but we're at a point now where even our economy is shuddering under the weight of government spending at every level. If spending isn't reined in, it won't matter what your political beliefs are, you'll be fending more for yourself than you certainly ever planned on.