On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 20:52:08 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 15:07:20 -0800, wrote:

Cato Institute? Do you know who they are?
That is a Libertarian group saying what the government SHOULD DO.
That has nothing to do with what they actually do.

"Vice-President Gore leads the Administration’'S efforts to reinvent
government, making it work better, cost less, and get results that
Americans care about. Under his leadership, the size of the federal
[civilian] workforce has been reduced by about 350,000 people, and
common sense changes have been made in the way government works
that have saved the taxpayers $ 137 billion."

http://www.scribd.com/doc/3973816/Re...ral-Downsizing


That was a great PR stunt but nobody was laid off. There was an
incentive for people to take what was essentially a buyout into early
retirement. I know a guy who took it.
The overall government workforce stayed about the same anyway.


So, you're claiming that U of Missouri was lying??? But, you believe
everything the Heritage Foundation says...

On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 23:07:06 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 19:32:20 -0800, wrote:

On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 20:52:08 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 15:07:20 -0800, wrote:

Cato Institute? Do you know who they are?
That is a Libertarian group saying what the government SHOULD DO.
That has nothing to do with what they actually do.

"Vice-President Gore leads the Administration’'S efforts to reinvent
government, making it work better, cost less, and get results that
Americans care about. Under his leadership, the size of the federal
[civilian] workforce has been reduced by about 350,000 people, and
common sense changes have been made in the way government works
that have saved the taxpayers $ 137 billion."

http://www.scribd.com/doc/3973816/Re...ral-Downsizing


That was a great PR stunt but nobody was laid off. There was an
incentive for people to take what was essentially a buyout into early
retirement. I know a guy who took it.
The overall government workforce stayed about the same anyway.


So, you're claiming that U of Missouri was lying??? But, you believe
everything the Heritage Foundation says...

No, you are claiming these people were fired ... remember what this
was about?
I am saying they simply allowed people to retire without replacing all
of them. This was not a layoff and they moved others around to fill
the slots.
There is a CBO report on H.R.3218 that lays out one of these programs
and explains all of this.

Later in your article you notice they ended up promoting people from
lower grades to higher grades and the payroll actually went up.
It also shifted a lot of the burden from the payroll to the unfunded
pension system, something that corporate America was doing

You said that the federal worker is basically immune from downsizing.
This is not correct. Seems to me you want it both ways. You want
"permanent" jobs, but then complain when people have that.

On 1/5/11 2:07 PM, I am Tosk wrote:

Your post is irrelevant to the conversation. He never said he "wanted"
anything at all, he was arguing with you a definition, period. Your
tactics are strangely familiar...


Doing a bit of instigating on the side?

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 14:18:25 -0500, Harryk
wrote:

On 1/5/11 2:07 PM, I am Tosk wrote:

Your post is irrelevant to the conversation. He never said he "wanted"
anything at all, he was arguing with you a definition, period. Your
tactics are strangely familiar...


Doing a bit of instigating on the side?

I mostly ignore him. I means what's the point...

On 1/5/11 4:26 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 14:18:25 -0500,
wrote:

On 1/5/11 2:07 PM, I am Tosk wrote:

Your post is irrelevant to the conversation. He never said he "wanted"
anything at all, he was arguing with you a definition, period. Your
tactics are strangely familiar...


Doing a bit of instigating on the side?

I mostly ignore him. I means what's the point...


Likewise, these days.

On 1/5/11 5:02 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 1/5/11 2:07 PM, I am Tosk wrote:

Your post is irrelevant to the conversation. He never said he "wanted"
anything at all, he was arguing with you a definition, period. Your
tactics are strangely familiar...


Doing a bit of instigating on the side?

Nope, I was addressing Plums disingenuous assertion/instigation...
That's all...


Uh-huh.

On Thu, 06 Jan 2011 11:08:07 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 10:52:01 -0800, wrote:

On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 23:07:06 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 19:32:20 -0800, wrote:

On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 20:52:08 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 15:07:20 -0800, wrote:

Cato Institute? Do you know who they are?
That is a Libertarian group saying what the government SHOULD DO.
That has nothing to do with what they actually do.

