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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.