Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Now I get that this isn't so much a news story, per se, but more of a fluff piece by Yahoo trying to offer people career guidance. However, the one salient point I took out of this whole article is "Government creating another 270,000 jobs". Or, if you want to be literal about this article, it's claiming that the government "needs" to create another 270,000 jobs. Because, you know, I'm sure that just like me, all of you wake up every morning and your first thought is 'man, what are we going to do about this government worker shortage epidemic?"
Sure, we're already completely bloated with government workers, and they're already bankrupting us. And yeah, countries like England are finally wising up and trimming the unnecessary fat from the government payrolls. But gosh darnit, this is Amurrrikah! We don't do none of that hoity toity fru fru British pansy mama money management stuff here! If we've got someone unemployed who won't train to go into another field, we'll create a makework position for them, even if we can't afford it! Huzzah!
My personal favorite was:
Quote:
Information technology manager ($72,980)
Nearly every federal agency wants more tech help--in all, more than 11,000 IT managers and specialists are being sought. Homeland Security, the Treasury, and the Army and Navy all have big needs.
Aside from the fact that that's less than half of what a skilled IT professional is worth, the 11,000 number stuck out to me. I work for a very large tech company, and know how many "IT managers" we have? About 25. But the government needs 11,000 of them. FOR WHAT? They don't even need to go from zero to 11,000, let alone from whatever already-bloated number they're presently at to that number + 11,000.
Now I get that this isn't so much a news story, per se, but more of a fluff piece by Yahoo trying to offer people career guidance. However, the one salient point I took out of this whole article is "Government creating another 270,000 jobs". Or, if you want to be literal about this article, it's claiming that the government "needs" to create another 270,000 jobs. Because, you know, I'm sure that just like me, all of you wake up every morning and your first thought is 'man, what are we going to do about this government worker shortage epidemic?"
Sure, we're already completely bloated with government workers, and they're already bankrupting us. And yeah, countries like England are finally wising up and trimming the unnecessary fat from the government payrolls. But gosh darnit, this is Amurrrikah! We don't do none of that hoity toity fru fru British pansy mama money management stuff here! If we've got someone unemployed who won't train to go into another field, we'll create a makework position for them, even if we can't afford it! Huzzah!
My personal favorite was:
Aside from the fact that that's less than half of what a skilled IT professional is worth, the 11,000 number stuck out to me. I work for a very large tech company, and know how many "IT managers" we have? About 25. But the government needs 11,000 of them. FOR WHAT? They don't even need to go from zero to 11,000, let alone from whatever already-bloated number they're presently at to that number + 11,000.
You totally missed the point to hiring 11,000 new IT managers while the federal government is already busting at the seams with them. See, the federal government needs IT managers who are prepared to work with cutting edge emerging technology; to do the work the current intellectually obsolete batch cannot. That way the new managers will accomplish the updates the government needs while presently employed and contractually indisposable managers are promoted to cushy rubber rooms where they can't break anything.
When you have unlimited funds as the federal government does, you can do things like that.
When you have unlimited funds as the federal government does, you can do things like that.
Yes, you are correct.
And some people determine success by how much of our money the government spends. For example, some said the subsidized car buying program last year. Some said it was a success because they spent all their money. If it weren't so sad, it would be funny.
Obama is the most expensive President we have ever had. No amount of political posturing will change that. I imagine they hired alot of new security too. Great for those guys, not so good for the taxpayers. I think politicians should foot their own bills just like the rest of us. They get a paycheck & can buy security, food, cars etc as they see fit.
Aw, come on... Obama did just create a job for Bill Clinton yesterday - to look Presidential in press conferences ...because Obama doesn't. Someone has to look like they know what they're doing in leading the country when they're in front of those news cameras.
What the hell is going on? Running a little late to a Christmas party is more important than a bill that would significantly impact our disastrous economy?
Now I get that this isn't so much a news story, per se, but more of a fluff piece by Yahoo trying to offer people career guidance. However, the one salient point I took out of this whole article is "Government creating another 270,000 jobs". Or, if you want to be literal about this article, it's claiming that the government "needs" to create another 270,000 jobs. Because, you know, I'm sure that just like me, all of you wake up every morning and your first thought is 'man, what are we going to do about this government worker shortage epidemic?"
Sure, we're already completely bloated with government workers, and they're already bankrupting us. And yeah, countries like England are finally wising up and trimming the unnecessary fat from the government payrolls. But gosh darnit, this is Amurrrikah! We don't do none of that hoity toity fru fru British pansy mama money management stuff here! If we've got someone unemployed who won't train to go into another field, we'll create a makework position for them, even if we can't afford it! Huzzah!
My personal favorite was:
Aside from the fact that that's less than half of what a skilled IT professional is worth, the 11,000 number stuck out to me. I work for a very large tech company, and know how many "IT managers" we have? About 25. But the government needs 11,000 of them. FOR WHAT? They don't even need to go from zero to 11,000, let alone from whatever already-bloated number they're presently at to that number + 11,000.
There's no relation between Government spending and "bankrupting us".
European governments are twice the size of the USA in relation to GDP and they running no greater deficits or unemployment rates the we are.
What is "bankrupting us" is failure to pay our bills. Not taxing the wealthy enough and paying absurdly too much for defense.
Obama is the most expensive President we have ever had. No amount of political posturing will change that. I imagine they hired alot of new security too. Great for those guys, not so good for the taxpayers. I think politicians should foot their own bills just like the rest of us. They get a paycheck & can buy security, food, cars etc as they see fit.
What's the big government program that Obama created?
There's no relation between Government spending and "bankrupting us".
European governments are twice the size of the USA in relation to GDP and they running no greater deficits or unemployment rates the we are.
What is "bankrupting us" is failure to pay our bills. Not taxing the wealthy enough and paying absurdly too much for defense.
High earners are paying nearly twice their fair share. It's everyone else who isn't pulling their weight. Either pay more - on an even par with the rates the high earners are paying - or cut services.
The 'gimme, gimme, but you pay for it' culture has been exposed for what it is - ugly exploitation that's taking this country down. Pay for what you're getting, or don't be surprised when it goes away.
High earners are paying nearly twice their fair share. It's everyone else who isn't pulling their weight. Either pay more - on an even par with the rates the high earners are paying - or cut services.
The 'gimme, gimme, but you pay for it' culture has been exposed for what it is - ugly exploitation that's taking this country down. Pay for what you're getting, or don't be surprised when it goes away.
Why is it so damn hard for people to grasp what you just said? It's not rocket science! We've got WAY TOO MANY folks that ain't pulling their own weight all the while screaming from the rooftops that the wealthy simply ain't paying "their fair share".
High earners are paying nearly twice their fair share. It's everyone else who isn't pulling their weight. Either pay more - on an even par with the rates the high earners are paying - or cut services.
The 'gimme, gimme, but you pay for it' culture has been exposed for what it is - ugly exploitation that's taking this country down. Pay for what you're getting, or don't be surprised when it goes away.
Not by any standard are high earners paying enough. Not by US historical averages, not by comparison to other Western countries.
This is a fantasy implanted in your brain. Your Father, Grandfather, Great Grandfather on past, all lived and worked in a time where the marginal tax rates on the wealthy were higher than now.
Your radical ideology is unique in the World.
Nowhere are Western World are citizens brainwashed enough to actually demand lower taxes on the rich while running historic deficits and involved in two plus wars.
Right wingers have lost the mental ability to discern what is in their own best interest.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
