Well look, I don't have a particularly well-formed opinion about the philosophical and political implications of government employees being unionized. My piece was primarily about Walker & Co's treatment of Wisconsin's public employees. I will say this: I think non-unionized multi-national corporations have proven themselves to be spectacularly adept at bilking the government for dollars through no-bid contracts and fraud, while the teachers of Wisconsin, for example, have been perhaps overly reasonable, earning less than many U.S. teachers and less than most teachers in the industrialized world - so it does seem to me that the system has worked pretty well. I don't really see why they don't "deserve" the same right to collectively bargain as anyone else. Would you argue that a government contractor ought not have unionized employees?