Potential gov't shutdown - blaming the Dems

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So when the dems had the Whitehouse and congress, and the gov was shutdown, it was the republicans fault

Then when the dems had the Whitehouse and republicans had congress and the gov was shutdown, it was the republicans fault.

Then when the republicans had the Whitehouse and the dems had congress and the gov was shutdown, it was the republicans fault.

Then when the republicans had the Whitehouse and congress and the gov was shutdown, its the republicans fault.




So when exactly is it EVER the democrats fault?

You conveniently left a lot out.

Like the fact that PP is LYING. There has never been a shutdown with a Dem POTUS and Dem Congress. FAKE NEWS, PP..

[Anonymous]

It looks like the Republicans might try to play a game of chicken next week over the Dreamers.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/29/government-shutdown-2017-republicans-democrats-268176

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It looks like the Republicans might try to play a game of chicken next week over the Dreamers.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/29/government-shutdown-2017-republicans-democrats-268176

Well good luck with that...

[Anonymous]

Dems need to shut it down. Stop cucking out!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like the Republicans might try to play a game of chicken next week over the Dreamers.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/29/government-shutdown-2017-republicans-democrats-268176

Well good luck with that...

Why do you say that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dems need to shut it down. Stop cucking out!

How? It’s a gop majority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep defense and Medicare at current levels and cut the rest of the federal government by 20%.

The waste in the federal government is nothing short of stunning.

The waste in defense is nothing short of stunning. Let's begin there.

I think we should begin with the contractors. The amount of money they take in (they were nicknamed "bandits" for a reason) is obscene, and all because the govt employees can't do the work - and they can't be fired. Maybe if the govt could can the deadwood and bring in competent people, we wouldn't have to outsource so much work.

Many people would support increasing the size of the federal workforce and moving away from contractors. There would be a cost savings but would necessitate a significant increase in federal employees. Would you agree to that?

Absolutely. These contractors are getting paid 2x and 3x a staff salary. What's particularly wasteful is when a GS15 retires, collects his pension, and then contracts back for the identical role at twice the salary. So instead of paying the employee $140,000, he is collecting from taxpayers a pension of as much as $80,000, plus an income of $200,000. Or....he retires, collects his pension, and then contracts back part-time for 3 days a week, but at a contractor's salary of $120,000. He is now collecting $200,000 from taxpayers for part-time work instead of $140,000 for full-time work. I see this ALL THE TIME!

Unless your mythical contractor is like the lady in this article he is not collecting a pension of $80,000!
http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/29/us/sue-finley-longest-serving-woman-nasa-trnd/index.html
Federal workers who were hired after 1983 (34 years ago) get a pension based on years of service. So to receive a pension of $80,000 which is 57% of the $140,000 salary you mention, the retiree would have to retire with over 50 years of service. Highly unlikely that they would then begin a second career at this age although in the case of Sue Finley - I would not put anything past her! I suppose it is possible that you have a lot of CRS (the old pension system which was more generous) federal retirees working with you but there are fewer of these folks in the federal civil service today.
If you know contractors who retired after 20 years of federal civil service, their pension would be 20% of their salary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Keep defense and Medicare at current levels and cut the rest of the federal government by 20%.

The waste in the federal government is nothing short of stunning.

The waste in defense is nothing short of stunning. Let's begin there.

I think we should begin with the contractors. The amount of money they take in (they were nicknamed "bandits" for a reason) is obscene, and all because the govt employees can't do the work - and they can't be fired. Maybe if the govt could can the deadwood and bring in competent people, we wouldn't have to outsource so much work.

Many people would support increasing the size of the federal workforce and moving away from contractors. There would be a cost savings but would necessitate a significant increase in federal employees. Would you agree to that?

Absolutely. These contractors are getting paid 2x and 3x a staff salary. What's particularly wasteful is when a GS15 retires, collects his pension, and then contracts back for the identical role at twice the salary. So instead of paying the employee $140,000, he is collecting from taxpayers a pension of as much as $80,000, plus an income of $200,000. Or....he retires, collects his pension, and then contracts back part-time for 3 days a week, but at a contractor's salary of $120,000. He is now collecting $200,000 from taxpayers for part-time work instead of $140,000 for full-time work. I see this ALL THE TIME!

Unless your mythical contractor is like the lady in this article he is not collecting a pension of $80,000!
http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/29/us/sue-finley-longest-serving-woman-nasa-trnd/index.html
Federal workers who were hired after 1983 (34 years ago) get a pension based on years of service. So to receive a pension of $80,000 which is 57% of the $140,000 salary you mention, the retiree would have to retire with over 50 years of service. Highly unlikely that they would then begin a second career at this age although in the case of Sue Finley - I would not put anything past her! I suppose it is possible that you have a lot of CRS (the old pension system which was more generous) federal retirees working with you but there are fewer of these folks in the federal civil service today.
If you know contractors who retired after 20 years of federal civil service, their pension would be 20% of their salary.

The myth of the contractor mega salary lives on. The company may charge that much for a contractor but the actual contractor doesn’t get paid that much! Also there are no more pensions!! Who in a company gets pensions?! Laughable! You’re living in a fantasy world which is much better than reality!