The Furlough Thread

[dbackjon]

And all should be government employees.

I follow you. I wonder if a study has ever been done to determine the feasibility of having all that work done by the government.

It used to be...

Now, I am not talking about equipment manufacturing - that has always been private. Talking about the outsourcing of traditional government jobs to private vendors.

[AZGrizFan]

I follow you. I wonder if a study has ever been done to determine the feasibility of having all that work done by the government.

It used to be...

Now, I am not talking about equipment manufacturing - that has always been private. Talking about the outsourcing of traditional government jobs to private vendors.

Like military operations?

[Ibanez]

It used to be...

Now, I am not talking about equipment manufacturing - that has always been private. Talking about the outsourcing of traditional government jobs to private vendors.

Like military operations?

That's farmed out to Explorer scouts


Sent from my iPhone

[houndawg]

Why is the govt furloughing employees? There's was enough $ for Obama to just take a $100 million trip to Africa...

Hogan and 93Handjob waste 100 million every month.

[houndawg]

You're another **** stain. **** off, welfare whore.

You're all bark. So tell me, what jobs do you want the Government to not contract out? Because we know, the government is such an efficient machine. Like i've said before and oddly enough, nobody will answer my question: If you don't want the Government employing people to build or manage something and you don't want the Government to contract that to a company, who DO you want to do that?

Well, the NSA might want to take a look at outsourcing fewer system admin jobs....

[Col Hogan]

I read what you wrote. The US government shouldn't outsource to the leaches aka private industry. With about 3.1 million government and military employees, do you want the US Government to absorb the other approx. 3 million defense contractors? Or do you want some jobs gov't and some others private. I can tell you, not many contractors (if any) are actually reading intel. They are probably developing, installing, managing and updates the computer systems and networks.

All should be employees of the US Government. Of course, we don't need 6.1 million defense employees.

Large use of contractor started under Clinton as a way of reducing long term (retirement, health care, etc) costs for the federal government...Bush kept the contractor force growing because Congress was forcing military cuts, but Bush never saw a mission he could say no to...

0bama felt the higher up-front costs had to be reduced, and started cutting contractor by in-place conversion...making the contractor a federal employee...lower short term costs, but those long term costs are mounting as the number of federal employees have skyrocketed under the current administration...

So, three choices...

1- Cut short term costs with more federal employees
2- Cut long term costs with more employees
3- Cut the federal workforce and federal budget

I vote for #3

[dbackjon]

All should be employees of the US Government. Of course, we don't need 6.1 million defense employees.

Large use of contractor started under Clinton as a way of reducing long term (retirement, health care, etc) costs for the federal government...Bush kept the contractor force growing because Congress was forcing military cuts, but Bush never saw a mission he could say no to...

0bama felt the higher up-front costs had to be reduced, and started cutting contractor by in-place conversion...making the contractor a federal employee...lower short term costs, but those long term costs are mounting as the number of federal employees have skyrocketed under the current administration...

So, three choices...

1- Cut short term costs with more federal employees
2- Cut long term costs with more employees
3- Cut the federal workforce and federal budget

I vote for #3

So you'd be okay with your job being eliminated?

[Ibanez]

All should be employees of the US Government. Of course, we don't need 6.1 million defense employees.

Large use of contractor started under Clinton as a way of reducing long term (retirement, health care, etc) costs for the federal government...Bush kept the contractor force growing because Congress was forcing military cuts, but Bush never saw a mission he could say no to...

0bama felt the higher up-front costs had to be reduced, and started cutting contractor by in-place conversion...making the contractor a federal employee...lower short term costs, but those long term costs are mounting as the number of federal employees have skyrocketed under the current administration...

So, three choices...

1- Cut short term costs with more federal employees
2- Cut long term costs with more employees
3- Cut the federal workforce and federal budget

I vote for #3

This. In Charleston, many of the PM and Financial positions have gone back to the government. I think Logistics is on it's way out as more and more loggies are being taken in by DoD.

[Col Hogan]

Large use of contractor started under Clinton as a way of reducing long term (retirement, health care, etc) costs for the federal government...Bush kept the contractor force growing because Congress was forcing military cuts, but Bush never saw a mission he could say no to...

