EPTIt also means Acrofales was right and they never really had collective bargaining rights and everyone was just pretending there were rules that didn't actually exist.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4883
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22487 Posts
It also means Acrofales was right and they never really had collective bargaining rights and everyone was just pretending there were rules that didn't actually exist. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17705 Posts
On March 30 2025 00:53 micronesia wrote: Reagan showed that such situations can be used to just fire whoever you want, even though normally the President can't. As famous as the air traffic controllers example is take a step back and look at what Reagan did on a macro level. Under Reagan the # of federal employees grew from 2.9 million to 3.1 million. Reagan yapped since the early 60s about how the USA had to slash government spending drastically or the entire nation was in peril. He talked it like the USA was on the verge of losing WW3 to the Soviet Union if they did not get their financial house in order. It was all BS. Reagan spent money like crazy. "A Time For Choosing" is one of the greatest speeches I've ever experienced. By the end of it my mindset was : "Tell me which Commie to shoot first!" No wonder Reagan was so popular. However, the contents of the speech turned out to be pure BS. Reagan spent money like crazy in the 80s. Regarding the current government cutbacks: according to sources, 0.15% have been RIFed so far. This % matches the reports I'm getting from customers of mine and people I know working in the US Navy and the FDIC. That said, people in the DC area are generally scared. You're either a government worker of some kind of you work for a company that services the government in some way. | ||
micronesia
United States24783 Posts
On March 30 2025 01:14 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Regarding the current government cutbacks: according to sources, 0.15% have been RIFed so far. This % matches the reports I'm getting from customers of mine and people I know working in the US Navy and the FDIC. That said, people in the DC area are generally scared. You're either a government worker of some kind of you work for a company that services the government in some way. The RIF plans are still for the most part being finalized. the percentage RIFed so far isn't as important as how many will be by, say, the end of the fiscal year. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24154 Posts
On March 30 2025 01:10 Gorsameth wrote: Ok, so it is just the US being insane and making striking a fireable offense. Some how not surprising. It also means Acrofales was right and they never really had collective bargaining rights and everyone was just pretending there were rules that didn't actually exist. GH: It's increasingly clear that's all that has been holding the US together its whole existence. That goes back to a bunch of genocidal, land/people stealing, rapists and slavers proudly declaring We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. at its inception. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35173 Posts
| ||
|
Introvert
United States5010 Posts
On March 30 2025 01:14 JimmyJRaynor wrote: As famous as the air traffic controllers example is take a step back and look at what Reagan did on a macro level. Under Reagan the # of federal employees grew from 2.9 million to 3.1 million. Reagan yapped since the early 60s about how the USA had to slash government spending drastically or the entire nation was in peril. He talked it like the USA was on the verge of losing WW3 to the Soviet Union if they did not get their financial house in order. It was all BS. Reagan spent money like crazy. "A Time For Choosing" is one of the greatest speeches I've ever experienced. By the end of it my mindset was : "Tell me which Commie to shoot first!" No wonder Reagan was so popular. However, the contents of the speech turned out to be pure BS. Reagan spent money like crazy in the 80s. Regarding the current government cutbacks: according to sources, 0.15% have been RIFed so far. This % matches the reports I'm getting from customers of mine and people I know working in the US Navy and the FDIC. That said, people in the DC area are generally scared. You're either a government worker of some kind of you work for a company that services the government in some way. Reagan was dealing with a Democratic Congress throughout his presidency and decided he'd rather cut taxes (and deal with the economic problems) and rebuild the military, a conscious choice. That being said, he did manage to drastically slow the rate of domestic non-military spending; none of these are small feats considering that the House was Dem controlled during his entire tenure. Speeches like A Time for a Choosing or his first inaugural were also important for the tone they set, even if they, like all good rhetoric, have no choice but to bend and change with the constraints of political reality. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28873 Posts
