Seems like Most of Our Government Employees Are Non Essential...So Why Do We Even Waste Money

Um, that is how it is supposed to work and has worked for the majority of my 50+ years.

Annual appropriations are divided into 12 separate pieces of legislation:

Agriculture
Commerce, Justice, and Science
Defense
Energy and Water
Financial Services
Homeland Security
Interior and Environment
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education
Legislative
Military and Veterans
State and Foreign Operations
Transportation and Housing and Urban Development

But it hasn't happened that way since 2010. This Congress couldn't even pass a Legislative Appropriations bill, which is why a lot of staffers aren't working right now along with the other Feds.

 

Maybe I'm confused, but I thought thumbs was talking about even more piece meal than this? I thought he meant each particular piece of each of those categories. For instance the bill that allowed soldiers to still be paid, but not full funding of Military and Veterans, etc.

 

And who's fault is that?

Obama has never even proposed a budget let alone sign one. He prefers executive action to dealing with a meddling Congress.

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/overview

You also do understand too the budget originates in the House and while Presidents propose budgets it is up to Congress initiate and pass them.

 

More inaccuracies or a lack of understanding how the budget process works.

 

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to FranchiseBlade again.

 

rimrocker, I commend you for not using massive amounts of profanity in your replies

 

My fellow liberals...I come before you with a heavy heart. As some of you may know, a Republican recently posted an unverified anecdote on an Internet message board about working in an unnamed government office where people were lazy. In light of this refutation of us and all we stand for, I recommend we shut the whole thing down and go home.

Gentlemen, it has been a privilege socialisming with you tonight.

 

Well that was a lazy rebuttle...And yes my story is true.

(oh and I'm not a rep...I'm an ind who votes both ways. Sick of the govt though - both sides - change is needed).

 

Oh - I get it.

You mean "forced" as in signed into law by the President after going through congress. This is not the same as "not forced" which woudl be signed into law by the President after going through congress.

here you go Artie, a free refresher:
<object width="420" height="315"><param name="movie" value="//www.youtube.com/v/Otbml6WIQPo?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="//www.youtube.com/v/Otbml6WIQPo?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="420" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

 

No I mean use your head sammy instead of posting cartoon rebuttals...put down the coloring books and think…

Get rid of EEs that don't bring value or are redundant because it's the right thing to do for the spending of govt money. How about run a budget like you would a household. Just because the money has been approved doesn’t mean it HAS to get spent in order for you to get some more next year. The US govt is POORLY run but you don’t see a problem so therefore no change is needed in your opinion. Keep spending like there’s no tomorrow because that’s not going to ever going to be a problem right sammy?

To keep this on track, this thread is about the percentage of “non-essential” employees, which non-essential is defined as “Having little or no importance”. This govt has way too many “non-essential” employees. As I noted, there are no guidelines in place for leaders to be rewarded for efficiency - it’s quite the opposite. More inefficiency leads to more money needed in which to spend on more inefficiencies. Is that how you like your govt run?

 

I am using my head.

You asked "When has the govt voluntarily made significant cuts?"

The answer: THIS year.

(Of course, those cuts were a terrible idea. But that's irrelevant to the main point here - which is currently, ignorance and its consequences).

This shouldn't be surprising to anybody who follows current events even casually. I suspect the problem here is that you don't like the answer. If so, you shouldn't have asked. If you want to live in your own alternate reality - fine, but leave the rest of the adults out of it.

 

Definitely not climate alarmism. There is science behind it all.

 

It's not even about that. It's about shrinking landmass from rising sea levels and increased arid zones, along with rising global temperatures. Science has shown if we don't curb our pollution, we're headed towards making this planet uninhabitable.

It's not going to be in our lifetimes, but it will effect generations down.

 

If you consider the sequester and recession resulted in "voluntarily" cuts, then I think we're done with our class today.

 

While I agree with you that the government is poorly run but I really wish you hadn't brought out the tired trope of "Running the government like you would a household." The government is in almost no way like a household. Further for all those who say the government should be run like a household one thing I do in my household is when money is tight look for ways to make more money, yet those who argue for running government like a household are also the most resistant to raising more revenue.

How would you define "Non-essential". The GOP are up in arms that parks are closed so should those be counted as essential? What about NASA? What about the Trade office? I bet you will find a lot of people arguing that sectors currently deemed "non-essential" are actually essential.

Anyway this current shutdown has less to do with cutting down government spending than it does with the GOP's determination to do away with the ACA. If the GOP were serious about cutting government spending they would've accepted the Grand Bargain that would've cut $4 Trillion in spending.

