But most citizens also feel that public-sector employees should not see themselves as being immune from the same sort of cuts in jobs and benefits as those being felt by employees in private businesses and industry, when their income shrinks.



When business income shrinks, businesses must either cut their costs to match, or else they must shut down."/>


But most citizens also feel that public-sector employees should not see themselves as being immune from the same sort of cuts in jobs and benefits as those being felt by employees in private businesses and industry, when their income shrinks.



When business income shrinks, businesses must either cut their costs to match, or else they must shut down."/>


But most citizens also feel that public-sector employees should not see themselves as being immune from the same sort of cuts in jobs and benefits as those being felt by employees in private businesses and industry, when their income shrinks.



When business income shrinks, businesses must either cut their costs to match, or else they must shut down." />
close

Cut costs to match revenues

1 min read
    •

To the editor,

No one is blaming public-sector employees for having created this decline, as Mr. Freeman suggested in his News-Press “Opinion” of March 31.

But most citizens also feel that public-sector employees should not see themselves as being immune from the same sort of cuts in jobs and benefits as those being felt by employees in private businesses and industry, when their income shrinks.

When business income shrinks, businesses must either cut their costs to match, or else they must shut down. States and cities cannot shut down, therefore it’s their obligation to cut costs to match their revenues.

During the past 10 years of increasing tax revenues, the public sector added many employees and increased other costs. So, when revenues decreased two years ago, why can’t taxpayers expect that those public-sector costs will be reduced to their earlier levels?

Dick Hasselman

Sanibel