posted on Aug, 8 2014 @ 01:26 PM
a reply to: METACOMET
Actually, based upon my observations and experience, this is sustainable for far longer than one might expect. In Italy, 1 of 2 workers works for the
Government and has since the end of WWII. Employment with the Government is really nothing more than a large scale welfare program. I think it was
Ben Franklin who commented that one of the primary tasks of Government is to provide employment for politicians idiot cousins.
I don't know about Boston, but in Texas, in most of the major metro areas, the City governments have, for all practical purposes been federalized,
meaning that for every dollar in local tax revenues to the City budget, the Feds match a dollar or more through various subsidies to the Cities,
either through school systems or Transit dollars. So the cities remain "sustainable" despite year over year dwindling property tax and sales tax
revenues. To sweeten the pot and make the cities somewhat more sustainable, the Fed Department of Housing and Urban Development has, for years now,
been bulldozing the large Metro area housing projects while at the same time, building huge apartment complexes along major streets outside the cities
in the suburbs where they move their welfare free housing clients. This frees up real property in the cities for redevelopment construction of high
end apartment high rise buildings and Town houses. This has had the effect of radically decreasing the public school populations which is why we see
the controversies in cities such as Houston, Dallas, Chicago, etc. about school closings.
So, I wouldn't worry too much.