Why did you delete the Supreme Court Clears Way for Mass Federal Layoffs?

[Anonymous]

Was it wrong to say:
We are NOT a Socialist nation?

[jsteele]

You were being a jerk saying that those losing their jobs had useless jobs. You are in no position to evaluate their jobs.

[Anonymous]

Wow. Is there a new standard for sharing opinions? I said continuing to pay people to do unnecessary jobs, just because we feel sorry for them is not a good thing. If it turns out a particular job is in fact of critical importance, people can always be rehired.

My apologies that this offended you. Perhaps I should have added: our national debt is choking us. Cuts obviously must be made, even though people will argue endlessly where to cut.

Almost everyone agrees we have massive bloat in the federal government. I don’t recall that our previous administration did much of anything to address this issue.

[Anonymous]

everyone agrees we have massive bloat in the federal government.

wrong
faulty premise

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Is there a new standard for sharing opinions? I said continuing to pay people to do unnecessary jobs, just because we feel sorry for them is not a good thing. If it turns out a particular job is in fact of critical importance, people can always be rehired.

My apologies that this offended you. Perhaps I should have added: our national debt is choking us. Cuts obviously must be made, even though people will argue endlessly where to cut.

Almost everyone agrees we have massive bloat in the federal government. I don’t recall that our previous administration did much of anything to address this issue.

Trump's Big Ugly Bill just added $4 trillion to the debt so forgive me if I don't take your concerns about the national debt seriously. The job cuts aren't really saving any money. What you should really do is start a thread asking people to educate you about the job cuts since you are woefully uniformed. We have posters who lost their jobs and can give you firsthand accounts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

everyone agrees we have massive bloat in the federal government.

wrong
faulty premise

How about just a tiny bit of honesty here?
It said “ALMOST everyone agrees we have massive bloat in the federal government.”

Some of you here are useless. Allow the echo chamber to remain unchallenged? That’s how you continue to plummet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

everyone agrees we have massive bloat in the federal government.

wrong
faulty premise

How about just a tiny bit of honesty here?
It said “ALMOST everyone agrees we have massive bloat in the federal government.”

Some of you here are useless. Allow the echo chamber to remain unchallenged? That’s how you continue to plummet.

People also think we spend 25% of our federal budget on foreign aid.

[Anonymous]

I’m OK with government layoffs, as long as they start with the White House and the cabinet, followed by Congress.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. Is there a new standard for sharing opinions? I said continuing to pay people to do unnecessary jobs, just because we feel sorry for them is not a good thing. If it turns out a particular job is in fact of critical importance, people can always be rehired.

My apologies that this offended you. Perhaps I should have added: our national debt is choking us. Cuts obviously must be made, even though people will argue endlessly where to cut.

Almost everyone agrees we have massive bloat in the federal government. I don’t recall that our previous administration did much of anything to address this issue.

Trump's Big Ugly Bill just added $4 trillion to the debt so forgive me if I don't take your concerns about the national debt seriously. The job cuts aren't really saving any money. What you should really do is start a thread asking people to educate you about the job cuts since you are woefully uniformed. We have posters who lost their jobs and can give you firsthand accounts.

I wasn't laid off but my support staff was. We're an entirely fee funded agency, that saved absolutely 0 in tax dollars. And now we're providing a worse service to the people who paid us for absolutely no reason.

[Anonymous]

This is what Musk failed to understand. You cannot do this in government, when even a short interruption in services can kill people.

Right now there are patients walking about with implanted experimental devices, cut off from their pharmacological treatment, entirely without their required medical supervision, because their NIH clinical trials were abruptly stopped. Some will die. The closing of USAID is projected to kill dozens of thousands of the most vulnerable people on earth, for ex: infants born to HIV-positive mothers in South Africa. If they do not have their life-saving treatment, 30% of them will die in a year.

All this could have been averted had federal cuts been implemented in a more thoughtful way. I do not dispute that cuts need to be made, and budgets restricted, but you don't abandon people with life-threatening needs. You finish programs, and find NGOs willing to take on some of the slack. You don't fire too many air controllers, nuclear specialists, Ebola monitors, in a insane bid to slash government expense. Hiring them back a few days or weeks later is just LETHAL INCOMPETENCE.

And you have no leg to stand on, no moral high ground, as another poster said, since this bill adds TRILLIONS to the national debt in tax cuts... for the rich! The poor get poorer and the rich get richer. All the pain and suffering and death inflicted on thousands will be for naught before the money will go to subsidize the wealthy instead of reducing the debt!

Bow your head in shame, OP. You are not worthy to debate the national debt.

[Anonymous]

What an ignorant post. Glad it was removed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

everyone agrees we have massive bloat in the federal government.

wrong
faulty premise

How about just a tiny bit of honesty here?
It said “ALMOST everyone agrees we have massive bloat in the federal government.”

Some of you here are useless. Allow the echo chamber to remain unchallenged? That’s how you continue to plummet.

+1
I also noticed the deliberate omission of the word "almost". That poster is displaying zero intellectual integrity. How utterly unsurprising.
NP

[Anonymous]

The media has been terrible about this. The Supreme Court did not clear the way for the large scale RIFs. They explicitly said they did not. The order isn't long - read all the way to the end.

Layoffs belong to Congress, not the president or Musk or Vought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The media has been terrible about this. The Supreme Court did not clear the way for the large scale RIFs. They explicitly said they did not. The order isn't long - read all the way to the end.

Layoffs belong to Congress, not the president or Musk or Vought.

Really? Tell that to the 100k+ Feds who have been RIFed despite being employed at Agencies with congressionally approved budgets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The media has been terrible about this. The Supreme Court did not clear the way for the large scale RIFs. They explicitly said they did not. The order isn't long - read all the way to the end.

Layoffs belong to Congress, not the president or Musk or Vought.

Really? Tell that to the 100k+ Feds who have been RIFed despite being employed at Agencies with congressionally approved budgets.

They can read the order, it's short. It says that drafting plans is ok but implementing them is not. Also, going after OPM initially made sense but now the laid off feds need to sue every department and agency - which is happening.