"Americans cannot maintain their essential faith in government if there are two Americas, in which the private sector's work subsidizes the disproportionate benefits of this new public sector elite"
About this Quote
Mortimer Zuckerman warns that civic trust cannot survive a widening divide between those who fund government and those who draw special advantages from it. The phrase two Americas recasts an old inequality theme into a public-versus-private frame: a private workforce exposed to market risk and stagnating wages, and a protected public sector that, in his view, enjoys disproportionate benefits and security financed by taxpayers. The core claim is about legitimacy. Citizens accept taxes and authority when the social contract feels reciprocal and fair; they rebel, politically or fiscally, when the state appears to prioritize its own insiders.
Context matters. After the 2008 financial crisis, states and cities struggled with underfunded pensions, rising retiree health costs, and weak revenues. Stories about generous defined-benefit pensions, low layoff rates, and overtime spiking fed a perception that public employees were insulated from the hardship battering private workers. Battles over public sector unions and pension reform, from Wisconsin to California and Illinois, amplified the sense of a system tilted by political bargaining rather than shared sacrifice.
Zuckerman’s phrase new public sector elite does not necessarily mean wealthiest; it signals insulation and leverage. When elected officials promise future benefits to employees whose unions help elect them, costs can be shifted onto future taxpayers. That dynamic breeds resentment, service cuts, and eventually insolvency, all of which undermine faith that government serves the public rather than itself.
There is nuance. Many public servants are underpaid relative to their skills and shoulder risks money cannot price. Private-sector elites and bailouts also corroded trust. Still, the warning targets perception as much as arithmetic: trust hinges on visible fairness. Sustaining faith in government requires aligning compensation and benefits with taxpayer capacity and performance, funding promises honestly, and ensuring that public institutions are clearly accountable to the broad public rather than a protected subset.
Context matters. After the 2008 financial crisis, states and cities struggled with underfunded pensions, rising retiree health costs, and weak revenues. Stories about generous defined-benefit pensions, low layoff rates, and overtime spiking fed a perception that public employees were insulated from the hardship battering private workers. Battles over public sector unions and pension reform, from Wisconsin to California and Illinois, amplified the sense of a system tilted by political bargaining rather than shared sacrifice.
Zuckerman’s phrase new public sector elite does not necessarily mean wealthiest; it signals insulation and leverage. When elected officials promise future benefits to employees whose unions help elect them, costs can be shifted onto future taxpayers. That dynamic breeds resentment, service cuts, and eventually insolvency, all of which undermine faith that government serves the public rather than itself.
There is nuance. Many public servants are underpaid relative to their skills and shoulder risks money cannot price. Private-sector elites and bailouts also corroded trust. Still, the warning targets perception as much as arithmetic: trust hinges on visible fairness. Sustaining faith in government requires aligning compensation and benefits with taxpayer capacity and performance, funding promises honestly, and ensuring that public institutions are clearly accountable to the broad public rather than a protected subset.
Quote Details
| Topic | Equality |
|---|
More Quotes by Mortimer
Add to List
