Another Reason Union Haters Should Want National Healthcare

With healthcare benefits out of the picture, there would be one less opportunity for union "corruption".

The topic of healthcare seems to be back in the conversation as of late. With the reporting of ever increasing and citizens, companies and municipalities reconciling their policies as segments of Obamacare are rolled out – the debate continues.

In early spring, the attack on Unions started loud and stayed constant. One consistent complaint has been the lavish benefits had by union members. And, of course, the teacher’s union became the bulls-eye for backlash.

I have used this analogy before and probably will again: a segment of our society sees that their neighbor has a cow. They do not have a cow and are angry because of that. They kill their neighbor’s cow because if they don’t have one, they feel nobody should. They find out later that their neighbors had been sharing the cow’s milk with the community. Now no one benefits.

Sometimes cows suck. They can be ornery and make it difficult to milk. They may even kick. No, not all cows are perfect. But sometimes a poor dairy product may be the fault of the farmer or the dairy or the store which sells the cow products. There are many hands on that udder contributing to the final outcome. That doesn’t mean we need to kill the cows and rely on goats. We still need the cows.

So, as we know, there are many people who love to see the teacher’s benefits get slashed. They think WEAC (Wisconsin Education Association Council) and their kind are bad cows. And a big complaint is WEA Trust, the insurance provider created by and for WEAC. Some say that WEA charges double compared to competitors simply because they can; that WEAC forces the districts to purchase insurance from WEA. And if that is the case, I can see why that would upset people. 

So, here is a question: wouldn’t that be just one more “problem” solved by a national healthcare system? We wouldn’t have to worry about the possible corruption regarding union benefits ever again. Unions wouldn’t need to waste time bargaining for it or striking against changes. Citizens wouldn’t have to worry that their cow is inferior to the neighbor’s cow. All cows would be the same, cost the same and provide the same. That would give unions one less thing to “manipulate.”

And when I say national healthcare, I am not speaking of Obamacare. That legislation is a watered down waste if you ask me. So much compromise left what could have been a nation-saving move to a few positive steps in the same ho-hum direction. While I see the good it can do for a few, Obamacare isn’t the national healthcare that America truly needs.

I don’t need to bore you with my thoughts on how the health industries of competitive nations can teach us a lot about caring for our people. I won’t repeat, yet again, how a national healthcare will reduce costs because more people will be able to afford to pay their bills. I will spare you the diatribe about prevention being the key to saving lives and massive dough. You have heard all of these arguments before.

I just wanted to share with you a thought about a correlation between unions and healthcare. It's just one more reason to change the status quo in medical care. One more win/win scenario. Implement healthcare for all and that's less time I have to spend listening to people complain about the mooing benefits of others.

Raider Fan October 08, 2011 at 12:28 PM
Union hater? or Freedom lover? Public employee unions are a PART of the problem but not all of it. They are not negotiating against a CEO but rather all taxpayers. And, through union dues funneled toward dem canidates, they tend to control both sides of the bargaining table. Complete elimination is not needed but restrictions on what can be negotiated was long overdue. The changes in Hudson already saved our district over $1,100,000 annually once the union-owned insurance company was forced to face some competition. The only other problem is that the unions tend to protect bad employees. The focus in on tenure and not on success or capability of the teacher which is how they they should be rewarded. This would inspire our teachers even more to improve since it would lead to more money - the greatest motivator ever. Rather, they are left to wait for the next vote to increase their pay and they are forced to always be disgruntled with their pay - Generally speaking - and in my OPINION.
James R Hoffa October 09, 2011 at 06:43 AM
You're dead on Raider Fan. Add to that, teacher's unions have effectively kept truly gifted, skilled, and effective educators away from public education all together because of their practices. Just look at how the unions treated great educators such as Joe Louis Clark and Jaime Escalante – both were violently threatened according to their respective books. And yet both men were praised and admired by their students. How many teachers were discouraged from even trying because of what they saw happen to Clark and Escalante? What’s wrong with this picture? That’s why I can’t help but to shake my head and yell LIAR and HYPOCRITE whenever I hear the teacher’s unions tying to convince us that their actions are really “all about the children.” Biggest crock of you know what EVER!!!
James R Hoffa October 09, 2011 at 07:17 AM
What exactly does the 'cow' represent in the analogy? You? Your labor? A public sector job? I'm not seeing how the 'cow' analogy works for the issues and conclusions that you and HRG are attempting to use it for. Could you please explain what the ‘cow’ and the ‘milk’ represent and if I’m correct in my assumption that everything else in the analogy is as it’s expressly stated to be. As a public employee, would you not agree that you are, by your own free choice, a PUBLIC SERVANT and serve at the pleasure of WE THE PEOPLE as a whole (including you)? And, as a citizen of the U.S. and the great state of Wisconsin, you are also an eligible voter and a taxpayer, just like everyone else - are you not? And as such, you are represented by your elected officials in the same fashion and capacity as the rest of us, right?
James R Hoffa October 09, 2011 at 07:17 AM
So, if you have your elected representatives, on the local, state, and national level to which you can addresses your employment grievances to, then why do you need a union at all? After all, as a taxpayer, you participate in electing your representative officials to decide what amount of taxes you should have to pay and what that money should be spent on, just like everyone else, correct? So why shouldn't these elected officials, who represent all of us, get to decide the wages and benefits that are offered with public employment? After all, as they are the ones who are deciding the amount of revenues to be collected via taxation, wouldn’t they also be the ones in the best position to determine those wages and benefits for the benefit of ALL the PEOPLE they represent? We the taxpayers, including you, participate in a non-profit government. So why do public sector employees need a union at all? In essence, all the union does is bargain against you (in your role as a taxpayer) as well as the rest of us taxpayers, who participate in and make up a non-profit government. Does that make any rational sense to you at all? Why is a union, who represents a limited number of people, in a batter position to dictate our taxes via it’s demands as opposed to WE THE PEOPLE (including you) via our elected representatives?
James R Hoffa October 09, 2011 at 07:18 AM
See why public sector unions don't make philosophical sense in that there is an inherent conflict of interest involved. That’s why FDR warned against public sector unionization. Private sector unions are a completely different story in that they tend to deal mostly with FOR PROFIT entities and bargain against a limited interest as opposed to the interest of the general public at large. That’s why many of us on this board have expressly differentiated between the two. In all honesty, public sector unions never should have been allowed to exist in this country in the first place. And if you don’t like that, then guess what – you don’t have to work in the public sector. That’s part of the greatness of America – you have a freedom of choice.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »