Well, I ticked off a right winger with this comment. . .

[kevinbgoode]

and while it isn't the most correct approach (sorry) it certainly makes a point:

One of those “perks” that public employees get (which private employees don’t receive) is the wonderful privilege of being forced to return a portion of their salary each year to their employer (themselves) in the form of “taxes” – which, of course, is recycled to them as part of their next year’s pay, and then returned again. This is just one of those amazing rewards for “service”. . .participating in having to pay a percentage of your own salary every year. So essentially, the faux cries of anguish from private sector taxpayers, who don’t have to return a percentage of their salaries to their employer each year “for their service” should wildly embrace the notion that perhaps it is the public sector employees who are “taxed enough already.”
Now why would the TEA Party – and their public officials – not embrace the notion of eliminating state and local taxes for public employees but so warmly embrace doing so for companies?

[lapislzi]

1. Public employees in my municipality have the charming habit

of "double dipping." In the form of married couples, both on the public payroll. Mrs. J. is appointed Town Planner and receives state medical benefits for herself and her family. Fine and dandy. I've got no problem with this. Perfectly legal and just. Mrs. J's husband, Mr. J., is hired by the highway department (no comment on the convenience of his hire soon after his wife takes office). Instead of taking the state benefits to which he is entitled, he's already covered by his wife. So the town/county, in its munificence, pays him the cash value of the policy in lieu of benefits.

Yes, you read that right.

Oh, yes, every person on our local board, save one, is either Republican or Conservative. They have banned people (self included) from taking video at town hall meetings. They refuse to answer questions. Any meaningful legislation is debated and concluded "in camera."

One resigned in disgrace after being convicted of tax fraud. Two were having a wild and very public extramarital affair. One was arrested for DUI. The charge mysteriously got dropped.

Yeah, they tell me that party affiliation doesn't matter at the local level. Bullshit.

[jberryhill]

2. I don't understand the problem in your first paragraph

If public employees are allowed to take cash in lieu of benefits, then what is the problem?

A lot of businesses have benefit plans under which opting in or out amounts to a pre-tax deduction in pay.

Is your problem that public employees are not allowed to be married, or what?

If it could be shown that someone had materially and improperly influenced the hiring of their spouse, then you'd have something, but not in relation to the alleged "double dipping".

[we can do it]

4. So On One Hand Wackinnuts Say a "Benefit" Is Part of an Employees Compensation

then you say they aren't entitled to it? wtf?

[bluestateguy]

3. If you really want to tick him off, call members of the military "public employees"

As that would be a true statement.