Because, as opposed to unions in private companies, the people funding government unions donât get a seat at the negotiation table. They just get stuck with the bill.
Hell, even FDR, a massive progressive, was against public sector unions.
Nice!
And everyone of those posts refers to it as conservative mantra. I wonder why. If i have permission from the mods @SixFoot or @GWH or @WuWei, I can post the search results.
I donât think reducing Police presence is a bad thing, honestly.
I just think Police need to do stuff that Police are supposed to do.
Back in the day, we had facilities for the mentally ill. We had housing for poor people. We took care of our folks.
But right now, the mentally ill are more likely jailed than institutionalized. Why are Police expected to be the primary arbiter and provider of mental health services? Why are Police required to be the providers of crisis management and family disturbances? They have to deal with broken homes and truant kids, school disturbances and substance abuse.
Because we put all of this on them, and without the training necessary to do it right, they are burdened and overused. A huge chunk of city money and resources go to the Police department because they are seemingly doing it all.
But what if we took all that money we give them and instead provide it to qualified mental health providers? Substance abuse councillors and facilities? Housing for the poor and job training for the destitute?
And let the Police do what they are trained to do, be Policemen?
Disbanded doesnât mean no police, just the opposite in fact, they fired all the union cops and hired twice as many non union cops with the same money.