Ramaswamy proposes mass federal employee layoffs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this is a GOP talking point, although not one that has a lot of traction. Still, the fact that it's become a thing they are talking about at all should worry some people. The last person to do that was a democrat, so it's kind of weird how the issue flipped sides.

Not sure where this ranks in my general worry about the next GOP administration. There's so much to worry about!

[Anonymous]

I remember chatting with an Under Secretary many years ago. He told me he could eliminate 85% of his staff and it would not impact their work at all.

Ouch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I remember chatting with an Under Secretary many years ago. He told me he could eliminate 85% of his staff and it would not impact their work at all.

Ouch.

I’m a career SES and wouldn’t put the number that high, closer to 50%. The problem is I couldn’t choose which ones would go, in a typical RIF those who have been around the longest doing very little would be protected and the ambitious new people would all be canned.

I definitely think the government would be better off without 85% of the Under Secretaries I’ve ever worked with. Most have been mildly competent but arrogant and self aggrandizing with zero leadership skills.

[Anonymous]

Evgeny Popov: "We should take a closer look at this Mr. Ramaswamy. The last time, we've installed President Trump for Americans, but our bet didn't quite work out. Why not try again? Let's give it another try and see how Ramaswamy will perform in case Trump doesn't manage to win the position of the President. Just kidding."
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/8/29/2190157/-Putin-s-pals-rave-about-Vivek-but-Trump-remains-No-1-in-their-hearts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I remember chatting with an Under Secretary many years ago. He told me he could eliminate 85% of his staff and it would not impact their work at all.

Ouch.

I’m a career SES and wouldn’t put the number that high, closer to 50%. The problem is I couldn’t choose which ones would go, in a typical RIF those who have been around the longest doing very little would be protected and the ambitious new people would all be canned.

I definitely think the government would be better off without 85% of the Under Secretaries I’ve ever worked with. Most have been mildly competent but arrogant and self aggrandizing with zero leadership skills.

I feel like it's a lot easier to believe that we need fewer political appointees and high level managers than 50% less staff.

I mean, I work for a public facing agency, and we already struggle to keep visitor centers open with minimal staffing. Would you like 50% fewer people answering the phones at IRS and Social Security? Just because YOU work with a lot of useless people doesn't mean the people who get paid a lot less are less needed.

[Anonymous]

I can see it happening and the wheels are already being set into place by the GQP. It’s very frightening. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservatives-aim-to-restructure-u-s-government-and-replace-it-with-trumps-vision?fbclid=IwAR2nBHjil5e8LShk7_-qHvQA0Jh1DYkQp7gERSQrMlbAvXKrTsQr95FDVpA_aem_AR4bjeF4mzlXISQMkqmy_ozAlOhstUw1qRbGI7q-ce9gJuWt0Hf_tfRuJxuAzWvs8BQ

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can see it happening and the wheels are already being set into place by the GQP. It’s very frightening. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservatives-aim-to-restructure-u-s-government-and-replace-it-with-trumps-vision?fbclid=IwAR2nBHjil5e8LShk7_-qHvQA0Jh1DYkQp7gERSQrMlbAvXKrTsQr95FDVpA_aem_AR4bjeF4mzlXISQMkqmy_ozAlOhstUw1qRbGI7q-ce9gJuWt0Hf_tfRuJxuAzWvs8BQ

What is their goal? Do they think government will work more effectively is they fire 50,000 workers? And let's assume they make 80K each. That's 4 billion saved per year. That's about 0.75% of the budget. Big woop.

[Anonymous]

In most organizations 20 percent of the employees do 80 percent of the work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can see it happening and the wheels are already being set into place by the GQP. It’s very frightening. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservatives-aim-to-restructure-u-s-government-and-replace-it-with-trumps-vision?fbclid=IwAR2nBHjil5e8LShk7_-qHvQA0Jh1DYkQp7gERSQrMlbAvXKrTsQr95FDVpA_aem_AR4bjeF4mzlXISQMkqmy_ozAlOhstUw1qRbGI7q-ce9gJuWt0Hf_tfRuJxuAzWvs8BQ

This sounds like they want to fire the leadership and replace them with their own people. Which is fine, imo, because the leadership generally never knows what they're doing anyway. The people in the government who actually do the grunt work will stay, because none of these guys want to do the actual grunt work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see it happening and the wheels are already being set into place by the GQP. It’s very frightening. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservatives-aim-to-restructure-u-s-government-and-replace-it-with-trumps-vision?fbclid=IwAR2nBHjil5e8LShk7_-qHvQA0Jh1DYkQp7gERSQrMlbAvXKrTsQr95FDVpA_aem_AR4bjeF4mzlXISQMkqmy_ozAlOhstUw1qRbGI7q-ce9gJuWt0Hf_tfRuJxuAzWvs8BQ

What is their goal? Do they think government will work more effectively is they fire 50,000 workers? And let's assume they make 80K each. That's 4 billion saved per year. That's about 0.75% of the budget. Big woop.

