Trump eyes 10% spending cuts, 20% slash of federal workers

In order to lay off federal employees, an RIF (Reduction In Force), must pass through respective agency and there is a legal and extensive process.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/workforce-restructuring/reductions-in-force/#url=Summary

Now I suggest if Pres Trump is going to remove that many positions, he will have to deal with Congress, and I have no doubt it will not be easy. The Pres cannot just simply say you're fired.

 

And I believe they are already talking about reforming the civil service system.

 

We need more Border Patrol, more and more trigger pulling military folks. Every other part of the federal parasite is up for negotiation.

 

Congress just passed a rule that allows re ups an 1870's law that allows the administration to do targeted reductions of pay to $1.00. Help let him get rid of the dead wood and some of the deep state denizens (could have used this to get rid of Lois Lerner).

An immediate hiring freeze will serve to have a RIF as the positions will not be re-filled after being vacated by retirements, people quitting, and normal attrition.

Lets get started. To many hammock swingers and time wasters work in any bureaucracy.

 

"Government Services". Oxymoron

 

So, were they part of the Solyndra boondoggle? Or Ener1? Or Abound Solar? or any of the other "green jobs" boondoggles that were a huge waste of money?

 

They should always be the first in line. A nation exists to protect the sovereignty of its people. The first duty of any nation is national defense. Everything else comes second.

 

So is it, Trump is favoring more the budget concerns than creating jobs?
and for whom is the budget allocated for?

 

If Trump cuts Federal Spending he will be the first Republican in my lifetime to do so and I am 62. Every previous GOP President has given lip service during the election, then vastly increased the Federal budget once they got in. I guess we will have to wait and see...

 

Why does one preclude the other?

What do you mean here?

 

The Republican sequester cut spending those cuts after the Democrats raised spending 9% in 2008 and then 18% in 2009. Bush and the Republicans had the deficit down to a paltry $161B when the Democrats took control and before that Republicans created the budget surpluses.

So what exactly are you talking about especially compare to Democrat fiscal policy?

 

That shows just how extremely out of wack the welfare system has become. Living on government welfare was never mention to be a career choice.

 

Those should work for the people and should not be used as a reason to deprive the people with that most basic need of better living. The budget should work mainly to benefit and promote means of livelihood like jobs and the improvement of human lives.

 

The budget should work to fund without a deficit to properly authorized limited functions of the federal government and not as some huge wealth transfer scheme. Jobs and improvements derive from the free markets not from government largesses.

 

Does the free market makes the economic infrastructure?

 

Not sure what you mean here or what it has to do with the budget.

 

i understand, i have no heartburn with idea, but again, the implementation is easier said than done

- - - Updated - - -

why dont you provide the details of that rule

 

But congress can after all the GOP is in control of both houses.

 

Not nearly enough.

 

A very good start, but good luck...

 

Economic infrastructures needs budgeting and of course an stimulus in creating jobs.

 

Any spending especially on a large scale needs budgeting what is your point? And the last government stimulus, if that is what you are talking about, we had did not create jobs. We need a free market stimulus not a government one.

 

In February 2009, Congress approved Obama's $787 billion economic stimulus package.
It cut taxes, extended unemployment benefits, and funded public works projects. The recession ended in July when GDP growth turned positive. In just seven months, ARRA pumped $241.9 billion into the economy, stirring growth to a robust 3.9 percent by early 2010. By March 30, 2011, nearly all ($633.5 billion) of the funds were spent.
https://www.thebalance.com/what-has-obama-done-11-major-accomplishments-3306158

 

Lol, President Blowhard may gut certain agencies, but the bottom line will still go up. After all, he's the "law and order president," right? Gotta have more law enforcement, and that's gonna cost you.

 

Try the more common measure of chained dollars to compare over time.

2007 1.8
2008 -0.3
2009 -2.8
2010 2.5
2011 1.6
2012 2.2
2013 1.7
2014 2.4
2015 2.6
https://www.bea.gov/national/Index.htm

If you do want to use current dollar numbers then you do realize your number of 3.8% would be just .5% above the worst of the 2000/2001 recession. And they didn't spend $800,000B.

As I said it was a total failure. Even Obama had to admit they didn't those shovel ready jobs.

The recession ended in June before the stimulus money even had any effect. Unemployment continued to skyrocket up to 10%, way past the 8% his economic counsel said the stimulus would hold it to and then after that they did nothing of any substance.