First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
.Gov Executive website change.
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17

BlueOni wrote:

For anyone who's interested, US federal employment figures are a matter of public record and are still up.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/data-analysis-documentation/federal-employment-reports/historical-tables/total-government-employment-since-1962/

They show an uptick in 2009 and 2010, then an uninterrupted decline in total federal employment from 2010 onward. Taken from a historical perspective the US federal government's employment total was, as of 2014 (as far as the record goes), pretty bloody small. The number of civilian executive personnel falls right in line with totals observed during the W. Bush administration and below figures observed under Presidents Clinton, H.W. Bush, Reagan, Nixon, and Carter. You have to go all the way back to Johnson, to 1965, to find a lower number of civilian executive personnel than the Obama administration had in 2014.


I think trump can cut 20% easily.
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17
Government employees should all be drug tested as well.
38202 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17

Xxanthar wrote:

I think trump can cut 20% easily.


The last statement in the quoted post was inaccurate and has been removed. Although it is true that most years reported reflect higher numbers of civilian executive employees and that this trend gets more dramatic as you go back through Cold War administrations you can nevertheless find lower numbers of civilian executive employees much earlier. There are several years in the W. Bush administration where the numbers are lower, though not dramatically so. It was completely incorrect to say that you have to go all the way back to '65. Not even close.

With that out of the way, Trump could cut federal employment, and a place to look for starters might be the recently uncovered large number of redundant DoD positions that have turned out to be costing quite a bit of money unnecessarily. But that's not 20% of the federal workforce, and I'm not even sure what the call for a 20% reduction is actually based on. Why 20%? Where?
2123 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
35 / M
Online
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17
Xxanthar and the others not even trying to debate or talk Just a reminder your side acted this same way when bush jr won and see how well that worked out. Last time you got drunk off your "win" we all paid with 9/11 and the greatest recession since the great depression.

Also as to put some reality in this staffing subject. Obama already had a hiring freeze on federal empoyeess for most of his 8 years. The IRS, Social Security, Deprtment of energy, FCC, FDA, and most other government agenties are all understaffed right now. The only place in our government that bloated in staff is. Congress who are given dozens of staffers each member. The DoD who is filled to the brim. Also The pentagon which has a massive issue with too many officers.
578 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17

Xxanthar wrote:


shugotenshi-atm wrote:

Wait as long as you want. Only Congress can actually change departments. Trump can sign legislation they pass, but he can't make it. It was Bush who last increased the size of government dramatically with the security apparatus.

Also only congress can make the wall happen. Trump has zero control over the budget. However it is true Mexico can be made to pay for the wall.


We shall see. You seem nervous. Do you work for the government?


I've never worked for the government and I'm not nervous at all. I'm simply shocked at your lack of knowledge about American governance.
36512 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / F / Seireitei, Soul S...
Offline
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17

ninjitsuko wrote:
As for the website...
I think too many people are freaking out about nothing right now. It's been less than a week and people are getting snazzy about what's been removed or added onto the website.

Though, the energy page does seem to be a "replacement" for Obama's global warming page at first blush. I'm still going to hold criticism of his website until it feels more completed.


I believe that the opening poster was referring to this page, just for some reason didn't have the whole URL for it: https://www.whitehouse.gov/america-first-energy

And was talking about this in particular from it being alarming: 'For too long, we’ve been held back by burdensome regulations on our energy industry. President Trump is committed to eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule. Lifting these restrictions will greatly help American workers, increasing wages by more than $30 billion over the next 7 years.'

Because eliminating the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule would actually do more harm than good, unlike what that page is saying.
25798 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / Atlanta, GA, USA
Offline
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17

BlueOni wrote:

It's not as if he has ever been trying to hide his shitty energy and environmental policy ideas.

>Calls anthropogenic climate change a hoax conjured by the PRC government

>Makes part of his platform on Syria to "go in and take the oil"

>Promises to withdraw from Paris Agreement

>Promises to make an expansion of coal mining and coal's share of US power fleet

>Has personal financial interests in oil pipelines' construction

>Names Exxon Mobil chief executive Rex Tillerson for Secretary of State and John "Invade Iran" Bolton deputy Secretary of State

>Names Scott Pruitt head of the EPA and Rick Perry head of the Department of Energy

It was inevitable. There was never any "wait and see" on this one. He was, and is, going to be shit on this front. It shouldn't be surprising.


Hmm, do you think it's completely shit, though? We can always transition back to protecting the climate, more fiercely than ever, and perhaps with more support than ever once the rest of the world sees how dangerous it is for a big country like the USA to ignore climate change. In the short term, maybe we could just use the money, too. That's the big advantage to these limited terms, we can adapt the administration very easily and everyone understands that new administrations behave differently.
36512 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / F / Seireitei, Soul S...
Offline
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17

Dark_Alma wrote:
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/
Here is Obama's website that was cached. Under the tab "Issues" and the far right category "more" you see veterans.


https://www.whitehouse.gov/
Here is Trumps. Empty of the hopes of Veterans, women, immigrants, green energy, global care and more!

This already shows what the Snowflake in Chief really values. Human rights be dammed... Big Business all the way! I mean shit, if we fuck up the world enough, once he leaves office a hell of a lot of money can be made! "Pro-LGBT and for the Veterans" are just a few of the promises already being dashed. Welcome to America!

