6 ms·

It sounds like the book had the exact opposite effect on you as was intended. Why do you think that was?

4ntonius8lock 7y ago
Perspective. This is what I feel the book was trying to tell government employees: 'This is a great job. You will move up and never get fired, just don't do anything too bad or we will whip you with a wet noodle... it will be oh so horribly humiliating... you might even get a suspension (read paid vacation) or worse' Here's how I was reading it: 'oh my god, if I did that as a small business owner I would be jailed, sued and have a criminal record... my business assets would be frozen, I'd possibly be charged with money laundering or wire fraud or some other vague laws... what do you mean 'possible suspension' for government employees doing that?
- stagger87 7y ago
  Is there an example that stands out?
  - 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
    Example 1: Military captain gives contracts to companies which he is 'affiliated' with in addition to getting direct kick back commissions from them. After investigation, he was 'forced into retirement'. So basically he accepted bribery (which I'm sure he didn't classify correctly on his bank statements, meaning money laundering and wire fraud) and didn't have to pay anything back, didn't get charged with anything and kept his career. His 'punishment' is having to continue to get paid... while keeping the money. Example 2: Naval director extorts money from subordinates: he faced a single 'letter of counseling' telling him his failures. He didn't pay back the money he received and faced no financial, career or other punishments. And that is AFTER being caught. And to be clear, these two examples are taken from a document produced by the US Government to warn employees of the dangers of misbehaving. Imagine the cases they felt were too lenient to include in the book!
    - pnutjam 7y ago
      https://www.jag.navy.mil/distrib/instructions/EncylopediaofEthicalFailures(2014).pdf https://www.jag.navy.mil/distrib/instructions/EncylopediaofE... - what page? (EDIT) page 5: 5brother-in-law as contractors. Colonel 2 even attempted to get his own son hired as a contractor, but Colonel 2’s supervisor correctly thought it would be inappropriate. Each colonel was issued a letter of caution to avoid an appearance of a conflictand they were required to take an annual ethics training course. Chief AuthorityA military service Chief Master Sergeant abused her authority and improperly used a government vehicle when she employed a government vehicle and three non-commissioned officers under her supervision to move personal property in a government rental vehicle. The soldiers helped her for 3 hours. The Chief Master Sergeant was given a verbal warning and advised of the improper use of government vehicles and the abuse of authority. Abuse of Position and BriberyA military service Captain used his official position as a reservist to obtain contracts for private sector companies with which he had an affiliation. In addition, the Captain accepted a “finder’s fee” (i.e., kickbacks) from one company for his efforts in helping thecompany obtain government contract work. For his significant ethical failure, the Captain was “allowed” to retire at the grade of Commander, though he had been selected to be an Admiral. In addition, the Captain was debarred for one year, while two of the affiliated companies entered into administrative agreements (for 3 years) with the military service. -- what's the pay difference between commander and admiral? This looks like a standard white collar slap on the wrist.
      - 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
        Your statement: 'standard white collar slap on the wrist' is so self evidently disconnected from an objective reality... that all I can state is I wish you well in your subjective reality. I truly wonder though what leads a person to believe that corporate employees getting caught in bribery and kick backs leads to them 'getting demoted'. It's a 'standard' story of a 'slap on the wrist'. Yeah, because courts order that all the time: this executive bribed the government? He will now be a junior executive. So has the court commanded... I don't even know how this could be a thing someone could imagine... to me it's hilarious. It's so evidently false. I'm also totally shocked at how some people will deny something, and when proven wrong, they pick at the proof by trying to diminish it without challenging it or acknowledging that they had the oposite view just a minute ago. It's like there is a percentage of the population incapable of admitting being in the wrong.
- empath75 7y ago
  Having worked for the federal government as an employee and a contractor, my experience is that while there are certainly people leaning on their shovels all day collecting a paycheck for doing almost nothing, the vast, vast majority of people are ethical and honest and trying to do the right thing.
  - perfmode 7y ago
    Sure there are good apples. It’s the system we ought to concern ourselves with. Does the system incentivize the shovel-leaners?
  - 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
    I never said anything to the contrary. Interesting to see you feel the need to state this here. To reply to you: I've known a number of drug dealers and the vast majority are honest, ethical and trying to do the right thing.
    - barrkel 7y ago
      That's deeply offensive. You're all but directly implying that civil servants are like drug dealers.
      - barry-cotter 7y ago
        That’s deeply offensive. You’re saying there’s something wrong with selling something people want to the people who want it.
      - 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
        Well, I posted a fact: leniency toward government official misbehavior. empath75 posted a fact in a reply to my fact: most government employees are good. The fact doesn't contradict mine directly, but it came across as a rebuttal. There's a pattern to this type of answers. It's 'throwing true facts out there that sort of contradict a point without having to actually address the point being made, and if anyone takes the bait, you can always say there was never any contradiction being made, it was just a statement of facts'. So I did the same. I posted a totally true fact that sort of rebuts the point without having to address the point being brought up. I prefer a point-counter point types of conversation. Edit: I don't think civil servants are like drug dealers.

Perspective. This is what I feel the book was trying to tell government employees: 'This is a great job. You will move up and never get fired, just don't do anything too bad or we will whip you with a wet noodle... it will be oh so horribly humiliating... you might even get a suspension (read paid vacation) or worse' Here's how I was reading it: 'oh my god, if I did that as a small business owner I would be jailed, sued and have a criminal record... my business assets would be frozen, I'd possibly be charged with money laundering or wire fraud or some other vague laws... what do you mean 'possible suspension' for government employees doing that?

stagger87 7y ago
Is there an example that stands out?
- 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
  Example 1: Military captain gives contracts to companies which he is 'affiliated' with in addition to getting direct kick back commissions from them. After investigation, he was 'forced into retirement'. So basically he accepted bribery (which I'm sure he didn't classify correctly on his bank statements, meaning money laundering and wire fraud) and didn't have to pay anything back, didn't get charged with anything and kept his career. His 'punishment' is having to continue to get paid... while keeping the money. Example 2: Naval director extorts money from subordinates: he faced a single 'letter of counseling' telling him his failures. He didn't pay back the money he received and faced no financial, career or other punishments. And that is AFTER being caught. And to be clear, these two examples are taken from a document produced by the US Government to warn employees of the dangers of misbehaving. Imagine the cases they felt were too lenient to include in the book!
  - pnutjam 7y ago
    https://www.jag.navy.mil/distrib/instructions/EncylopediaofEthicalFailures(2014).pdf https://www.jag.navy.mil/distrib/instructions/EncylopediaofE... - what page? (EDIT) page 5: 5brother-in-law as contractors. Colonel 2 even attempted to get his own son hired as a contractor, but Colonel 2’s supervisor correctly thought it would be inappropriate. Each colonel was issued a letter of caution to avoid an appearance of a conflictand they were required to take an annual ethics training course. Chief AuthorityA military service Chief Master Sergeant abused her authority and improperly used a government vehicle when she employed a government vehicle and three non-commissioned officers under her supervision to move personal property in a government rental vehicle. The soldiers helped her for 3 hours. The Chief Master Sergeant was given a verbal warning and advised of the improper use of government vehicles and the abuse of authority. Abuse of Position and BriberyA military service Captain used his official position as a reservist to obtain contracts for private sector companies with which he had an affiliation. In addition, the Captain accepted a “finder’s fee” (i.e., kickbacks) from one company for his efforts in helping thecompany obtain government contract work. For his significant ethical failure, the Captain was “allowed” to retire at the grade of Commander, though he had been selected to be an Admiral. In addition, the Captain was debarred for one year, while two of the affiliated companies entered into administrative agreements (for 3 years) with the military service. -- what's the pay difference between commander and admiral? This looks like a standard white collar slap on the wrist.
    - 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
      Your statement: 'standard white collar slap on the wrist' is so self evidently disconnected from an objective reality... that all I can state is I wish you well in your subjective reality. I truly wonder though what leads a person to believe that corporate employees getting caught in bribery and kick backs leads to them 'getting demoted'. It's a 'standard' story of a 'slap on the wrist'. Yeah, because courts order that all the time: this executive bribed the government? He will now be a junior executive. So has the court commanded... I don't even know how this could be a thing someone could imagine... to me it's hilarious. It's so evidently false. I'm also totally shocked at how some people will deny something, and when proven wrong, they pick at the proof by trying to diminish it without challenging it or acknowledging that they had the oposite view just a minute ago. It's like there is a percentage of the population incapable of admitting being in the wrong.
empath75 7y ago
Having worked for the federal government as an employee and a contractor, my experience is that while there are certainly people leaning on their shovels all day collecting a paycheck for doing almost nothing, the vast, vast majority of people are ethical and honest and trying to do the right thing.
- perfmode 7y ago
  Sure there are good apples. It’s the system we ought to concern ourselves with. Does the system incentivize the shovel-leaners?
- 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
  I never said anything to the contrary. Interesting to see you feel the need to state this here. To reply to you: I've known a number of drug dealers and the vast majority are honest, ethical and trying to do the right thing.
  - barrkel 7y ago
    That's deeply offensive. You're all but directly implying that civil servants are like drug dealers.
    - barry-cotter 7y ago
      That’s deeply offensive. You’re saying there’s something wrong with selling something people want to the people who want it.
    - 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
      Well, I posted a fact: leniency toward government official misbehavior. empath75 posted a fact in a reply to my fact: most government employees are good. The fact doesn't contradict mine directly, but it came across as a rebuttal. There's a pattern to this type of answers. It's 'throwing true facts out there that sort of contradict a point without having to actually address the point being made, and if anyone takes the bait, you can always say there was never any contradiction being made, it was just a statement of facts'. So I did the same. I posted a totally true fact that sort of rebuts the point without having to address the point being brought up. I prefer a point-counter point types of conversation. Edit: I don't think civil servants are like drug dealers.