Those arguing against significant budget cuts have a real logic problem

[spartan]

Schumer, Reid et al are trying really hard to set the environment to broker a compromise aren't they?

[John Galt?]

The whole debate is beyond idiotic. The Rs want to cut out a microscopic 1.54% and the Ds only 0.86% and neither will budge on their tiny crumbs.

The FACT is ANY organization can easily cut expenses by 5%-10% without cutting a single job or reducing service one iota. Just things that us common folk do all the time can add up to Billions when talking about an entity the size of the US Government. Stuff like

raising the thermostats on all Federal Offices from 72' to 76' (or lowering in the winter),

or cutting out the Gold Cup coffee service and making Fed Employees make their own coffee with stuff bought from Cosco,

or enforcing some car pooling in Fed vehicles ( I once saw 8 US Marshalls serve a warrant on a Law Office and yes, they came in 4 separate Crown Vics and 4 SUVs),

eliminate the use of "company cars" for personal use (and it goes without saying that Nancy Pelosi does NOT need her own Tax payer funded 727)

reduce the excess use of paper (the US Gov goes thru about a Brazilian rain forest worth of paper a month).

buy cheaper office supplies-seriously you don't need a $12 pen, the 3 for $0.99 ones work fine. 

Switch from Charmin to Scott brand TP in all federal restrooms-there is easily over 500,000 restrooms under federal supervision, each with 4-5 stalls, each using 1-2 rolls/day-(double that in the Capitol Building because Congress is really full of ____) 500,000*4*2*250 work days=100 million rolls a year-save a buck a roll and it's $100 million saved!

Stop throwing perfectly good stuff out because you want new stuff. The US Gov dumps billions in perfectly office equipment and furniture every year rather than spending 10% of the replacement cost just to get it fixed.

Cut back on employee paid sick days and vacation days. Paying someone for NOT working is the stupidest idea American business (yeah, I know, it's really the unions) has ever come up with.

Put all the lights on timers-I constantly see Federal office buildings lit up like Christmas trees in the middle of the night-lectric ain't free

Replace Security Guards with Guard Dogs-they are cheaper and far more effective, the 70+ year old ex-cop scares no one- the 7 year old Rottweiler does.

No more first class or Biz class airline travel-ride coach

Shop for a cheaper cell phone plan

Outsource all Military mess halls-I guarantee a private caterer could do it cheaper while making it taste better.

Reorganize Departments to where they logically belong-like why are Pell Grants run by Dept. of Agriculture and NOT Education??? How much is wasted with paperwork shuffling back and forth between separate agencies? Why does the SCHIPS program run thru HHS and Dept.Interior and Agriculture???

Seriously, Forrest Gump could find a way to save $100 billion unfortunately no one in Congress is as intelligent as Gump

[CBWx2]

The whole debate is beyond idiotic. The Rs want to cut out a microscopic 1.54% and the Ds only 0.86% and neither will budge on their tiny crumbs.

The FACT is ANY organization can easily cut expenses by 5%-10% without cutting a single job or reducing service one iota. Just things that us common folk do all the time can add up to Billions when talking about an entity the size of the US Government. Stuff like

raising the thermostats on all Federal Offices from 72' to 76' (or lowering in the winter),

or cutting out the Gold Cup coffee service and making Fed Employees make their own coffee with stuff bought from Cosco,

or enforcing some car pooling in Fed vehicles ( I once saw 8 US Marshalls serve a warrant on a Law Office and yes, they came in 4 separate Crown Vics and 4 SUVs),

eliminate the use of "company cars" for personal use (and it goes without saying that Nancy Pelosi does NOT need her own Tax payer funded 727)

reduce the excess use of paper (the US Gov goes thru about a Brazilian rain forest worth of paper a month).

buy cheaper office supplies-seriously you don't need a $12 pen, the 3 for $0.99 ones work fine. 

Switch from Charmin to Scott brand TP in all federal restrooms-there is easily over 500,000 restrooms under federal supervision, each with 4-5 stalls, each using 1-2 rolls/day-(double that in the Capitol Building because Congress is really full of ____) 500,000*4*2*250 work days=100 million rolls a year-save a buck a roll and it's $100 million saved!

Stop throwing perfectly good stuff out because you want new stuff. The US Gov dumps billions in perfectly office equipment and furniture every year rather than spending 10% of the replacement cost just to get it fixed.

Cut back on employee paid sick days and vacation days. Paying someone for NOT working is the stupidest idea American business (yeah, I know, it's really the unions) has ever come up with.

Put all the lights on timers-I constantly see Federal office buildings lit up like Christmas trees in the middle of the night-lectric ain't free

Replace Security Guards with Guard Dogs-they are cheaper and far more effective, the 70+ year old ex-cop scares no one- the 7 year old Rottweiler does.

No more first class or Biz class airline travel-ride coach

Shop for a cheaper cell phone plan

Outsource all Military mess halls-I guarantee a private caterer could do it cheaper while making it taste better.