I think the goal is the same it was with education - privatization. They put policies in place that effectively doomed public education, and then insisted they needed charters and vouchers and other subsidies for privates. It's their MO - sabotage, criticize, privatize.

[Anonymous]

Okay. I'll go along with this if Ramaswamy is the first to be laid off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see it happening and the wheels are already being set into place by the GQP. It’s very frightening. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservatives-aim-to-restructure-u-s-government-and-replace-it-with-trumps-vision?fbclid=IwAR2nBHjil5e8LShk7_-qHvQA0Jh1DYkQp7gERSQrMlbAvXKrTsQr95FDVpA_aem_AR4bjeF4mzlXISQMkqmy_ozAlOhstUw1qRbGI7q-ce9gJuWt0Hf_tfRuJxuAzWvs8BQ

What is their goal? Do they think government will work more effectively is they fire 50,000 workers? And let's assume they make 80K each. That's 4 billion saved per year. That's about 0.75% of the budget. Big woop.

No, they specifically want the goverment to work less effectively. An ineffective government means corporations and special interests run things without interference. They have zero interest in whether the IRS answers its customer phones, but they very much want the IRS to not audit them. They think that poor food safety will not affect them personally (planning to use money to source safe food) and could improve the company bottom line. And so on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see it happening and the wheels are already being set into place by the GQP. It’s very frightening. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservatives-aim-to-restructure-u-s-government-and-replace-it-with-trumps-vision?fbclid=IwAR2nBHjil5e8LShk7_-qHvQA0Jh1DYkQp7gERSQrMlbAvXKrTsQr95FDVpA_aem_AR4bjeF4mzlXISQMkqmy_ozAlOhstUw1qRbGI7q-ce9gJuWt0Hf_tfRuJxuAzWvs8BQ

What is their goal? Do they think government will work more effectively is they fire 50,000 workers? And let's assume they make 80K each. That's 4 billion saved per year. That's about 0.75% of the budget. Big woop.

No, they specifically want the goverment to work less effectively. An ineffective government means corporations and special interests run things without interference. They have zero interest in whether the IRS answers its customer phones, but they very much want the IRS to not audit them. They think that poor food safety will not affect them personally (planning to use money to source safe food) and could improve the company bottom line. And so on.

+1. It's all stupid. Gov programs will be cut, then something everyone expected the gov to do won't get done, there will be hearings, the agency will say it has no money, and Congress will fund it so that it can re-hire everyone that was cut. We've all seen this before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see it happening and the wheels are already being set into place by the GQP. It’s very frightening. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservatives-aim-to-restructure-u-s-government-and-replace-it-with-trumps-vision?fbclid=IwAR2nBHjil5e8LShk7_-qHvQA0Jh1DYkQp7gERSQrMlbAvXKrTsQr95FDVpA_aem_AR4bjeF4mzlXISQMkqmy_ozAlOhstUw1qRbGI7q-ce9gJuWt0Hf_tfRuJxuAzWvs8BQ

What is their goal? Do they think government will work more effectively is they fire 50,000 workers? And let's assume they make 80K each. That's 4 billion saved per year. That's about 0.75% of the budget. Big woop.

No, they specifically want the goverment to work less effectively. An ineffective government means corporations and special interests run things without interference. They have zero interest in whether the IRS answers its customer phones, but they very much want the IRS to not audit them. They think that poor food safety will not affect them personally (planning to use money to source safe food) and could improve the company bottom line. And so on.

Nailed it.

This is how you build a kleptocracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can see it happening and the wheels are already being set into place by the GQP. It’s very frightening. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/conservatives-aim-to-restructure-u-s-government-and-replace-it-with-trumps-vision?fbclid=IwAR2nBHjil5e8LShk7_-qHvQA0Jh1DYkQp7gERSQrMlbAvXKrTsQr95FDVpA_aem_AR4bjeF4mzlXISQMkqmy_ozAlOhstUw1qRbGI7q-ce9gJuWt0Hf_tfRuJxuAzWvs8BQ

What is their goal? Do they think government will work more effectively is they fire 50,000 workers? And let's assume they make 80K each. That's 4 billion saved per year. That's about 0.75% of the budget. Big woop.

No, they specifically want the goverment to work less effectively. An ineffective government means corporations and special interests run things without interference. They have zero interest in whether the IRS answers its customer phones, but they very much want the IRS to not audit them. They think that poor food safety will not affect them personally (planning to use money to source safe food) and could improve the company bottom line. And so on.

+1. It's all stupid. Gov programs will be cut, then something everyone expected the gov to do won't get done, there will be hearings, the agency will say it has no money, and Congress will fund it so that it can re-hire everyone that was cut. We've all seen this before.

I actually think it's different from before. If there is a hearing, it will be about how govt has failed so we should privatize everything. But I am not sure they will bother: it's easier to distract people with culture wars stuff.