Cut Federal Employee Raises in Best Economy Ever Due to an Emergency

TruthSeeker

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
3,424
Reaction score
169
Points
63
Trump says we have an economic emergency in our country that requires Federal workers to lose most of their raises. Trump also says we're in the best economy ever. Tell that to the emergency. LMAO!
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,198
Reaction score
460
Points
83
Trump says we have an economic emergency in our country that requires Federal workers to lose most of their raises. Trump also says we're in the best economy ever. Tell that to the emergency. LMAO!
Yeah, 23 trillion in debt and trillion dollar deficits is definitely an emergency.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,771
Reaction score
1,217
Points
113
Trump says we have an economic emergency in our country that requires Federal workers to lose most of their raises. Trump also says we're in the best economy ever. Tell that to the emergency. LMAO!
Big government addict ^^^^
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8,277
Reaction score
273
Points
83
We should all be so lucky to have the retirement, benefits and health insurance of federal employees
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,771
Reaction score
1,217
Points
113
Should be a hiring freeze and wage freeze until we get rid of about 200,000 federal workers. Pare it down and then start offering merit raises to the best of the rest.
 

kellyleeks

GH Hall of Fame '10
Joined
Sep 28, 2010
Messages
2,508
Reaction score
157
Points
63
Should be a hiring freeze and wage freeze until we get rid of about 200,000 federal workers. Pare it down and then start offering merit raises to the best of the rest.
Hahaha. You’re so cute. Ain’t gonna be any merit raises. You see, it’s better to base increases based on time in the job.
 

OldBob53

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 15, 2019
Messages
1,041
Reaction score
130
Points
63
As his autocratic power expands even further, look for The Donald to fire most all federal workers whom he regards as the "deep state" out to get him. Then, next step, he'll order his "deep state" enemies confined to Goolags at Guantanamo.
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
16,256
Reaction score
836
Points
113
It's the same "national emergency" excuse being used to divert National Guard and other funds to build a medieval-era wall on the southern border. Any president without scruples could pull this at any time to do practically anything they want, but this is the first guy to actually do it. The courts should make him (or anyone) be specific about the nature of the emergency.
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
16,256
Reaction score
836
Points
113
Should be a hiring freeze and wage freeze until we get rid of about 200,000 federal workers. Pare it down and then start offering merit raises to the best of the rest.
What happens when 200,000 people are suddenly unemployed? Serious question. The vast majority would be more capable than you, for example, so it wouldn't bode well for your job security. Honestly, the unemployment rate would skyrocket, and we'd be in an economic depression in short order.

Or are you talking about executing them? That would actually work.
 
Last edited:

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,198
Reaction score
460
Points
83
It's the same "national emergency" excuse being used to divert National Guard and other funds to build a medieval-era wall on the southern border. Any president without scruples could pull this at any time to do practically anything they want, but this is the first guy to actually do it. The courts should make him (or anyone) be specific about the nature of the emergency.
Not national guard funds! This is an outrage!

Look man, you hate the wall. I don't really like the wall either. But it was the main thing he ran on. It was the centerpiece of his entire campaign. The fact that he's actually building it and getting creative with funding is not an outrage.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,198
Reaction score
460
Points
83
What happens when 200,000 people are suddenly unemployed? Serious question. The vast majority would be more capable than you, for example, so it wouldn't bode well for your job security. Honestly, the unemployment rate would skyrocket, and we'd be in an economic depression in short order.

Or are you talking about executing them? That would actually work.
HAHAHAHAHAHHA
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
8,589
Reaction score
422
Points
83
Obviously, the point of the OP is the inconsistency between what Trump says and what the Government does.

Trump says "best economy ever."
Gov't says no raises for federal employees, citing "serious economic situation."

those are absolutely contradictory statements. They cannot both be true.
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
16,256
Reaction score
836
Points
113
Obviously, the point of the OP is the inconsistency between what Trump says and what the Government does.

Trump says "best economy ever."
Gov't says no raises for federal employees, citing "serious economic situation."

those are absolutely contradictory statements. They cannot both be true.
Hey, where's the both sides-ism here? You're making this all sound like "facts," which there's no such thing as.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8,277
Reaction score
273
Points
83
Obviously, the point of the OP is the inconsistency between what Trump says and what the Government does.

Trump says "best economy ever."
Gov't says no raises for federal employees, citing "serious economic situation."

those are absolutely contradictory statements. They cannot both be true.
Government employment has been the same for generations; when the economy is bad, it's a fantastic gig, but when the economy is going great, it's not so great, lower pay than the booming private side, etc.

This hasn't changed in any of our lifetimes. So yes, kinda, both can be somewhat true, SON
 

dpodoll68

Elite Poster
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
18,933
Reaction score
224
Points
63
Not national guard funds! This is an outrage!

