3 ms·

I don't know much about unions but that particular union in CA represents a lot of government employees. In San Francisco every union leader I talked to was als

I don't know much about unions but that particular union in CA represents a lot of government employees. In San Francisco every union leader I talked to was also very pro-government spending, like usually the way they see problems getting solved is by the government spending more money on them, but my sample may be biased.

0xB31B1B 5y ago
The people in the unions, and the leaders, are not "pro government spending" they are pro "the government spends money on me" it is a small but important difference.
- mc32 5y ago
  That runs close to a distinction without a difference.
  - gizmo686 5y ago
    The government is a massive organization. Ignoring the cynical interperatation, it is entirely reasonable to think that there are some legitamate areas for the government to spend on; as long as the worker is in one of those areas, there is no dissonance. Alternativly, someone could think 'I want to work in industry X. I think X should be privatised, but since it is government run, I'll work for the government'. Further the cynical answer of 'the government shouldn't be spending so much money. But as long as they are, I should get some' isn't that bad of an answer