The Tea Party has Pension Envy?!

According to a new article from the AP, that’s the problem.  Pension Envy.

When Erin McFarlane looks at public workers, she sees lucrative pension benefits she doesn’t ever expect to get. And it makes her mad.

“I don’t think that a federal employee or government employee is worth any more than anybody else who does their job and does it well,” said the Slinger, Wis., woman. She’s been working a couple of bartending jobs since January, when she was laid off from her job at a Harley Davidson plant after almost a decade.

She’s not alone in seeing public servants as public enemies in some ways.

Then a Tea Partier weighs in along the same vein:

“I’m sorry, but what they’re doing is telling off the middle class,” said Davis, 76, and a co-chairwoman of the Cherry Hill Area Tea Party. “The middle-class people don’t get all the goodies that they do.”

At its heart, the issue is this: Some public workers get a sweet deal compared to other workers. And it’s taxpayers who pay for it.

So we’re supposed to listen to a person receiving Social Security and Medicare that public SERVANTS are getting a free ride at taxpayers’ expense?

“But she paid into the system her whole life to get those benefits!  You’re being unreasonable!”, you say?  You’re right, Ms. Tea Party DID earn those retirement entitlements.  So do public SERVANTS! They get paid less than their private sector counterparts and, in return, they receive a pension.  If private sector job security and pay plummet, that’s not the public SERVANT’s fault.

As for Ms. Tea Party’s oh so clever division of public SERVANTS from the middle class, I challenge the Tea Party or any other group of Koch Meat Puppets to find me a teacher, sanitation worker or any other unionized public SERVANT they would consider “rich” and THEN they can explain to me why taking money from “those” people isn’t the same kind of wealth redistribution they rail against all the time.  Isn’t taking money from the rich to benefit everyone else B.A.D. ?

Read the rest of the article here: