Less Federal employees does not translate to less government

[Anonymous]

We get it, Grammar Gretas. Now, do you have anything to say that is relevant to the topic?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FEWER federal employees.

This. Your title make you seem like an ignoramus, which ruins the whole point of your post.

The first person made a correction, which is fine. But you chose to add an insult. Just curious, why? Do you reinforce teaching moments with your child with insults?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:16:16 If I got a cover letter from a job application with this mistake in it, I would put it in the "no" file. Any employee who misuses language goes down a notch in their supervisor's eyes.

. 1. DCUM postings are much different from cover letters, don't you agree. 2. Do you refuse to shop at stores with express lines for people buying "15 items or less" items?

[Anonymous]

give it a rest grammar police! it's just as obnoxious and annoying as correcting people's statements while you're having a conversation w/ someone!

To the topic - my biggest problem with this federal hiring freeze idea is that it pretends to be a reasonable solution to the problem of massive federal overspending when nothing will make a real dent until we tackle military spending and entitlements.

[Anonymous]

ITA with original poster (despite the grammar issues) and 20:43 as well. It drives me nuts to see the crazy contractor salaries and overhead that occurs around here.

The average American out in the midwest where I come from has no idea that this is going on - folks just jump on the bandwagon for cutting as much government as possible at the federal level without any thought as to the consequences.