Reply to One of DOGE's "cost saving" suggestions

Forum Index » Jobs and Careers

Reply to "One of DOGE's "cost saving" suggestions"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]As someone who just trained new people, it'd just be a massive, stupid waste.  We hired people because we needed rhem, we just spent a whole lot of money training them and to fire them now would mean we aren't going to get the investment back.  Might as well just set money on fire.[/quote]

How things are done currently is also a massive, stupid waste.

If they streamline many procedures and eliminate some unneeded programs, they can reduce the number of things the agency is tasked with and how many people required to do it.  The posts here assume that you will all be doing the same amount of "stuff" long-term and that's short-sighted.  Private companies eliminate or automate a lot of things the government still does with manpower.  Inefficient.[/quote]

This is so tiresome. Agency budgets are already cut to the bone: if there was a task we could eliminate, we've eliminated it. Congress is welcome to eliminate tasks but we're obligated to do the ones they directed agencies to do.

I'm not sure what you think can be automated but IME that costs more money not less. And you end up still having to keep a manual process because a decent chunk of the population doesn't have internet (to e-file, for example) or has complicated identity documents because they were a home birth, or whatever. I would welcome people applying actual thought and funding to these problems but i resent the idea that agencies have left the cheap and easy fixes on the table. If it was doable on our budget we would have done it. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics