4 ms·
> This is a great example of that political dogma: notice that you’ve accepted as an article of faith the trope that government employees can’t be fired or disc
by ripjaygn 2y ago
> This is a great example of that political dogma: notice that you’ve accepted as an article of faith the trope that government employees can’t be fired or disciplined or that this is not true of contractors, despite neither of those being true
Nice strawman. It is harder to fire govt employees than to fire private employees. Disagree?
Just look up at-will employment law that doesn't apply to government entities. Looks like you're the one following political dogma and accepting articles of faith and tropes.
Otherwise why would ignore that a very consequential law is different for private vs govt employees?
> The managers you think can’t direct civil servants directly aren’t magically more capable of selecting and overseeing contracts, either.
Where did I say they cannot? Please stop with the strawmen. They just don't have enough incentive because it's very hard to fire them, unlike managers in the private sector.
- acdha 2y ago> Nice strawman. It is harder to fire govt employees than to fire private employees. Disagree? Let’s see, so it’s not a straw man when you say government employees are “essentially unfirable” but it is when someone corrects you?
- ripjaygn 2y agoLets ignore the personal back and forth, and get back to the argument. It is harder to fire govt employees than to fire private employees. Disagree? At-will employment law doesn't apply to government entities. A very consequential law is different for private vs govt employees. > The managers you think can’t direct civil servants directly aren’t magically more capable of selecting and overseeing contracts, either. Never said in my comment they cannot direct civil servants. They just don't have enough incentive because it's very hard to fire them, unlike managers in the private sector.
- ahahahahah 2y agoThat's like the farthest I've seen goalposts move within a span of two comments. You went from "essentially unfirable" to simply "harder to fire" and continues to act like you're so right. Like it's almost pointless to discuss something with someone who pretends those are even close to the same.
- ripjaygn 2y agoThat's three comments where folks are attacking me instead of addressing the topic because they know they lost the argument. Sad to see that happen. And also look up the meaning of the word essentially.
- paulmd 2y ago> Lets ignore the personal back and forth, and get back to the argument. I mean, were you not attempting to make an argument when you said that government employees were “essentially unfirable”? Your argument just sucked/was factually incorrect and you want to steer away from the “interpersonal” aspect of someone pointing that out. It’s gauche to point this out on HN but you aren’t engaging in good faith here - wnd when someone else engages you in actual good-faith you fall back to juvenile debate-club attempts to frame them as the wrongdoer. That’s highly rude and a bad attitude and approach to bring to this community. Act better and take some accountability for your own misbehavior.
- ripjaygn 2y agoI had two options, either continue the personal back and forth by debating that you folks don't understand the meaning of the word 'essentially', or take the high ground and debate the topic. Sad that both you and the other poster lost the argument so hard that you have to resort to ad hominems and make it about me instead of the topic. Thats very telling. And also look up the meaning of the word essentially.