0bama felt the higher up-front costs had to be reduced, and started cutting contractor by in-place conversion...making the contractor a federal employee...lower short term costs, but those long term costs are mounting as the number of federal employees have skyrocketed under the current administration...

So, three choices...

1- Cut short term costs with more federal employees
2- Cut long term costs with more employees
3- Cut the federal workforce and federal budget

I vote for #3

So you'd be okay with your job being eliminated?

Yes...

But I'd rather start with the non-Constitutionally mandated agencies like Education, HHS, HUD, EPA...

But Defense has fat that needs to be cut too...

[Ibanez]

So you'd be okay with your job being eliminated?

Yes...

But I'd rather start with the non-Constitutionally mandated agencies like Education, HHS, HUD, EPA...

But Defense has fat that needs to be cut too...

DHS.

[Col Hogan]

Yes...

But I'd rather start with the non-Constitutionally mandated agencies like Education, HHS, HUD, EPA...

But Defense has fat that needs to be cut too...

DHS.

What he said...

[D1B]

So you'd be okay with your job being eliminated?

Yes...

But I'd rather start with the non-Constitutionally mandated agencies like Education, HHS, HUD, EPA...

But Defense has fat that needs to be cut too...

You are working hard to earn my approval. Keep this up, and you just might get an "atta boy!"

[BDKJMU]

So the DOD is saving less than 2 billion through furloughs, right?

Well, they should just take that out of the 14 billion in foreign military aid slated for 2013 (and that doesn't even include 23 billion in economic foreign aid).

There. Problem solved.

[mrklean]

So you'd be okay with your job being eliminated?

Yes...

But I'd rather start with the non-Constitutionally mandated agencies like Education, HHS, HUD, EPA...

But Defense has fat that needs to be cut too...

AMEN , People dont know how much money the DOD Has. This is the one department that can be cut by 40% AND YESSSSS!!!!, we will be able to still get our worthless F-35 Joint Strike Fighter(Shitty as Jet)

[Ibanez]

Yes...

But I'd rather start with the non-Constitutionally mandated agencies like Education, HHS, HUD, EPA...

But Defense has fat that needs to be cut too...

AMEN , People dont know how much money the DOD Has. This is the one department that can be cut by 40% AND YESSSSS!!!!, we will be able to still get our worthless F-35 Joint Strike Fighter(Shitty as Jet)

It's funny that you use the "40%" number. When I was part of JSF, the budget was reduced approx. 40%.

[TheDancinMonarch]

Large use of contractor started under Clinton as a way of reducing long term (retirement, health care, etc) costs for the federal government...Bush kept the contractor force growing because Congress was forcing military cuts, but Bush never saw a mission he could say no to...

As with all things liberal the stated reason for doing something is usually a smoke screen. The real reason was to have more people on the government payroll, albeit with the money passing through an intermediate, the contracting company. Fewer people will call for reducing the size of government when their salary comes more or less directly from the government.

And for all this talk of furloughs and no pay raises for years, where is the mass exodus of government "workers"? It seems that the large majority think that despite these negatives, it is still a pretty soft deal.

[mrklean]

AMEN , People dont know how much money the DOD Has. This is the one department that can be cut by 40% AND YESSSSS!!!!, we will be able to still get our worthless F-35 Joint Strike Fighter(Shitty as Jet)

It's funny that you use the "40%" number. When I was part of JSF, the budget was reduced approx. 40%.

The F-22 and the F- 35 are a money pit for the DOD. Upgrade the F-15, F-16 and F-18 and we still have the best Aircraft in the world.

[CID1990]

Yes...

But I'd rather start with the non-Constitutionally mandated agencies like Education, HHS, HUD, EPA...

But Defense has fat that needs to be cut too...

AMEN , People dont know how much money the DOD Has. This is the one department that can be cut by 40% AND YESSSSS!!!!, we will be able to still get our worthless F-35 Joint Strike Fighter(Shitty as Jet)

So much fail, so little time


Sent from the center of the universe.