How will you tell if someone is MAGA? |
They open their mouths? |
ooooo ... was worried until you clarified ![]() |
Okay. Thanks for weighing in, champ. |
Oh what will poor MAGA do when we all just say, “Fine, you won. Now show us you can deliver!”
I will “resist” but nothing they can see. No protest, no social media (who wants to be on X?). You broke it, you buy it. Have fun! |
And for the MAGAs that are well to do (doctors, financial advisers, lawyers, etc) there is always the FEC public info. Already weeded a few out, and it turns out there were more competent options out there anyway. Win, win, win. |
DP. I’ve had a lot of people at my house in the last year. Landscapers, chimney sweeps, plumbers, contractors, flooring guys. Of course I talk to them but I’m not sure how I’m supposed to know they are MAGA. Do you interview each one to ensure they agree with you on every political issue? |
+1 NP |
That is not true. I knew many many feds who were lawyers and economists who worked revolving doors between private and public sectors. The public sector gave them skills that helped them earn way more in the private sector. |
Come on now, I am not anti-Fed, but this is just wishful thinking. Fed pay is actually very competitive, except for some limited technical and policy areas. Most feds don't have particularly valuable skills for the private sector. Many do have very specific knowledge that makes things work in fedgov, that is valuable to agencies, but they are not turning down private sector offers en masse. If they were so desirable, and so undepaid, they'd leave. |
Oh, yes, no conservative has ever engaged in these things. Do you ever tire of your hypocrisy? Do you even hear yourself and think “Well, I sound like a hypocrite” No? What a surprise. |
This board has been four years of them whining about everything. And when they don't get the big freakout they've been waiting for, they whine about that. |
DP they often do leave for higher pay but many stayed for job security and benefits. There is still a big pay gap as private sector pays more for same jobs and qualifications. Federal workers who move between the private and public sectors are often referred to as "revolving door" employees, meaning they transition between jobs in government agencies and private companies, sometimes leveraging their experience in one sector to gain advantages in the other. Reasons for transition: Federal employees might move to the private sector for potentially higher salaries, more rapid career progression, or to pursue opportunities in specific industries where their government experience is valuable. Conversely, they might move back to the public sector for stability, benefits like pensions, and a sense of public service. Potential ethical concerns: "Revolving door" situations can raise concerns about conflicts of interest, especially when a former government official might use their insider knowledge to benefit a private company they later work for. Relevant regulations: Ethics rules govern federal employees transitioning to the private sector, often requiring cooling-off periods where they cannot engage in certain activities related to their previous government role. Examples of roles where this transition is common: Policy advisors: Individuals who work on policy development in government agencies might move to lobbying firms or consulting companies where they can leverage their policy expertise. Contractors: Federal employees with experience managing contracts might transition to working for private companies that bid on government contracts. Regulatory officials: Individuals who oversee compliance with regulations in a particular industry might later work for companies within that industry |
That might be true, but not in our case. Private practice is substantially more lucrative than working at the VA. Ditto for lawyers or scientists, not to mention all the ethics restrictions on travel, stock, outside consulting, etc |
What is it with all these “democrats go sit in the corner and reflect on how naughty you’ve been” posts? The Democratic Party ran on a perfectly reasonable (and achievable) platform of opportunity for everyone. It was rejected. The GOP ran on no taxes, deflation, mass deportation and protecting women. Doesn’t seem like that is going to be great for the country and most Harris voters don’t need to reflect on the fact that they disagree with it. |