Ramaswamy proposes mass federal employee layoffs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not just Ramaswamy, DeSantis has stated he wants a 50% reduction in the Federal workforce.

I'm a Fed and I'm not entirely opposed to a reduction, we have a lot of worthless positions. Not necessarily the people in them (although...) but just too many positions and redudancy. Bush 43 came in and cut FTEs to on-board levels, all vacancies were wiped out in several agencies. We managed to survive.

By hiring contractors (I was one of them )

This is a good point. Where I work (your usual administrative desk jockey place) we have staff who are retired-on-the-job, don't have enough to do, or just plain can't handle the work. So what do we do? Hire contractors to do the work. So it's costing taxpayers TWICE what it should.

[Anonymous]

GOP is too racist to vote for Indian Americans. Indian-Americans should be careful not to fund this party. We are better off starting an educational charity somewhere.

Also, why does GOP attract the scummiest Indian Americans?? Bobby Jindal? Nikki Haley? Dinesh D’Souza? Why??

- Curious Indian-American

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not just Ramaswamy, DeSantis has stated he wants a 50% reduction in the Federal workforce.

I'm a Fed and I'm not entirely opposed to a reduction, we have a lot of worthless positions. Not necessarily the people in them (although...) but just too many positions and redudancy. Bush 43 came in and cut FTEs to on-board levels, all vacancies were wiped out in several agencies. We managed to survive.

Thats like saying we didn't have seatbelts as kids, but you lived so nbd. How many good services and programs might be available to the public now if he hadn't cut those positions?

I work in a safety field, so I have pretty strong opinions on redundancy and points of failure. If we expect government to be available in a crisis, prepared for all kinds of things, innovating, accountable and transparent, etc. - yes there has to be redundancy. Saying there are too many positions (compared to what?) is just empty talking points without some discussion of what services government should provide.

It should be done surgically -- don't cut Border Patrol agents, federal law enforcement (Ramaswamy can't be taken seriously when he says disband the FBI), agriculture inspectors, etc. But does a typical office need dozens of Program Analysts?

Sure there are hard-working, over-worked Feds. But for everyone one of those, there are hundreds who have about 2 hours of work a week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not just Ramaswamy, DeSantis has stated he wants a 50% reduction in the Federal workforce.

I'm a Fed and I'm not entirely opposed to a reduction, we have a lot of worthless positions. Not necessarily the people in them (although...) but just too many positions and redudancy. Bush 43 came in and cut FTEs to on-board levels, all vacancies were wiped out in several agencies. We managed to survive.

Thats like saying we didn't have seatbelts as kids, but you lived so nbd. How many good services and programs might be available to the public now if he hadn't cut those positions?

I work in a safety field, so I have pretty strong opinions on redundancy and points of failure. If we expect government to be available in a crisis, prepared for all kinds of things, innovating, accountable and transparent, etc. - yes there has to be redundancy. Saying there are too many positions (compared to what?) is just empty talking points without some discussion of what services government should provide.

It should be done surgically -- don't cut Border Patrol agents, federal law enforcement (Ramaswamy can't be taken seriously when he says disband the FBI), agriculture inspectors, etc. But does a typical office need dozens of Program Analysts?

Sure there are hard-working, over-worked Feds. But for everyone one of those, there are hundreds who have about 2 hours of work a week.

Then the overworked ones should consider utilizing them, not firing them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not just Ramaswamy, DeSantis has stated he wants a 50% reduction in the Federal workforce.

I'm a Fed and I'm not entirely opposed to a reduction, we have a lot of worthless positions. Not necessarily the people in them (although...) but just too many positions and redudancy. Bush 43 came in and cut FTEs to on-board levels, all vacancies were wiped out in several agencies. We managed to survive.

Thats like saying we didn't have seatbelts as kids, but you lived so nbd. How many good services and programs might be available to the public now if he hadn't cut those positions?

I work in a safety field, so I have pretty strong opinions on redundancy and points of failure. If we expect government to be available in a crisis, prepared for all kinds of things, innovating, accountable and transparent, etc. - yes there has to be redundancy. Saying there are too many positions (compared to what?) is just empty talking points without some discussion of what services government should provide.

It should be done surgically -- don't cut Border Patrol agents, federal law enforcement (Ramaswamy can't be taken seriously when he says disband the FBI), agriculture inspectors, etc. But does a typical office need dozens of Program Analysts?

