The Internal Revenue Service is at it again. Never mind the “sequester,” never mind the scandal of targeting conservatives, the IRS is plowing ahead with paying agents and supervisors $70 million in bonuses. And here's the real kicker — the bonuses are mandated by the IRS' collective bargaining agreement with its union. From one corrupt criminal enterprise to another, eh? ... But wait, it's far worse than just that. Americans for Limited Government, through a Freedom of Information request, discovered that the government's collective bargaining agreement allows 201 IRS employees to work full time on union activities. And our “leaders” wonder why the public views government with less regard than an overflowing sewer on a 100-degree day. ... The Government Accountability Office says the planned merger of American Airlines and US Airways will, in fact, reduce competition. While a new competitor will be created on 210 routes affecting 17.5 million passengers, nearly 1,700 routes will lose one competitor affecting more than 53 million passengers. So, on net, this merger will see less competition on 1,490 routes affecting 35.5 million passengers. Why, again, is this such a good deal for the traveling public? ... Should the merger go through, look next for Doug Parker, the US Airways boss who will head the new American, to shaft Pittsburgh again by closing the local flight operations center that taxpayers helped to underwrite. Once a shaft-delivery expert, always a shaft-delivery expert.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.