On March 29 2025 22:43 oBlade wrote: US private salaries average $65k annually. Federal employees average $106k. When the former are the ones paying and employing the latter through the representation they voted for, I'm inclined to agree they'll be able to make it without collective bargaining for a while. This guy's sentiments reek of ideological capture which is not appropriate for a government labor union, and give immediate credence to the administration's claim "Certain Federal unions have declared war on President Trump's agenda." Smells like a swampy deepstate. So like at face value this number is surprising to me, because in Norway if you're employed by the state you'll generally make less money than someone who has the same job in the private sector, but then thinking a bit about it I realize it's kinda meaningless without context. Because in the US, the 'average wage' then includes all the millions of people working minimum wage jobs and jobs that don't require particular skills or education, but that's kinda irrelevant when you're comparing it to a specific work force. Basically - how much do federal workers make compared to americans that have jobs with similar requirements in terms of skills and education? If it's still 40% more then hey, that honestly sounds like a good reason to reduce their pay. | ||
|
micronesia
United States24783 Posts
The draw is mostly gone now. Instead of stability, you get hatred and attacks on your job/benefits/character. Instead of doing public good, you're expected to personally serve whoever is in charge, which currently is one of the most reprehensible Americans. | ||
|
Billyboy
2058 Posts
On March 30 2025 03:56 Introvert wrote: Reagan was dealing with a Democratic Congress throughout his presidency and decided he'd rather cut taxes (and deal with the economic problems) and rebuild the military, a conscious choice. That being said, he did manage to drastically slow the rate of domestic non-military spending; none of these are small feats considering that the House was Dem controlled during his entire tenure. Speeches like A Time for a Choosing or his first inaugural were also important for the tone they set, even if they, like all good rhetoric, have no choice but to bend and change with the constraints of political reality. I miss the gold old days, when after a election the people elected worked together and compromised to move the country they SERVED to be better. Instead of now when they pick their opinion based on the opposite of the other team. And of course enriching themselves as much as possible. On March 30 2025 05:48 micronesia wrote: Typically, federal civilians make a fair bit less than their private sector counterpart (similar to how you described Norway). In exchange, they get some good stability and benefits (at least prior to 2025) and a noble feeling of providing a public service. The draw is mostly gone now. Instead of stability, you get hatred and attacks on your job/benefits/character. Instead of doing public good, you're expected to personally serve whoever is in charge, which currently is one of the most reprehensible Americans. Random aside, but are you still doing the 5 things or has everyone forgotten about it? And is it takin as long if your still doing it? | ||
|
micronesia
United States24783 Posts
On March 30 2025 09:30 Billyboy wrote: Random aside, but are you still doing the 5 things or has everyone forgotten about it? And is it takin as long if your still doing it? Varies mostly by Department. Unlike many others, the Department of Defense set up a separate account (a .mil e-mail vice opm e-mail) to solicit and receive ~5 bullets of accomplishments each month. It is ongoing with zero feedback. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17705 Posts
On March 30 2025 01:27 micronesia wrote: The RIF plans are still for the most part being finalized. the percentage RIFed so far isn't as important as how many will be by, say, the end of the fiscal year. this will be interesting... https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/4138965/hegseth-orders-civilian-workforce-realignment-in-dod-reopens-drp/ On March 30 2025 09:57 micronesia wrote: Varies mostly by Department. Unlike many others, the Department of Defense set up a separate account (a .mil e-mail vice opm e-mail) to solicit and receive ~5 bullets of accomplishments each month. It is ongoing with zero feedback. the people i know working for the US Navy submit what amounts to a form letter for their 5 items and it is anonymously worded. they are still submitting their 5 bullet points every week. On March 30 2025 03:56 Introvert wrote: Reagan was dealing with a Democratic Congress throughout his presidency and decided he'd rather cut taxes (and deal with the economic problems) and rebuild the military, a conscious choice. That being said, he did manage to drastically slow the rate of domestic non-military spending; none of these are small feats considering that the House was Dem controlled during his entire tenure. Speeches like A Time for a Choosing or his first inaugural were also important for the tone they set, even if they, like all good rhetoric, have no choice but to bend and change with the constraints of political reality. A Time For CHoosing was 1964. I thought the world was ending the way he was talking... "no nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income..." blah blah blah. THE RED COATS ARE COMING! ! ! During Reagan's years public debt as a percentage of GDP rose from 26.1% in 1980 to 41.0% by 1988 Not only did spending go up under Reagan .. it went up relative to the increasing GDP. I like Reagan and I think he was good for the country overall. However, it is important to see the full context and everything he did throughout his career as a politician. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27228 Posts