Edit: If we fuck up the world enough under his rule though... maybe we can make more epic music videos like this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dy6MpsDPKts


That's really fucked up that Trump got rid of those categories on the White House web page. Especially since he said that he was for Veterans as part of his campaign. I'm no supporter of his but I do remember that. The getting rid of the LGBT thing sadly doesn't surprise me though as I never saw anything from him supporting that.

+10,000 points and you win the internet today for me for the music video you linked though. Within Temptation is my all time favorite English speaking band and that is an epic music video of theirs.
23204 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17
Every presidency the old Adkins pages get taken down and replaced with the new presidents pages. Why are you so surprised trump did it too. All of bushes were taken down for Obama.
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17
nice he gets down to business
23288 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M
Offline
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17

Kavalion wrote:


BlueOni wrote:

It's not as if he has ever been trying to hide his shitty energy and environmental policy ideas.

>Calls anthropogenic climate change a hoax conjured by the PRC government

>Makes part of his platform on Syria to "go in and take the oil"

>Promises to withdraw from Paris Agreement

>Promises to make an expansion of coal mining and coal's share of US power fleet

>Has personal financial interests in oil pipelines' construction

>Names Exxon Mobil chief executive Rex Tillerson for Secretary of State and John "Invade Iran" Bolton deputy Secretary of State

>Names Scott Pruitt head of the EPA and Rick Perry head of the Department of Energy

It was inevitable. There was never any "wait and see" on this one. He was, and is, going to be shit on this front. It shouldn't be surprising.


Hmm, do you think it's completely shit, though? We can always transition back to protecting the climate, more fiercely than ever, and perhaps with more support than ever once the rest of the world sees how dangerous it is for a big country like the USA to ignore climate change. In the short term, maybe we could just use the money, too. That's the big advantage to these limited terms, we can adapt the administration very easily and everyone understands that new administrations behave differently.


Problem with this is that once an environment is screwed with, it takes loads of resources just to remove the issue, let alone fix it. It has been proven (the biggest example being oil spills) that destroying the environment leads to nasty, sometimes unfixable, repercussions. Anyways, I am going to take the "wait and see" approach, since there is not really anything else unless something happens.
39169 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


Xxanthar wrote:

Hmmmmmmmm... don't lose next time.


Nice reply, though I think the OP would appreciate more discussion though.


O.K. Then instead of criticizing someone for not giving enough discussion, how about you actually add to the discussion? (I know. That applies to my post criticizing you for not discussing the topic at hand. But you see how that worked?)

In fact, let me discuss the topic on hand. He was quite clear where he stood on it. And he said he was going to do this. So, he's following through. Americans voted for him, knowing this.

Not everyone believed that climate change was the result of human activity. (I happen to believe that climate change IS the result of human activity. However, the election was more than just about one issue. I'm sure millions of Americans felt the way I did, as they voted for Trump.

Who knows. With enough pressure to our Congressional representatives, maybe Trump will reverse himself. That's what the checks and balances are for. The Legislative branch checks the Executive branch, which checks The Supreme Court, which checks the Legislative branch.

Those ignorant masses burning and destroying and rioting have turned to anarchy instead of remembering that our Constitution has provided Americans a way to say 'no' to stuff.

That's why Obama gave so many executive orders, because America was saying "no" to him about stuff through their Legislative representatives, and so he had to go around it. Fortunately, Trump can undo all of those executive orders. And if Trump goes that route, the next president can undo his executive orders, too.
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17
Are their any preliminary estimates on how many polar bears will drown because of this?
Ejanss 
17091 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17
Well, maybe this time, Disney can get in on the America First movement, just like Walt got in on the 40's one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America_First_Committee

(I guess the name's fallen out of copyright by now, and there's no chance of an infringement lawsuit?)
13315 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Abyss
Offline
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17

BlackRose0607 wrote:

That's really fucked up that Trump got rid of those categories on the White House web page. Especially since he said that he was for Veterans as part of his campaign. I'm no supporter of his but I do remember that. The getting rid of the LGBT thing sadly doesn't surprise me though as I never saw anything from him supporting that.

+10,000 points and you win the internet today for me for the music video you linked though. Within Temptation is my all time favorite English speaking band and that is an epic music video of theirs.


What worries me most is how fast the presidents updated the full website when they were sworn into office. It took Trump less than an hour to update the site... which means he has finished it. After all, the prep work is done before they take office. That means Trump really has forsaken the Veterans, the LGBT, Climate Change and other Human rights. It scares me to no end.

On a side note, thanks for letting me win the internet for the day! I am honored! What can I spend these 10,000 points on? A Lotus Evora maybe?

If you like Within Temptation, you may like Kamelot (WT with male singer), Epica, Nightwish (Tarja from the video is an ex Nightwish singer) or a new band I found Ignea. They are all Symphonic Metal and I enjoy all of these bands!

Edit 1: Trump said he was for LGBT rights, Pence on the other hand said no. There was a small scandal about it because the VP and POTUS were at odds. I think Trump was just digging for votes wherever he could get them though.
Posted 1/21/17 , edited 1/22/17
If we can put tracking collars on polar bears, why cant we equip them with wearable flotation devices?

First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.