Sorry!! The article you are trying to read is not available now.

There's Always a Cop Around When You Don't Need One

Print comment Post Comments
Okay, so public employees earn less, don't get pensions, and can't retire until they're 65, while workers in the private sector make more money overall and get pensions with full benefits for themselves and their families for rest of their lives after 20 years of service.

Oh, wait. Hang on here...DANG! My mistake--it's the other way around! Gosh, I must've gotten confused by all those charts and numbers and data and whatnot.

Adrian Moore over at the Reason Foundation points out yet another case of obscene government overspending, this time in Massachusetts.

A job-by-job breakdown provided to The Associated Press shows how the state saved $28,000 during four relatively slow days in May by paying lower wages for flaggers to either replace or supplement the police officers who formerly had exclusive rights to stand watch over highway and side-road work zones.

"The savings that are being described may be mirage-like," Essex, Massachusetts Police Chief Peter Silva told the Gloucester Times. "They are telling us that this is going to save us a substantial amount of money; I want to see where the savings are."

Well, golly, Chief--those "mirage-like" savings are right there in the article you undoubtedly saw because you're quoted in it.

Moore notes that in Essex, a police officer was hired to manage traffic coming out of Woodman's, Dunkin' Donuts, and Tom Shea's. Chief Silva "commended the state for putting an officer down there."

After all, you can't spell "excessive spending" without Essex.

I mean, you can, know what I'm saying.
POSITION:  No positions in stocks mentioned.