re: Fed Employees being paid for not working

quote:

---

You really don’t have a “gotcha” here

---

There's no gotcha. I'm just telling you how it is.

Meanwhile, you don't even know the difference between a government civilian and a contractor.

quote:

---

You are arguing that we will lose people that MUST be replaced at a higher rate; whether they are our “best people” or not

---

Nope. You're still wrong. Keep trying, I suppose.

quote:

---

you have not presented anything to make a case for not trimming down the federal work force

---

Nor do I intend to. I'm going to make more money from this than you'll see in your life.

quote:

---

There's no gotcha. I'm just telling you how it is.

---

you are, as usual, wrong, or at a minimum, have provided nothing to support your argument

your hubris, however remains intact

quote:

---

Meanwhile, you don't even know the difference between a government civilian and a contractor.

---

yep; I was unfamiliar with the term "government civilian" - at least until tonight; that does not invalidate my premise (that shrinking the federal workforce is a good thing)

quote:

---

Nor do I intend to. I'm going to make more money from this than you'll see in your life.

---

in your wildest dreams perhaps...

at this point, you are, once again, being obtuse and still have not demonstrated how forcing federal employees out the door will cost the taxpayer more money than it saves

this is really all you've had to say:

quote:

---

Your problem is that you think work won't still need to get done. It will, except now, it'll be done by a contractor who fills an FTE position at $120K but bills the government closer to $500K. People like me love this, because I make a frick ton of money from it. People like you love this because those who benefit from it sold you on the idea that we're "totally shrinking FedGov."

---

this has been the way things work for a long time; looks like the times are changing; at least it looks that way so far

Trump was elected to fix that type of horseshite; he may not win every battle in this area; but I don't think this will work out for you like you think

I had a staff of 10 feds. 8 out of 10 did no “work”. I’m not being hyperbolic. 1 or 2 in every branch do work and are so reliable that 5-6 others don’t do a damn thing. It’s also debatable what “work” is . When “work” is generating reports for other agencies that do no real work”work”, is it work? Anyone thinking that some contractors will need to fill in and do “work”, haven’t got a F’ing clue.

quote:

---

no, that would be you

---

Again, you didn't even know there was a difference between a government civilian and a contractor.

quote:

---

and then you turned around and claimed that was not what you said

---

That, of course, is complete bullshite. I simply called out your attempts to reframe my argument. Your straw man won't fly.

You could've just admitted you were wrong and didn't know anything about any of this.

also; it really looks like we are discussing different issues

you are basing the potential additional costs on the government having a need to replace what federal workers had performed with what contractors do & basing your numbers on work performed BEFORE government officials have been forced out

this is 2 separate issues

the issue of this thread -- can the government save money by shrinking the workforce

the issue you are arguing -- contractors tend to overbill the government

you are assuming that issue 1 will force more instances where issue 2 comes into play

you have also failed to address the exemptions to this early retirement offer (which includes workers tied to national security)

potential contractor abuse of government contracts does not mean that we should not trim down the federal workforce

Majority are paid by timecard. Any employee on the GS Pay Schedule are hourly and by timecard.

quote:

---

Of course we are. I've been trying to get you to address what I've actually posted throughout the entire thread.

---

not really

and you’re hanging your hat on the fact that I was unfamiliar with the term “government civilian”

I did address your point - I said that it seems unlikely that contractors would be required to replace fed employees on most situations, and I pointed out that many federal employees are not impacted by this offer

then you went down a rabbit hole looking for an angle

quote:

---

and you’re hanging your hat on the fact that I was unfamiliar with the term “government civilian”

---

I'm hanging my hat on the verified fact that you don't know what you're talking about.