"Vice-President Gore leads the Administration’'S efforts to reinvent
government, making it work better, cost less, and get results that
Americans care about. Under his leadership, the size of the federal
[civilian] workforce has been reduced by about 350,000 people, and
common sense changes have been made in the way government works
that have saved the taxpayers $ 137 billion."

http://www.scribd.com/doc/3973816/Re...ral-Downsizing


That was a great PR stunt but nobody was laid off. There was an
incentive for people to take what was essentially a buyout into early
retirement. I know a guy who took it.
The overall government workforce stayed about the same anyway.


So, you're claiming that U of Missouri was lying??? But, you believe
everything the Heritage Foundation says...

No, you are claiming these people were fired ... remember what this
was about?
I am saying they simply allowed people to retire without replacing all
of them. This was not a layoff and they moved others around to fill
the slots.
There is a CBO report on H.R.3218 that lays out one of these programs
and explains all of this.

Later in your article you notice they ended up promoting people from
lower grades to higher grades and the payroll actually went up.
It also shifted a lot of the burden from the payroll to the unfunded
pension system, something that corporate America was doing

You said that the federal worker is basically immune from downsizing.
This is not correct. Seems to me you want it both ways. You want
"permanent" jobs, but then complain when people have that.

I said a federal worker is virtually impossible to fire and will not
get laid off. You have only reinforced that statement. The article you
posted said the people who left were rolled into the retirement
system, either because they were of age or because they got an
incentive. I know a guy who took the incentive (basically full
retirement at an earlier age). The only decline in headcount was in
not hiring new people to replace them That was a temporary situation.

Yeah... really hard....

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dcno...ilibuster.html

On 1/6/11 3:48 PM, wrote:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dcno...ilibuster.html

I guarantee you they will get every dime of their pay, even though
they stayed home. This is just another "shut down the government"
thing like the mid 90s. Nobody lost a dime then either.
I suspect people in LA don't understand that.


Wow...all the excitement of attending a teabagger rally without actually
having to be anywhere near those sorts of folks! :)

On 1/6/11 5:32 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 1/6/11 3:48 PM, wrote:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dcno...ilibuster.html

I guarantee you they will get every dime of their pay, even though
they stayed home. This is just another "shut down the government"
thing like the mid 90s. Nobody lost a dime then either.
I suspect people in LA don't understand that.


Wow...all the excitement of attending a teabagger rally without actually
having to be anywhere near those sorts of folks! :)

Nice use of pejorative, it clearly shows why you get banned from every
moderated group you infect...



Sorry, Scotty, but I'm no longer playing your game. Have a nice life.

On 1/6/11 5:56 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In article55ydnT7L8Mi72bvQnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 1/6/11 5:32 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In ,
says...

On 1/6/11 3:48 PM, wrote:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dcno...ilibuster.html

I guarantee you they will get every dime of their pay, even though
they stayed home. This is just another "shut down the government"
thing like the mid 90s. Nobody lost a dime then either.
I suspect people in LA don't understand that.


Wow...all the excitement of attending a teabagger rally without actually
having to be anywhere near those sorts of folks! :)

Nice use of pejorative, it clearly shows why you get banned from every
moderated group you infect...



Sorry, Scotty, but I'm no longer playing your game. Have a nice life.

You never really did... although I do think you might have given it a
bit of a shot last month...



Last month...oh, I remember...that's when you were actively urging more
ID spoofing here, and otherwise behaving like a flaming asshole. I'm
sure you'll find some playmates here...perhaps you might want to hang
with Ziggy, the ID Spoofer, the Loogy, the LG, the Bert, the Herring, et
cetera. They're really more your type than mine, since I have little use
for rightwingers and morons.

Sorry, I'm not interested in your ill-informed opinions on the world, on
politics, on music, on child-rearing, or any of the other nonsense that
vent here, except as a source of giggles.

Have a nice life.