Possible for Trump to move federal agencies to "flyover country"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A better question would be why the people in Michigan, etc. feel they are "entitled" to Federal jobs. The D.C. area has an educated workforce. Federal careers aren't a welfare program. Any attempt to redistribute our Fed agencies should be called out as a redistribution of wealth.

The federal "swamp" built this. This place was a dump 25 years ago. Now it's just vulgar compared to the rest of the country. 7 of the richest dozen counties! No wonder all the agencies are out of touch and useless.

It is not to the federal government that make these the richest counties, it is all of the lobbyists. And Trump has appointed a whole bunch of billionaires does not exactly lower the average income of this region, if they move here. Please use your critical thinking skills before you type.

+1. Most of the Feds I know live in modest 1940s capes/ramblers or commute from pretty far out. I suspect the posters complaining how federal employees are rolling in dough don't even live here.

This.

[Anonymous]

Feds -> lobbyists -> contractors -> industry -> hip restaurants - better schools -> strong housing.

You move some HQs to Ohio and western PA and Michigan and everything else will follow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A better question would be why the people in Michigan, etc. feel they are "entitled" to Federal jobs. The D.C. area has an educated workforce. Federal careers aren't a welfare program. Any attempt to redistribute our Fed agencies should be called out as a redistribution of wealth.

The federal "swamp" built this. This place was a dump 25 years ago. Now it's just vulgar compared to the rest of the country. 7 of the richest dozen counties! No wonder all the agencies are out of touch and useless.

It is not to the federal government that make these the richest counties, it is all of the lobbyists. And Trump has appointed a whole bunch of billionaires does not exactly lower the average income of this region, if they move here. Please use your critical thinking skills before you type.

+1. Most of the Feds I know live in modest 1940s capes/ramblers or commute from pretty far out. I suspect the posters complaining how federal employees are rolling in dough don't even live here.

This.

Exactly. The people who complain the loudest about government and government employees know the least about it. That's been proven over and over again on these forums.

But sadly they aren't interested in reality either. Thoroughly debunk their posts today and they will just come back with the same garbage tomorrow. DCUM's conservative trolls suffer from bizarre cult-like behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Feds -> lobbyists -> contractors -> industry -> hip restaurants - better schools -> strong housing.

You move some HQs to Ohio and western PA and Michigan and everything else will follow.

Um, you aren't paying attention. 86% of feds are already out in western PA, Michigan and elsewhere and none of it followed. Hypothesis has already been tested and failed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Feds -> lobbyists -> contractors -> industry -> hip restaurants - better schools -> strong housing.

You move some HQs to Ohio and western PA and Michigan and everything else will follow.

Idiocy. Lobbyists will stay where Congress is regardless of where they move the fed employees. Lobbyists don't lobby federal employees. They lobby the Congressional assholes who you keep voting into office year after year because you think THEY are the good guys while thinking federal employees are the problem. You are so deluded.

[Anonymous]

Higher than average incomes and higher than average cost of living here, which does not mean wealth.

Look around. The wealthiest Americans don't live on income but investments.

Do you own a 2nd and 3rd vacation home? A yacht? An airplane?

[Anonymous]

I know feds who own second homes (New Jersey, South Carolina), boats (not yachts, boats). To be fair, they're married, so there're two incomes. But they also have children, elderly parents, and all other typical MC expenses. They live on income, not investments.

The feds I know in DC don't suffer. Some live far out, but only if a huge house with a backyard is important. Plenty of younger (both single and married) people in the city who can afford condos and apartments. They generally don't complain about life at the GS-13 level and above.

So, to paint all feds as living hand-to-mouth is not entirely correct. I'm sure people's circumstances differ, but those who know how to handle money (even a little bit of it) do fairly well. Generally better than their counterparts in the private sector, IMO.

[Anonymous]

Trump will not decentralized government. It is not in the best interest of his bottom line. Trump Tower in New York is close to Washington DC and now that he has a trump hotel in DC you can kiss this thought goodbye.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know feds who own second homes (New Jersey, South Carolina), boats (not yachts, boats). To be fair, they're married, so there're two incomes. But they also have children, elderly parents, and all other typical MC expenses. They live on income, not investments.

The feds I know in DC don't suffer. Some live far out, but only if a huge house with a backyard is important. Plenty of younger (both single and married) people in the city who can afford condos and apartments. They generally don't complain about life at the GS-13 level and above.

So, to paint all feds as living hand-to-mouth is not entirely correct. I'm sure people's circumstances differ, but those who know how to handle money (even a little bit of it) do fairly well. Generally better than their counterparts in the private sector, IMO.

I would guess most feds who live as you describe have family money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know feds who own second homes (New Jersey, South Carolina), boats (not yachts, boats). To be fair, they're married, so there're two incomes. But they also have children, elderly parents, and all other typical MC expenses. They live on income, not investments.

The feds I know in DC don't suffer. Some live far out, but only if a huge house with a backyard is important. Plenty of younger (both single and married) people in the city who can afford condos and apartments. They generally don't complain about life at the GS-13 level and above.

So, to paint all feds as living hand-to-mouth is not entirely correct. I'm sure people's circumstances differ, but those who know how to handle money (even a little bit of it) do fairly well. Generally better than their counterparts in the private sector, IMO.