Look man, you hate the wall. I don't really like the wall either. But it was the main thing he ran on. It was the centerpiece of his entire campaign. The fact that he's actually building it and getting creative with funding is not an outrage.
It's interesting how you've many times posted that the only legitimate function of the federal government is national defense, and now you're mocking a diversion of funds away from the National Guard to Trump's vanity piece that will serve no national defense purpose. Principles of granite, indeed.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,198
Reaction score
460
Points
83
It's interesting how you've many times posted that the only legitimate function of the federal government is national defense, and now you're mocking a diversion of funds away from the National Guard to Trump's vanity piece that will serve no national defense purpose. Principles of granite, indeed.
I point that out to liberals who think the only federal spending that should be cut is defense.
Trump campaigned on the wall. Trump won. Trump is building the wall. Everything else is sour grapes.
 

TruthSeeker

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
3,424
Reaction score
169
Points
63
I point that out to liberals who think the only federal spending that should be cut is defense.
Trump campaigned on the wall. Trump won. Trump is building the wall. Everything else is sour grapes.
And that's a good thing or bad thing?
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,582
Reaction score
366
Points
83
Trump says we have an economic emergency in our country that requires Federal workers to lose most of their raises. Trump also says we're in the best economy ever. Tell that to the emergency. LMAO!
Gotta love that brazen level of total dishonesty and hypocrisy from our Dear Leader.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,582
Reaction score
366
Points
83
Government employment has been the same for generations; when the economy is bad, it's a fantastic gig, but when the economy is going great, it's not so great, lower pay than the booming private side, etc.

This hasn't changed in any of our lifetimes. So yes, kinda, both can be somewhat true, SON
Government employment acts as an economic stabilizer. That doesn't mean that the POTUS should be excused for more obvious lies. What is the point of excusing all of the lies? Do you feel there is a necessity to these kinds of lies?

Also, if the "private" side is growing and increasing wages, then to compete, the government side should be doing the same, to remain competitive. On the other hand, he could just be honest and admit that he is purposely trying to harm government as a whole so he can gather himself even more power in the Executive Branch...
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8,277
Reaction score
273
Points
83
Government employment acts as an economic stabilizer. That doesn't mean that the POTUS should be excused for more obvious lies. What is the point of excusing all of the lies? Do you feel there is a necessity to these kinds of lies?

Also, if the "private" side is growing and increasing wages, then to compete, the government side should be doing the same, to remain competitive. On the other hand, he could just be honest and admit that he is purposely trying to harm government as a whole so he can gather himself even more power in the Executive Branch...
My comments don't have a damn thing to do with whatever it is that the Trumpster said. They are general comments on the nature of government employment, and clearly you don't remotely have a clue as to the long term benefits of being a government employee, the pensions, et al.

The problem with growing the public side when the private side grows is what happens when the tide turns and the private side experiences massive layoffs and wage reductions, benefit reductions, etc. THOSE things almost never translate BACK to the public side, and then the public side doesn't have to the funds to perform it's other functions.

When you're a public employee, the tradeoff you take going in, KNOWINGLY, for a slightly lower wage is the benefit of essentially having a job for life. Where else in the world can you get a job and barring killing someone or another felony, you know you will have a job 20, 30 years from now? Do you have any idea what kind of security that is? It's a tradeoff that some are willing to take, and some are not.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
18,033
Reaction score
273
Points
83
Should be a hiring freeze and wage freeze until we get rid of about 200,000 federal workers. Pare it down and then start offering merit raises to the best of the rest.
Are military members considered federal employees? If so...bust out the trimmers.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
16,426
Reaction score
154
Points
63
Maybe we need more deficit crushing tax cuts.
It's an emergency that we have all this debt, but it's all the Ds fault, because Rs have the presidency and Senate and they had the house for 2 years. Can't you understand how Neocons, progressives and liberals shoulder all the blame?
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,198
Reaction score
460
Points
83
Government employment acts as an economic stabilizer. That doesn't mean that the POTUS should be excused for more obvious lies. What is the point of excusing all of the lies? Do you feel there is a necessity to these kinds of lies?

Also, if the "private" side is growing and increasing wages, then to compete, the government side should be doing the same, to remain competitive. On the other hand, he could just be honest and admit that he is purposely trying to harm government as a whole so he can gather himself even more power in the Executive Branch...
A stabilizer! Paying people to do nothing of value or to actually burden the private economy are stabilizers!
He wants to reduce the size of government and weaken government employees because he will then have more power!
A sterling intellect on display here. But he knows his TABLES!!
 

GoodasGold

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
8,816
Reaction score
243
Points
63
Not national guard funds! This is an outrage!

Look man, you hate the wall. I don't really like the wall either. But it was the main thing he ran on. It was the centerpiece of his entire campaign. The fact that he's actually building it and getting creative with funding is not an outrage.
Another main thing he ran on was that he would be so presidential “like you’ve never seen”, working so hard making great deals that he wouldn’t leave the White House and would not have time to golf.
 
Top Bottom