Tax cuts are a cost, says Kansas teachers union

For those who believe in the principle of self-ownership, taxes are a violation of that principle. But to those who depend on government for their funding, taxes are viewed differently. To them, any move to reduce taxes is viewed as a cost to government. People who value economic freedom, however, view tax cuts as the government allowing citizens to keep more of what is rightfully theirs.

The Kansas National Education Association (or KNEA, the teachers union) is one such organization that believes that cutting taxes is a cost to Kansas state government instead of a benefit to citizens. Yesterday’s issue of KNEA’s “Under the Dome Today” provides an example of this type of thinking:

The most interesting statement of the day came from Rep. Richard Carlson (R-St Mary’s) who told the committee, “In six and a half hours of debate on the House floor yesterday, not one motion was made to increase taxes so this is where we are.” Carlson himself did offer a tax amendment during that six and a half hours of debate. Carlson’s motion was to eliminate the corporate income tax — a motion which, had it passed, have cost the state in the neighborhood of $250 million!


7 thoughts on “Tax cuts are a cost, says Kansas teachers union”

  1. I get it. Let’s scapegoat the teachers again and demonize their union.
    That really isn’t very productive.
    Wail and gnash your teeth all you want, you are not going to get rid of the teachers unions in this country.

  2. Kerr,

    Why are teacher unions needed in the 21st century? I grew up in a home where both of my parents were active union members of the auto industry. What began as pure motives: negotiation of wages, definition of roles and responsibilities, rules governing hiring, firing and promotion of workers, benefits, and workplace safety has disintegrated into legalistic robots who do the very least amount of work possible and complain bitterly when asked to do something outside their designated job title. In the case of teachers let’s take wages for example. Are we really concerned that the teachers of our children are going to get taken advantage of? In reality, I believe the case can and should be made that they are already being taken advantage of – though at the hands of their guardian union. Are we afraid of pay inequities? The only individuals I’ve ever met who are concerned about pay inequalities are those who know they aren’t fulfilling the requirements of their position. Wouldn’t we rather have men and women incented to give their best for the children? After all, it is all about the children isn’t it?

  3. Kip

    Why AREN’T teachers unions needed in the 21st century? I think that is the more valid question.

  4. Unions have the legal right to exist.

    A group does not have to justify their right to join together in a cohesive group to advocate their best interests.

    You are the one favoring the dissolution of a legally established entity. I think the burden of proof is actually yours.

  5. Unions were founded on the basis of worker inequity. Fair work for fair pay. Unions abololished (allegedly) sweat mills, child labor, practices such as pay less than minimum wage, unhealthy/dangerous work conditions and regulated number of hours. They have evolved into a power-monger that now represents the worker in aspects that truly having little to do with the original foundation. Unions used to protect workers -now they represent workers – in many demands that are nothing more than employment negotiations i.e., higher wagers, increased time off – paid and unpaid – the “right” of tenure, improved insurance benefits, and so forth. I personally know of no teachers that are experiencing the tribulations remotely simlar to those that the original Unions were created to protect. And unfortunately, arrogance only adds to the desire to see unions squashed.

  6. Nacho Mama, you were right on target in your first sentence, then you went totally awry. Times and needs of workers change. It doesn’t matter if you know of NO teachers who are being abused in the manner of the past. The fact is that teachers are professionals and deserve to be treated and compensated as such. If a union helps them earn that respect, well so be it.

    Also, “arrogance” is in the eye of the beholder. What you call arrogance, teachers call leadership of their profession. You don’t have to like it, but you have to deal with it. It looks as if the NEA has over 3.2 million members and AFT has at least 1.8 million members. You are truly delusional to think that you will ever make organizations of that size ever “go away”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>