Sure there are hard-working, over-worked Feds. But for everyone one of those, there are hundreds who have about 2 hours of work a week.

You think that's really the actual ratio? I think there were overworked feds, there are those that do two hours a week, and there are those who are not overworked (but still work hard and put in a solid 40.). I think the third category is probably much, much larger than the first two.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not just Ramaswamy, DeSantis has stated he wants a 50% reduction in the Federal workforce.

I'm a Fed and I'm not entirely opposed to a reduction, we have a lot of worthless positions. Not necessarily the people in them (although...) but just too many positions and redudancy. Bush 43 came in and cut FTEs to on-board levels, all vacancies were wiped out in several agencies. We managed to survive.

Thats like saying we didn't have seatbelts as kids, but you lived so nbd. How many good services and programs might be available to the public now if he hadn't cut those positions?

I work in a safety field, so I have pretty strong opinions on redundancy and points of failure. If we expect government to be available in a crisis, prepared for all kinds of things, innovating, accountable and transparent, etc. - yes there has to be redundancy. Saying there are too many positions (compared to what?) is just empty talking points without some discussion of what services government should provide.

It should be done surgically -- don't cut Border Patrol agents, federal law enforcement (Ramaswamy can't be taken seriously when he says disband the FBI), agriculture inspectors, etc. But does a typical office need dozens of Program Analysts?

Sure there are hard-working, over-worked Feds. But for everyone one of those, there are hundreds who have about 2 hours of work a week.

NP- change the statutes!! So many of us are required by Congress to perform tasks that are meaningless and outdated. Ask Feds what they would like changed to cut the budget- you'd get some great ideas. I know specifically what's wrong in my area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:GOP is too racist to vote for Indian Americans. Indian-Americans should be careful not to fund this party. We are better off starting an educational charity somewhere.

Also, why does GOP attract the scummiest Indian Americans?? Bobby Jindal? Nikki Haley? Dinesh D’Souza? Why??

- Curious Indian-American

Because the GOP is full of sleaze bags.

[Anonymous]

How much money would these mass layoffs save? Would it just be a drop in the bucket, and if so, what's the point? So the goal is to increase the unemployment rate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Politics aside, Ramaswamy is just so insufferable.

Does he even believe half of what comes out of his own mouth?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gotta keep working up the hatred of the Federal workforce.

The workers themselves make it easy. Read some DCUM boards about federal government RTO, salaries, pensions, vacation time, job security, actual working hours, etc.

Of course, there are some federal workers that work hard and make the system work. But, there are a lot of coasters in the system and a lot more than in private industry.

Give me a break. They’re not coasting, they’re drowning. Morale is incredibly low, employees don’t have the support or tools they need to be “successful” nor is that “success” even clearly defined by management at most agencies and certainly not at the very top. Think about what it’s like working at the lower levels of the biggest corporation you know, then multiply that feeling by a million and cut the budget in half. Most private sector employees wouldn’t be able to stand it. They’d faint at the suggestion that they need to buy their own coffee, ffs.

This whole song and dance is very tiresome.

I know-- I was thinking of the poster who complained that his company wouldn't pay for a goodbye party for someone. Meanwhile my agency refused to pay for paper I use to WFH.

Yep. No paper, no ink cartridges....

[Anonymous]

In Russian, his first and last names sound like “вовек рама с вами» which stands for “forever frame with you”. He is probably a Russian agent, beware.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In Russian, his first and last names sound like “вовек рама с вами» which stands for “forever frame with you”. He is probably a Russian agent, beware.

The Ukrainian bot returns! I kid, I kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In Russian, his first and last names sound like “вовек рама с вами» which stands for “forever frame with you”. He is probably a Russian agent, beware.

The Ukrainian bot returns! I kid, I kid.

I'm actually Russian and can smell fellow agents from afar

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Also, why does GOP attract the scummiest Indian Americans?? Bobby Jindal? Nikki Haley? Dinesh D’Souza? Why??

- Curious Indian-American

If they had brains, they'd be scamming through business, like everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How much money would these mass layoffs save? Would it just be a drop in the bucket, and if so, what's the point? So the goal is to increase the unemployment rate?

The savings doesn’t matter. Americans hate injustice, and there isn’t a bigger one than a loser asleep at the desk getting paid professional wages while waiting for the pension to kick in - all paid by the US taxpayer.