Depends who you think of as their counterparts. Federal employees are older and more highly educated than th general population, we have a much higher percentage of employees with graduate degrees than the rest of the labor force. So if you're comparing them with the average American with no college completion they do make more $ but same occupation comparisons with the private sector show federal employees making less than their similarly situated private sector peers. For example, the federal government is the largest single employer of doctors in the country, mostly due to the high VA and DOD healthcare systems plus the medical research community at NIH. Comparing the salaries of VA doctors and those with similar specialties in the private sector show that VA doctors make considerably less, but their low 6 figure salaries are certainly higher than the average American.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know feds who own second homes (New Jersey, South Carolina), boats (not yachts, boats). To be fair, they're married, so there're two incomes. But they also have children, elderly parents, and all other typical MC expenses. They live on income, not investments.

The feds I know in DC don't suffer. Some live far out, but only if a huge house with a backyard is important. Plenty of younger (both single and married) people in the city who can afford condos and apartments. They generally don't complain about life at the GS-13 level and above.

So, to paint all feds as living hand-to-mouth is not entirely correct. I'm sure people's circumstances differ, but those who know how to handle money (even a little bit of it) do fairly well. Generally better than their counterparts in the private sector, IMO.

If you know Feds who own second homes, that is because they are married to people who are not Feds. Only other way is inherited wealth. It simply is not possible otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know feds who own second homes (New Jersey, South Carolina), boats (not yachts, boats). To be fair, they're married, so there're two incomes. But they also have children, elderly parents, and all other typical MC expenses. They live on income, not investments.

The feds I know in DC don't suffer. Some live far out, but only if a huge house with a backyard is important. Plenty of younger (both single and married) people in the city who can afford condos and apartments. They generally don't complain about life at the GS-13 level and above.

So, to paint all feds as living hand-to-mouth is not entirely correct. I'm sure people's circumstances differ, but those who know how to handle money (even a little bit of it) do fairly well. Generally better than their counterparts in the private sector, IMO.

If you know Feds who own second homes, that is because they are married to people who are not Feds. Only other way is inherited wealth. It simply is not possible otherwise.

...or else they came into government service after leaving a more lucrative career in the private sector. I know plenty of Feds who were partners at law firms or who, like me, left Wall Street for government service. But your premise is right - people are not getting rich just by being government employees

[Anonymous]

Good lord. It's education that makes people wealthy, not federal jobs by definition. You need a masters' degree to get many, many federal jobs. You can't slot a miner into a program manager position, or even HR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know feds who own second homes (New Jersey, South Carolina), boats (not yachts, boats). To be fair, they're married, so there're two incomes. But they also have children, elderly parents, and all other typical MC expenses. They live on income, not investments.

The feds I know in DC don't suffer. Some live far out, but only if a huge house with a backyard is important. Plenty of younger (both single and married) people in the city who can afford condos and apartments. They generally don't complain about life at the GS-13 level and above.

So, to paint all feds as living hand-to-mouth is not entirely correct. I'm sure people's circumstances differ, but those who know how to handle money (even a little bit of it) do fairly well. Generally better than their counterparts in the private sector, IMO.

Depends who you think of as their counterparts. Federal employees are older and more highly educated than th general population, we have a much higher percentage of employees with graduate degrees than the rest of the labor force. So if you're comparing them with the average American with no college completion they do make more $ but same occupation comparisons with the private sector show federal employees making less than their similarly situated private sector peers. For example, the federal government is the largest single employer of doctors in the country, mostly due to the high VA and DOD healthcare systems plus the medical research community at NIH. Comparing the salaries of VA doctors and those with similar specialties in the private sector show that VA doctors make considerably less, but their low 6 figure salaries are certainly higher than the average American.

+1. It's comparing apples to oranges. Most feds in DC are a skewed population that is predominantly highly skilled professionals, virtually all college educated, many with advanced degrees, as opposed to the private sector which is a much wider spectrum that includes unskilled, semiskilled and high school only workers who typically have much lower wages. The federal workforce also includes a much higher percentage of military veterans as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know feds who own second homes (New Jersey, South Carolina), boats (not yachts, boats). To be fair, they're married, so there're two incomes. But they also have children, elderly parents, and all other typical MC expenses. They live on income, not investments.

The feds I know in DC don't suffer. Some live far out, but only if a huge house with a backyard is important. Plenty of younger (both single and married) people in the city who can afford condos and apartments. They generally don't complain about life at the GS-13 level and above.

So, to paint all feds as living hand-to-mouth is not entirely correct. I'm sure people's circumstances differ, but those who know how to handle money (even a little bit of it) do fairly well. Generally better than their counterparts in the private sector, IMO.

Depends who you think of as their counterparts. Federal employees are older and more highly educated than th general population, we have a much higher percentage of employees with graduate degrees than the rest of the labor force. So if you're comparing them with the average American with no college completion they do make more $ but same occupation comparisons with the private sector show federal employees making less than their similarly situated private sector peers. For example, the federal government is the largest single employer of doctors in the country, mostly due to the high VA and DOD healthcare systems plus the medical research community at NIH. Comparing the salaries of VA doctors and those with similar specialties in the private sector show that VA doctors make considerably less, but their low 6 figure salaries are certainly higher than the average American.

I am speaking from personal experience. I am fully aware that the federal government is bottom heavy. I do observe somewhat older workers, but most of them have 4 years of college at most. Many only have high-school diplomas. The hiring mechanisms changed in the recent years. We do have opportunities to hire college grads for entry-level positions. However, the majority of hires are veterans with very limited education, usually high school plus any occupational training they got in the military. I do not compare them to average Americans, whatever that may mean. I compare them to the people with similar educational background and experience, myself included. I have friends with the exact (advanced) degree I have. I'm blessed to be a fed, I kid you not. (Obviously, I am not an MD. I agree that highly specialized professionals make more money in the private sector.)