or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Gibonius

The government is already having a hard time hiring people in key areas like cybersecurity. The max pay is under the starting pay in industry. This is supposedly a priority mission (and also supposedly under Trump), but it's basically going to be impossible to build expertise without leaning hard on contractors. And they can leave at any time, making it really hard to build expertise and develop a national policy.It's still sort of amazing to me that federal workers get...
Hey, austerity worked great in Europe. Adding a fixation on autarky on top of that couldn't possible have negative outcomes, right?
Yeah, that's what I meant by "outside of DC." They're all over the place, but everyone seems to think that all two million federal workers are right around DC.Also people think that the federal workforce has been massively expanding, but it's about the same size as in 1960 despite the population doubling.
You're arguing with the dictionary.Someone who works in public service is a public servant. That's the definition of the phrase. Probably hear "civil servant" more often, but it's the same thing.
There are quite a few conservative leaning feds. Anybody in the security and defense oriented departments is likely to be Republican.There's not a lot of polling on it, but the one I found showed 44% Democrat, 40% Republican, and 16% independent (with a majority there indicating they leaned conservative).85% of the federal workforce is outside DC, and half is in DOD or the other security agencies. People have kind of a misrepresentation of the federal workforce.
Trump just implemented a more or less across the board federal hiring freeze (as widely anticipated). Drain the Swamp never meant "address corruption", it meant "punish public servants." Of course it exempts DOD, which is probably the least efficient and most bloated department in DC.
Should society? Because that's what happens if one parent can just bail on providing support.There's a societal interest in making sure children are as well cared for as possible. Ensuring that as much of that cost as possible is born by the parents seems fair to me.I think I can safely say that the majority of pro-choice people are not in favor of baby-killing, so yes, I'd imagine they don't think of fetuses as children.
Why would that follow? Pro-choice people don't consider early term fetuses to be "children," so there really aren't the same concerns.
Oh, well, we're not Saudi Arabia, so people should really stop looking for progress.Low fucking bar right there.
It's mostly basement dwelling misogynists who think they're "enlightened" because they hate and disrespect women, while simultaneously devoting their life to fucking as many of them as possible.
New Posts  All Forums: