Trump cancels planned January pay increase for civilian federal workers

[Primemuscle]

A huge chunk of homeless are mentally ill, another huge chunk are drug addicts, neither group of people will be contributing to society any time soon.

True, and.....

[chaos]

True, and.....

As long as shitholes like Poorland and San Fagsisco keep encouraging drug addicts and the mentally ill to congregate in those areas without fear of punishment for their wrong doings, you will continue to see almost daily specials on "homelessness"

[Straw Man]

Oh, you just read it somewhere. Well, why didn't you just say so?
Then I guess we can safely conclude that matter is settled.

Hey, I just remembered where I read it

It was in a letter from Liar in Chief to the Speaker of the House explaining why he was cancelling scheduled pay raises for federal employees.

This must have been covered by the gang over at Fox and Friend or on many of the reliable right wing news sources

Dear Mr. Speaker:     (Dear Mr. President:)

I am transmitting an alternative plan for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems in January 2019.

Title 5, United States Code, authorizes me to implement alternative plans for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems if, because of “national emergency or serious economic conditions affecting the general welfare,” I view the increases that would otherwise take effect as inappropriate.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/text-letter-president-speaker-house-representatives-president-senate-32/

[Coach is Back!]

Hey, I just remembered where I read it

It was in a letter from Liar in Chief to the Speaker of the House explaining why he was cancelling scheduled pay raises for federal employees.

This must have been covered by the gang over at Fox and Friend or on many of the reliable right wing news sources

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/text-letter-president-speaker-house-representatives-president-senate-32/

Nice try, liar


Title 5, United States Code, authorizes me to implement alternative plans for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems if, because of “national emergency or serious economic conditions affecting the general welfare,” I view the increases that would otherwise take effect as inappropriate.

[Coach is Back!]

Like I said, he's running the country like a business and to prove it, even more, he specifically said that 'raises should be based on performance" LIKE A BUSINESS!

[Agnostic007]

Like I said, he's running the country like a business and to prove it, even more, he specifically said that 'raises should be based on performance" LIKE A BUSINESS!

A country can't be run like a business. That is what the problem is.

[chaos]

A country can't be run like a business. That is what the problem is.

How has it been a problem? Your retirement plummet? Has anyone you know lost money or their job as a result of Trump running the country? When you claim so, please provide an example.

[Agnostic007]

How has it been a problem? Your retirement plummet? Has anyone you know lost money or their job as a result of Trump running the country? When you claim so, please provide an example.

Sure, the government is not a business. for a smaller example, a police department. If you run a police department like a business it would be a complete disaster. Bottom lines are not the only guiding principle in government where it is in most businesses. And if you are CEO of a company, you have authoritarian control over every aspect. In government there are checks and balances and you don't always have the final say so finesse and being able to work with people is an asset. Those are a couple of the many many differences between running a company and a country

[chaos]

Sure, the government is not a business. for a smaller example, a police department. If you run a police department like a business it would be a complete disaster. Bottom lines are not the only guiding principle in government where it is in most businesses. And if you are CEO of a company, you have authoritarian control over every aspect. In government there are checks and balances and you don't always have the final say so finesse and being able to work with people is an asset. Those are a couple of the many many differences between running a company and a country

Checks and balances? Congress and the senate ring a bell?
And many police departments are run like businesses, hence the speed traps, seatbelt laws, helmet laws, etc.

[Agnostic007]

Checks and balances? Congress and the senate ring a bell?
And many police departments are run like businesses, hence the speed traps, seatbelt laws, helmet laws, etc.

Speed traps, could be. Seat belt helmet laws, nothing to do with the police.

[Coach is Back!]

A country can't be run like a business. That is what the problem is.

For the most part, with the exception of the lefts obstruction, is being ran like a business which why, especially with the economy, is running on all cylinders.

[Agnostic007]

For the most part, with the exception of the lefts obstruction, is being ran like a business which why, especially with the economy, is running on all cylinders.

God I wish I had your blinders..

[Straw Man]

Nice try, liar


Title 5, United States Code, authorizes me to implement alternative plans for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems if, because of “national emergency or serious economic conditions affecting the general welfare,” I view the increases that would otherwise take effect as inappropriate.

So you saying Trumptard is citing a national emergency

[pellius]

Companies create jobs when there is an increased demand for the goods or services they provide.   Period.

Giving corporations a tax windfall doesn't create demand.

That's why all the CEO's couldn't stop from laughing out loud when Cohn asked that question.

What they did with that windfall is what every expert said they would do..

They bought back their stock.

First of all, shut up already about the CEO laughing. It's a meaningless point. How old are you anyway?

Yes, companies create jobs when their company grows. It grows because of the demand for their goods and services increases. But that's because they increase profits with increasing demand. You make more when you sell more. A company can expand when they have more money to expand and pay for additional employees. Isn't that obvious? It's not the demand per se that creates job expansion, it is the increase in profits as a RESULT of increasing demand that allows a company to expand.  So when you let them keep more of their money they have more money to invest.

Again, why do you think that the government that takes money from corporations can spend money better than the corporations that had to actually earn it? Company profits are used to pay employees, hire more employees, and expand their business. So much of government spending is lost in the giant black hole of government bureaucracy.

[pellius]

My point is that I love the poorly educated Trumptard and even more the poorly informed Trumptard.  Oops that last one was redundant.

That quote from Orwell reminds me of Republicans belief that tax cuts pay for themselves.    Even many Republicans no longer believe that but apparently Trumptards still do.

Don't speak for Republicans. They do believe that. It's been proven time and again. When people and corporations keep more of their money it creates economic growth increasing the tax base. When the government takes more of their money it stifles economic activity. Ask yourself this: when a company has more money, allowed to keep more of THEIR money, does that increase or decrease job creation?

It's not a zero-sum game. If the government increases taxes across the board on business by, say, 15% it doesn't mean that their tax revenue will increase by 15%.

[pellius]

True, and.....

and...economic conditions will not change a thing for the majority of the homeless.

Hawaii has a huge homeless problem but unemployment is at it's all-time lowest. I see and interact with the homeless every day. Every damn day. Every single one I see are drunks, drug addicts, and/or mentally ill. They couldn't hold down a job, nor would they want one, so it wouldn't matter if the economy was booming and the minimum wage was $20/hr.

There was never a problem at this level when I was a kid growing up in Hawaii. But then we had something called Sanitoriums. All the drug addicts, mentally ill and drunks were taken off the streets and treated in these facilities. But the ACLU got rid of that. They said it was illegal to confine them to a facility against their will when they committed no crime. But back then, disturbing the peace, loitering, sleeping on bus benches, crapping and urinating in public, and other quality of life issues that effected decent tax paying citizen was a crime.

Another great victory for the ACLU.

[pellius]

Hey, I just remembered where I read it

It was in a letter from Liar in Chief to the Speaker of the House explaining why he was cancelling scheduled pay raises for federal employees.

This must have been covered by the gang over at Fox and Friend or on many of the reliable right wing news sources

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/text-letter-president-speaker-house-representatives-president-senate-32/

Oh OK. I'll agree with that. Good one.

The ever-expanding government. The ever-expanding government expenditures that were never intended or authorized under the Constitution is indeed one of the most serious economic crisis facing our country today.

Not only should Federal workers, in fact, all government employees; not be given raises, but every attempt should be made to reduce the number of government employees that are a drain on our economy.

[Coach is Back!]

God I wish I had your blinders..

The numbers don’t lie

[chaos]

Speed traps, could be. Seat belt helmet laws, nothing to do with the police.

Bullshit.

[Agnostic007]

Bullshit.

which part?

[chaos]

which part?

Seat belts and helmet laws. Where does the revenue go for the tickets written?

[The Scott]

I can think of one in particular that should definitely quit

Interesting how nobody bothered to comment on the that joint training with South Korea is too expensive meanwhile Russia and China are doing the largest joint military training ever

Nubainian, puhleeeeze...The only joint thing cucktards want is to do is smoke one.

[Agnostic007]

Checks and balances? Congress and the senate ring a bell?
And many police departments are run like businesses, hence the speed traps, seatbelt laws, helmet laws, etc.

So we don't lose sight of the debate here.. Your position now is that any law that has a ticket as enforcement is due to raising revenue vs gaining compliance with the law via penalties. In your examples, only one fits that criteria. Speed Traps. The speed trap is generally set up in a transition zone from a higher speed to a lower speed and police target cars intentionally in those zones in order to give tickets out, without regard for whether it was safe or not. That is clearly revenue based. Enforcing traffic laws on the other hand is typically compliance based. Police don't make the laws, it's not up to them if there is a seatbelt law. It is up to them to enforce them when the opportunity presents itself. There is no "business" to it. And before you jump in with the "but there was this one time, at band camp" story, yes I'm sure there have been abuses by departments, but overall, police aren't enforcing laws to raise money. They just don't care about that part of it.   

[Soul Crusher]

So we don't lose sight of the debate here.. Your position now is that any law that has a ticket as enforcement is due to raising revenue vs gaining compliance with the law via penalties. In your examples, only one fits that criteria. Speed Traps. The speed trap is generally set up in a transition zone from a higher speed to a lower speed and police target cars intentionally in those zones in order to give tickets out, without regard for whether it was safe or not. That is clearly revenue based. Enforcing traffic laws on the other hand is typically compliance based. Police don't make the laws, it's not up to them if there is a seatbelt law. It is up to them to enforce them when the opportunity presents itself. There is no "business" to it. And before you jump in with the "but there was this one time, at band camp" story, yes I'm sure there have been abuses by departments, but overall, police aren't enforcing laws to raise money. They just don't care about that part of it.   

Taxes and fines and penalties of the like are theft in order to pay the parasites on the govt payroll. 

[Agnostic007]

Taxes and fines and penalties of the like are theft in order to pay the parasites on the govt payroll.  

What would you propose for someone doing 50mph in a 30 mph residential area? What would you propose in lieu of fines to encourage people to follow the traffic laws?