On March 30 2025 10:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote: this will be interesting... https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/4138965/hegseth-orders-civilian-workforce-realignment-in-dod-reopens-drp/ the people i know working for the US Navy submit what amounts to a form letter for their 5 items and it is anonymously worded. they are still submitting their 5 bullet points every week. How do they feel about that? | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17705 Posts
most are whining about it. most are not happy that their "lifetime jobs" are at risk. The unspoken deal is that you work for the government for less money in exchange for lifetime job security. Trump/Musk/Doge is breaking that deal. Sure , there are lazy government workers out there. There are also lots of dedicated, hard working professionals as well. It is not all doom and gloom however. One guy I know at the FDIC is about to hit "level 15 management". They are ready to promote him no matter what orders come from on high. He does not much care. He has multiple private sector options. | ||
|
Yurie
12128 Posts
On March 30 2025 10:47 JimmyJRaynor wrote: this will be interesting... https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/4138965/hegseth-orders-civilian-workforce-realignment-in-dod-reopens-drp/ the people i know working for the US Navy submit what amounts to a form letter for their 5 items and it is anonymously worded. they are still submitting their 5 bullet points every week. A Time For CHoosing was 1964. I thought the world was ending the way he was talking... "no nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income..." blah blah blah. THE RED COATS ARE COMING! ! ! During Reagan's years public debt as a percentage of GDP rose from 26.1% in 1980 to 41.0% by 1988 Not only did spending go up under Reagan .. it went up relative to the increasing GDP. I like Reagan and I think he was good for the country overall. However, it is important to see the full context and everything he did throughout his career as a politician. Most people I talk to seem to strongly dislike Reagan since he started the decline of the working class (sometimes incorrectly called the middle class) in the US. You raised two examples, decreased taxes for the rich and increased debt (so less long term spending). Increasing military spending is a stimulus but one of the worst ones since it creates limited long term value. If he dumped the same money into expanding civilian ship building or the rail network he would not be seen as negatively I think. Though perhaps his spending made the breaking point for the USSR come 5 years earlier. Which isn't something most credit him for. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
On March 30 2025 05:35 Liquid`Drone wrote: So like at face value this number is surprising to me, because in Norway if you're employed by the state you'll generally make less money than someone who has the same job in the private sector, but then thinking a bit about it I realize it's kinda meaningless without context. Because in the US, the 'average wage' then includes all the millions of people working minimum wage jobs and jobs that don't require particular skills or education, but that's kinda irrelevant when you're comparing it to a specific work force. Basically - how much do federal workers make compared to americans that have jobs with similar requirements in terms of skills and education? If it's still 40% more then hey, that honestly sounds like a good reason to reduce their pay. I make a minimum of about 150k less than my private practice counterparts. | ||
|
micronesia
United States24783 Posts
| ||
|
Gahlo
United States35173 Posts
On March 30 2025 05:35 Liquid`Drone wrote: So like at face value this number is surprising to me, because in Norway if you're employed by the state you'll generally make less money than someone who has the same job in the private sector, but then thinking a bit about it I realize it's kinda meaningless without context. Because in the US, the 'average wage' then includes all the millions of people working minimum wage jobs and jobs that don't require particular skills or education, but that's kinda irrelevant when you're comparing it to a specific work force. Basically - how much do federal workers make compared to americans that have jobs with similar requirements in terms of skills and education? If it's still 40% more then hey, that honestly sounds like a good reason to reduce their pay. Sounds like a good reason to improve the pay of private sector workers to me. Why make a bad situation worse for more people? | ||
|
oBlade
United States6327 Posts