 

Yeah that may be oversimplification but the concept is the same. I know some things go over the budget (sorry to use the concept again but just like a household emergencies). I know things come up like unforeseen wars, recessions, rise in unemployment, natural disasters, etc. But you shouldn’t be spending money just to spend money because if you don’t put yourselft at risk losing that money next year. Corps rewards staying on budget. The US govt does not. Never has. And as I saw 1st hand, it’s quite the opposite.

Did you feel any pain from the sequester? That was never supposed to happen but supposed to be the worst case punishment that would push parties into an agreement. And yet it had little-to-no impact. Now those people who were laid off would say it had a big impact and that they do is essential. But really in the big picture, they do not.

I would consider park rangers, museum workers etc and many other that have been classified as not essential something that should be funded. Some of these actually make money. NASA – non (I know the benefits but I dare say the cost doesn’t justify the benefit anymore). Trade (as I understand it) non. But see this is where the experts who care should be making the decisions of what’s essential and what not. However, I do see there are too many workers in same field/line of work that create redundancy and inefficiency. You can’t run a company like that and you shouldn’t be running a country like that. Inefficiency breeds more inefficiency which gives us the bloat that we have today. That’s why you can take the blanket knife cuts that the sequester gave us and not even feel it. This country needs to cut the fat but not the blanket cuts that forced cuts give you.

And there are some govt workers that should be laid off for lack of “skills” or “effort”. Unless you come in and take a dump on the bosses desk – while he’s sitting there - you are not getting laid off. No matter what time you come in, what time you leave, what you do during the day, how you handle customers, you will have a job again tomorrow. Not all – but there are too many where that is the case. Unfortunately you’d just be paying unemployment in this system which isn’t a bad thing for a lazy worker. And I do believe in unemployment but only 1 year. After that it should start getting cut back each month – 0 after 2 years. If you can’t get a job in your line of work after 1 year, then I think it’s time to reset and find a new line of work and/or new location painful as that might be. I personally wouldn’t hire someone who hasn’t worked in the field in a year and I think unemployment is used far too often not as a safety net but as a way of life.

Now I will say, and I’m sure you’d agree, that we shouldn’t and wouldn’t be in this mess if Boner (misspelled on purpose) wasn’t Speaker. There are enough votes. He’s playing outside the box to try and get a minorities but that’s not the way the system should work. One man should not drive a country. That is not what the fathers ever had in mind. Ironically it is the teaparty that believes this the most.

And just so you know (but not that you’d care), I am not a tea-party, lib, rep or dem man at all. I’d be for a tax increase if there were also smart spending cuts. Like the F-35 program. What a boondoggle. I know our planes are getting old, but just build new F14s, F16, drones and cruise missiles with maybe a couple of electronic touch ups. I dare say no one could still touch us. And there are a ton of subsides that need to be stopped or at the very least cut back and way back in some cases. I’m also for gun control. I am 100% against lobbying which is just legalized bribery to me to help his/her re-election. That’s given us more bad decisions/laws/direction than any one party has. So really I’m all over the board and it’s hard finding someone I believe in but I do vote on both sides – though sometimes I have to completely refrain because neither is an acceptable choice. But I have what I think is reason behind my decisions – not just tow the party line which I think is idiotic for either side.

Bottom line there need to be cuts. Smart cuts. We can’t just keep spending and growing uncontrollably or there will be a payday one day. Maybe in a 100 years. Maybe in 50. But it’s coming. And unless there is significant change on how we spend our money it will be here soon enough for most of us to witness.

 

The sequester wasn't the "result[] of" voluntary cuts, it physically is a voluntary cut, entered into a few years agon, manifesting itself currently.

That's called reality.

What part of it do you not understand? Because you obviously don't.

I will offer you some theories, you can merely respond a; b; c;

A) aliens caused sequestration to happen INVOLLUNTARILY

B) alien ninjas caused sequestration to happen INVOLUNTARILY

C) I am wrong.

 

Sam - Keeping it simple for you...

Did they voluntarily ask for the sequester? The answer - which I think you need a cheat sheet - is it was a punishment if they couldn't reach an agreement - which they didn't.

 

They were voluntarily passed and entered into by the governments enacting them.

I agree that we're done with your class - you have passed ignorant clown 101, and successfully demonstrated the "never retreat never surrender no matter how trivial and stupid you look" behavioral facet.

Good job, arty.