In article ,
says...

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.


Some people believe everything in print. In my tenure at the USDA I saw
many people get promoted out. The were promoted to a grade that was
higher than their position which required them to get a position in
another agency at their new grade. This was the easiest and fastest way
to get them to out.

Also, incompetence was abundant and all you could do was send people to
classes to try and make them un-incompetent. This helped but it rarely
resolved the problem.

DePlume can believe that AlGore reduced the government rolls by 350,000
but what she isn't saying is that Bill Clinton increased them by 500,000
at the same time.

On 1/5/11 7:33 AM, BAR wrote:


Some people believe everything in print. In my tenure at the USDA I saw
many people get promoted out. The were promoted to a grade that was
higher than their position which required them to get a position in
another agency at their new grade. This was the easiest and fastest way
to get them to out.

Also, incompetence was abundant and all you could do was send people to
classes to try and make them un-incompetent. This helped but it rarely
resolved the problem.

DePlume can believe that AlGore reduced the government rolls by 350,000
but what she isn't saying is that Bill Clinton increased them by 500,000
at the same time.


What percentage of your employer's business is done with federal, state,
and local governmental agencies, or other corporations whose main
business is with government or governmental agencies?

In article ,
says...

On 1/5/11 7:33 AM, BAR wrote:


Some people believe everything in print. In my tenure at the USDA I saw
many people get promoted out. The were promoted to a grade that was
higher than their position which required them to get a position in
another agency at their new grade. This was the easiest and fastest way
to get them to out.

Also, incompetence was abundant and all you could do was send people to
classes to try and make them un-incompetent. This helped but it rarely
resolved the problem.

DePlume can believe that AlGore reduced the government rolls by 350,000
but what she isn't saying is that Bill Clinton increased them by 500,000
at the same time.


What percentage of your employer's business is done with federal, state,
and local governmental agencies, or other corporations whose main
business is with government or governmental agencies?

I don't know, why don't you ask my company.

On 1/5/11 3:47 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On 1/5/11 7:33 AM, BAR wrote:


Some people believe everything in print. In my tenure at the USDA I saw
many people get promoted out. The were promoted to a grade that was
higher than their position which required them to get a position in
another agency at their new grade. This was the easiest and fastest way
to get them to out.

Also, incompetence was abundant and all you could do was send people to
classes to try and make them un-incompetent. This helped but it rarely
resolved the problem.

DePlume can believe that AlGore reduced the government rolls by 350,000
but what she isn't saying is that Bill Clinton increased them by 500,000
at the same time.


What percentage of your employer's business is done with federal, state,
and local governmental agencies, or other corporations whose main
business is with government or governmental agencies?

I don't know, why don't you ask my company.



Sure...send me the name and phone number of the VP of Governmental
Relations.

My guess is the percentage is high, and that it is humorous when someone
working for a company sucking on as many governmental teats as possible
whines about the supplier of the milk.

In article , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 1/5/11 3:47 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On 1/5/11 7:33 AM, BAR wrote:


Some people believe everything in print. In my tenure at the USDA I saw
many people get promoted out. The were promoted to a grade that was
higher than their position which required them to get a position in
another agency at their new grade. This was the easiest and fastest way
to get them to out.

Also, incompetence was abundant and all you could do was send people to
classes to try and make them un-incompetent. This helped but it rarely
resolved the problem.

DePlume can believe that AlGore reduced the government rolls by 350,000
but what she isn't saying is that Bill Clinton increased them by 500,000
at the same time.


What percentage of your employer's business is done with federal, state,
and local governmental agencies, or other corporations whose main
business is with government or governmental agencies?

I don't know, why don't you ask my company.



Sure...send me the name and phone number of the VP of Governmental
Relations.

My guess is the percentage is high, and that it is humorous when someone
working for a company sucking on as many governmental teats as possible
whines about the supplier of the milk.

You are a ****ing genius figure it out.

On 1/5/11 4:03 PM, BAR wrote:
In articlerbmdnaW0RfaSR7nQnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 1/5/11 3:47 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On 1/5/11 7:33 AM, BAR wrote:


Some people believe everything in print. In my tenure at the USDA I saw
many people get promoted out. The were promoted to a grade that was
higher than their position which required them to get a position in
another agency at their new grade. This was the easiest and fastest way
to get them to out.

Also, incompetence was abundant and all you could do was send people to
classes to try and make them un-incompetent. This helped but it rarely
resolved the problem.

DePlume can believe that AlGore reduced the government rolls by 350,000
but what she isn't saying is that Bill Clinton increased them by 500,000
at the same time.


What percentage of your employer's business is done with federal, state,
and local governmental agencies, or other corporations whose main
business is with government or governmental agencies?

I don't know, why don't you ask my company.



Sure...send me the name and phone number of the VP of Governmental
Relations.

My guess is the percentage is high, and that it is humorous when someone
working for a company sucking on as many governmental teats as possible
whines about the supplier of the milk.

You are a ****ing genius figure it out.




A ****ing genius? Well, I'm competent in the bedroom, but no one has
called me that. Thanks.

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 16:07:13 -0500, Harryk
wrote:

On 1/5/11 4:03 PM, BAR wrote:
In articlerbmdnaW0RfaSR7nQnZ2dnUVZ_vOdnZ2d@earthlink .com, payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 1/5/11 3:47 PM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

On 1/5/11 7:33 AM, BAR wrote:


Some people believe everything in print. In my tenure at the USDA I saw
many people get promoted out. The were promoted to a grade that was
higher than their position which required them to get a position in
another agency at their new grade. This was the easiest and fastest way
to get them to out.

Also, incompetence was abundant and all you could do was send people to
classes to try and make them un-incompetent. This helped but it rarely
resolved the problem.

DePlume can believe that AlGore reduced the government rolls by 350,000
but what she isn't saying is that Bill Clinton increased them by 500,000
at the same time.


What percentage of your employer's business is done with federal, state,
and local governmental agencies, or other corporations whose main
business is with government or governmental agencies?

I don't know, why don't you ask my company.



Sure...send me the name and phone number of the VP of Governmental
Relations.

My guess is the percentage is high, and that it is humorous when someone
working for a company sucking on as many governmental teats as possible
whines about the supplier of the milk.

You are a ****ing genius figure it out.




A ****ing genius? Well, I'm competent in the bedroom, but no one has
called me that. Thanks.


LOL

On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 07:33:17 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

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.


Some people believe everything in print. In my tenure at the USDA I saw
many people get promoted out. The were promoted to a grade that was
higher than their position which required them to get a position in
another agency at their new grade. This was the easiest and fastest way
to get them to out.

Also, incompetence was abundant and all you could do was send people to
classes to try and make them un-incompetent. This helped but it rarely
resolved the problem.

DePlume can believe that AlGore reduced the government rolls by 350,000
but what she isn't saying is that Bill Clinton increased them by 500,000
at the same time.

So, you're claiming the U of M was lying... well, ok.

On 1/5/11 3:08 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 07:33:17 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

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.


Some people believe everything in print. In my tenure at the USDA I saw
many people get promoted out. The were promoted to a grade that was
higher than their position which required them to get a position in
another agency at their new grade. This was the easiest and fastest way
to get them to out.

Also, incompetence was abundant and all you could do was send people to
classes to try and make them un-incompetent. This helped but it rarely
resolved the problem.

DePlume can believe that AlGore reduced the government rolls by 350,000
but what she isn't saying is that Bill Clinton increased them by 500,000
at the same time.

So, you're claiming the U of M was lying... well, ok.


Hey...it's an *academic* institution...

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:28:46 -0500, Harryk
wrote:

On 1/5/11 3:08 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 07:33:17 -0500, wrote:

In ,
says...

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.


Some people believe everything in print. In my tenure at the USDA I saw
many people get promoted out. The were promoted to a grade that was
higher than their position which required them to get a position in
another agency at their new grade. This was the easiest and fastest way
to get them to out.

Also, incompetence was abundant and all you could do was send people to
classes to try and make them un-incompetent. This helped but it rarely
resolved the problem.

DePlume can believe that AlGore reduced the government rolls by 350,000
but what she isn't saying is that Bill Clinton increased them by 500,000
at the same time.

So, you're claiming the U of M was lying... well, ok.


Hey...it's an *academic* institution...

OIC