On March 30 2025 05:35 Liquid`Drone wrote: So like at face value this number is surprising to me, because in Norway if you're employed by the state you'll generally make less money than someone who has the same job in the private sector, but then thinking a bit about it I realize it's kinda meaningless without context. Because in the US, the 'average wage' then includes all the millions of people working minimum wage jobs and jobs that don't require particular skills or education, but that's kinda irrelevant when you're comparing it to a specific work force. Basically - how much do federal workers make compared to americans that have jobs with similar requirements in terms of skills and education? If it's still 40% more then hey, that honestly sounds like a good reason to reduce their pay. It's 40k more which works out to around 60%+. They are 10-20% more educated than the workforce in general. As a whole, federal workers are more educated than the overall civilian workforce. Nearly a third of federal workers (31.5%) have a bachelor’s degree, compared with 27.7% of all employed Americans. And almost 22% of federal workers have an advanced degree, versus 17.6% of all workers. The federal workforce is almost completely white collar, whereas the workforce at large is about half white/half blue. Some reasons related to that are the structure of the US government - things like departments of transportation fixing potholes and paving roads, clearly with more blue collar opportunities, are at the state level. Not that the government needs less blue collar things done. But it sends those tasks out to contractors inefficiently via poorly competed contracts that often run over time and cost and meet intense regulation to ever complete. Things like machining rockets that NASA flies are done by contractors with blue collar employees rather than federal employees per se. So the blue/white gap itself not directly a skill issue in either direction. If the average looks bad, the median gap is also slightly worse than the average because private compensation skews more right (nobody bags 7-8 figures from the government - as salary anyway - or has stock options). In addition to stability, federal benefits are notoriously good because admittedly it would self-evidently be stupid to, for example, pay someone minimum wage from the government thereby making their income so low as to be eligible for other social welfare/benefit programs to make their ends meet - since they're employed by the fundamental source of all those to begin with. And at some level they do as a matter of cost of living need more than the national average because they have gentrified the seat of the federal government and parts of Maryland and Virginia where most of these people and their networks are physically located. Many are just there rather than on-site like at an FBI field office or national park. But that's an issue for different reasons. The federal gov't has 4 million credit cards. HHS itself has 100 communications departments and 40 IT departments. That means one day they had 39 IT departments, and someone said, we need another IT department, and now they have to have 40 IT departments because that's the way things are, that's how it works. These patriots serving the public good are overwhelmingly left leaning, white collar, apparently unfireable after 1-2 years, and more privileged than the citizens they work for. They are effectively a company that loses $1-2 trillion per year that I am a compulsory shareholder in and I have a vested interest in opposing whatever has been allowed to become entrenched this way. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada17705 Posts
On March 30 2025 22:34 oBlade wrote: The federal gov't has 4 million credit cards. HHS itself has 100 communications departments and 40 IT departments. That means one day they had 39 IT departments, and someone said, we need another IT department, and now they have to have 40 IT departments because that's the way things are, that's how it works. These patriots serving the public good are overwhelmingly left leaning, white collar, apparently unfireable after 1-2 years, and more privileged than the citizens they work for. They are effectively a company that loses $1-2 trillion per year that I am a compulsory shareholder in and I have a vested interest in opposing whatever has been allowed to become entrenched this way. Government IT Departments spend money like its just coloured paper. I use a compiler to convert xBase // Foxpro // Clipper // Visual Objects applications to modern 2020s C#. The in-house guys only want to convert their systems on a manual screen by screen , report by report, function by function basis. They view using a compiler as "taking jobs away". I solve this problem by never telling them about my compiler.  I made this compiler in 2006 when I was taking a compiler construction course. I get 6 month project overhauls done in 3 days. Stuff like this allows me to get in lots of practise for the next EA NHL '94 World Championships. it also gives me lots of time to discuss Canadian politics on video game forum boards. EDIT: I never skimp on the testing phase. Testing takes just as much time with or without a compiler. Testing is a very boring grind, however, it must be done. I feel bad for my employees that have to do it. I started off as a Tester making minimum wage at the Canadian Video Rental chain "Video 99" that had an internal 3 person Technical Department. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7328 Posts
| ||
| ||
