3 ms·
So more career politicians? And since their job prospects outside govt are basically nil, you'd have an even higher bar for dismissal based on performance or in
by beambot 10y ago
So more career politicians? And since their job prospects outside govt are basically nil, you'd have an even higher bar for dismissal based on performance or incompetence. It's already hard enough to cull the govt employee herd... we don't need every little position becoming a lifetime appointment a la supreme court justices.
- semi-extrinsic 10y agoOP said those of O-7 rank (one-star general) or above. Statutory limits [1] state that there can be no more than ~400 people of rank O-8 or above in the US military. So say 1000 people in active service at O-7 or above. Do you really think a number like that is significantly influencing the size of the "govt employee herd"? And do you really think the cost of keeping these people employed outweighs the benefits of keeping them away from private positions using their connections for lobbying the government? [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/525 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/525
- beambot 10y agoThe parent I responded to made no such distinction; they were advocating an expanded scope: > I'd extend to this to a lot of high ranking government positions, and a lot of other jobs (lobbying, etc).