3 ms·

I take it you’re not american? This is how the US works: at will employment: one day you have a job, the next you don’t.

jarsin 2y ago
The sympathy for an insanely bloated bureaucracy that has put generations into massive tax debt is baffling to say the least. If I sued everytime I got laid off and posted a bunch of wahmbulance crap on linkedin I would never get hired again.
- eesmith 2y ago
  Trump added $7.8 trillion to the debt in his first term, which is about 25% of the debt. Congress after Congress has borrowed from the Social Security Trust Fund while lowering taxes. And you want to place all the blame on "an insanely bloated bureaucracy" when there are fewer federal employees now than 40 years ago, despite the 35% increase in population?
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  do your homework the deficit doesn't stem from an increase in federal employment
unsnap_biceps 2y ago
public jobs historically have had the most protections against mass firings. It weights in on the calculus to take a lower paid job in public sector in exchange for very high stability.
eesmith 2y ago
It's how about 2/3rds of the US works. About 1/3rd of Americans have an employment arrangement which requires just cause or other factor which makes it not at will employment.
insane_dreamer 2y ago
Not all states have at will employment. And government employees in particular are typically protected from "at will" and instead should be fired for cause. That's why gov jobs offer greater job security, while paying less than in the private sector.
- throw0101d 2y ago
  > That's why gov jobs offer greater job security, while paying less than in the private sector. It should also be noted that this type of purge and re-purge of the civil service with the party faithful was the norm in the 1800s: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoils_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoils_system Eventually folks figured out that this didn't make for effective government and reforms were passed to make so that some positions were treated as 'neutral' and the folks in them would generally follow the policy of new administrations (and give honest advice): > Civil service reform in the United States was a major issue in the late 19th century at the national level, and in the early 20th century at the state level. Proponents denounced the distribution of government offices—the "spoils"—by the winners of elections to their supporters as corrupt and inefficient. They demanded nonpartisan scientific methods and credential be used to select civil servants. The five important civil service reforms were the two Tenure of Office Acts of 1820 and 1867, Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act of 1883, the Hatch Acts (1939 and 1940) and the CSRA of 1978.[1] In addition, the Civil Service Act of 1888 drastically expanded the civil service system.[2] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_service_reform_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_service_reform_in_the_Un... Making more people 'unprotected' and basically 'at-will' was done recently: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schedule_F_appointment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schedule_F_appointment
  - insane_dreamer 2y ago
    Ironically, some of things that Trump is trying to do in the name of "rooting out corruption" -- fire lots of civil servants and replace those who are necessary with those loyal to him -- is actually the type of corruption-enabling behavior that the civil service reforms were designed to prevent in the first place.

jarsin 2y ago

The sympathy for an insanely bloated bureaucracy that has put generations into massive tax debt is baffling to say the least. If I sued everytime I got laid off and posted a bunch of wahmbulance crap on linkedin I would never get hired again.

eesmith 2y ago
Trump added $7.8 trillion to the debt in his first term, which is about 25% of the debt. Congress after Congress has borrowed from the Social Security Trust Fund while lowering taxes. And you want to place all the blame on "an insanely bloated bureaucracy" when there are fewer federal employees now than 40 years ago, despite the 35% increase in population?
insane_dreamer 2y ago
do your homework the deficit doesn't stem from an increase in federal employment

unsnap_biceps 2y ago

public jobs historically have had the most protections against mass firings. It weights in on the calculus to take a lower paid job in public sector in exchange for very high stability.

eesmith 2y ago

It's how about 2/3rds of the US works. About 1/3rd of Americans have an employment arrangement which requires just cause or other factor which makes it not at will employment.

insane_dreamer 2y ago

Not all states have at will employment. And government employees in particular are typically protected from "at will" and instead should be fired for cause. That's why gov jobs offer greater job security, while paying less than in the private sector.

throw0101d 2y ago
> That's why gov jobs offer greater job security, while paying less than in the private sector. It should also be noted that this type of purge and re-purge of the civil service with the party faithful was the norm in the 1800s: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoils_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoils_system Eventually folks figured out that this didn't make for effective government and reforms were passed to make so that some positions were treated as 'neutral' and the folks in them would generally follow the policy of new administrations (and give honest advice): > Civil service reform in the United States was a major issue in the late 19th century at the national level, and in the early 20th century at the state level. Proponents denounced the distribution of government offices—the "spoils"—by the winners of elections to their supporters as corrupt and inefficient. They demanded nonpartisan scientific methods and credential be used to select civil servants. The five important civil service reforms were the two Tenure of Office Acts of 1820 and 1867, Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act of 1883, the Hatch Acts (1939 and 1940) and the CSRA of 1978.[1] In addition, the Civil Service Act of 1888 drastically expanded the civil service system.[2] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_service_reform_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_service_reform_in_the_Un... Making more people 'unprotected' and basically 'at-will' was done recently: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schedule_F_appointment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schedule_F_appointment
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  Ironically, some of things that Trump is trying to do in the name of "rooting out corruption" -- fire lots of civil servants and replace those who are necessary with those loyal to him -- is actually the type of corruption-enabling behavior that the civil service reforms were designed to prevent in the first place.