Don’t ignore perils of public sector cuts

This is in response to John Boske Jr.’s letter published Feb. 16. I have no way of knowing, but it certainly sounds like Mr. Boske is employed by the public sector. I’ve read his post several times trying to truly understand his points. He seems to be saying that the fools who have chosen, and continue, to work in the private sector should have been smarter and elected to work in the public sector. He also seems to be saying that the filthy capitalists who are trying to remain in business in a competitive, and oftentimes global, marketplace should shoulder more of the sacrifice.

Don’t worry Mr. Boske. The budget cuts proposed by the Democrats mainly target discretionary spending, which is a minuscule part of the budget. Republicans want to attack the entitlements portion of the budget. Federal entitlements include veterans benefits, food stamps, military and civil service retirement systems, unemployment insurance, income programs for the blind and disabled, school breakfasts and lunches, housing subsidies, child care support, nutrition for the elderly, vocational training, disaster relief, flood insurance, farm subsidies, and various special benefits for handicapped persons, American Indians, pregnant women, displaced defense workers, tobacco farmers and graduate students. Only the largest of entitlements, Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare, have gotten attention in the press. It’s unclear as to whether Republicans would touch civil service retirements.

Oh, yes, the state of Illinois really came down hard on its employees when they tweaked the pension program for new workers starting on Jan. 1. But that’s OK, everybody in the state of Illinois is going to pay more state income tax to make up for any existing shortfalls. Gee, I wonder if the pols in Washington would do the same thing? Eureka! I’m beginning to see how everyone is sacrificing.

Tom Frampton

Hoffman Estates