Reorganize Departments to where they logically belong-like why are Pell Grants run by Dept. of Agriculture and NOT Education??? How much is wasted with paperwork shuffling back and forth between separate agencies? Why does the SCHIPS program run thru HHS and Dept.Interior and Agriculture???

Seriously, Forrest Gump could find a way to save $100 billion unfortunately no one in Congress is as intelligent as Gump

Solid points. Obviously I'm not for cutting sick days and vacation days, but everything else makes a crap ton of sense.

[John Galt?]

"Obviously I'm not for cutting sick days and vacation days"

why not?? Federal employees get an absurd amount of sick days and vacation days. Cut it back from 9 paid sick/personal days to 6 and reduce vacations from 14-21 days by half.

Gawd forbid the poor Federal paper pusher has to work the same hours as a private sector Joe. It is an economic crisis and if your biggest sacrifice is losing a few paid days off, then cry my a friggin river

[CBWx2]

"Obviously I'm not for cutting sick days and vacation days"

why not?? Federal employees get an absurd amount of sick days and vacation days. Cut it back from 9 paid sick/personal days to 6 and reduce vacations from 14-21 days by half.

Gawd forbid the poor Federal paper pusher has to work the same hours as a private sector Joe. It is an economic crisis and if your biggest sacrifice is losing a few paid days off, then cry my a friggin river

Two issues. First, while I understand your moral opposition to paid time off, how does this save money? Either you are paying them to be there, or you are paying them to not be there. Either way, you are paying them.

Secondly, most private employers have time off based on a scale dependent on time vested in the company. I've worked places where time off given to employees exceeds Federal employee levels. And executives got even more time off than that.

[John Galt?]

"Obviously I'm not for cutting sick days and vacation days"

why not?? Federal employees get an absurd amount of sick days and vacation days. Cut it back from 9 paid sick/personal days to 6 and reduce vacations from 14-21 days by half.

Gawd forbid the poor Federal paper pusher has to work the same hours as a private sector Joe. It is an economic crisis and if your biggest sacrifice is losing a few paid days off, then cry my a friggin river

Two issues. First, while I understand your moral opposition to paid time off, how does this save money? Either you are paying them to be there, or you are paying them to not be there. Either way, you are paying them.

In the short term individual level, this is true. But in the big picture when you are talking about millions of workers getting tens of millions of days off, it is a huge cost. If you need 5000 people to job X and they all get 10 sick days, and 14 vacation days, you'd only need ~4,750 getting no days off. So as people retire and quite, there is 250 less people to replace. Also, missed days do cost money in that work is being done less efficiently. Fill-ins and temps rarely do as good a job as someone experienced (and if they do, you should permanently replace that person). If they are there, that means fewer delays and delays=$$$.

Secondly, most private employers have time off based on a scale dependent on time vested in the company. I've worked places where time off given to employees exceeds Federal employee levels. And executives got even more time off than that.

Two wrongs don't make a right




p.s. my suggestion of cutting back on paid time off was meant for Federal office-type workers. Military, security, and law enforcement are completely different and exempt

[spartan]

Reid said it was the ONLY thing blocking a deal. I've heard otherwise.

But, even if that was true, what in your opinion is more important, the Govt funding of abortions or Senior citizens getting their SS checks, Medicare + Medicaid and the unemployed getting thier Unemployment checks. If you think it is more important for a woman to POSSIBLY get a Govt financed abortion (she could still pay for herself if she wanted to), fine. My priorities are a bit different.

Planned parenthood's mission is much more than providing abortions.

So? The discussion is not what they do, but what is more important.

If funding the troops was so important to John Boehner and Mike Pence, then why attach a Planned Parenthood rider to a budget deal in the first place? Is defunding Planned Parenthood more important than paying our men and women in the armed forces? Shaving the minuscule amount of funding they receive isn't going to make a difference in the big picture. Why draw a line in the sand there?

Well, that is exactly what the Democrats have done haven't they? They have put Planned Parenthood above the needs of the troops, Seniors and the unemployed.

Actually, to be honest this is a really stupid reason not to come to a deal, and one which I think is not the real and only cause of failure. However, The Democrat Senate leadership have been playing real cheap political points all day; in fact all week. Just demonstrating that perhaps the Republicans should go for a bit of payback!

[spartan]

To get to the short and curlies, if you think this week/budget is a problem, this is but a skirmish compared to what is going to come next year. That is one reason why I think the Dems are being so adamant about it. They are hoping to make the R's so frittish they wont pursue any kind of 'radical' agenda next year. Otherwise, why would they invest so much time and political capital over so miniscule savings relative to the rest of the budget.

[CBWx2]

In the short term individual level, this is true. But in the big picture when you are talking about millions of workers getting tens of millions of days off, it is a huge cost. If you need 5000 people to job X and they all get 10 sick days, and 14 vacation days, you'd only need ~4,750 getting no days off. So as people retire and quite, there is 250 less people to replace. Also, missed days do cost money in that work is being done less efficiently. Fill-ins and temps rarely do as good a job as someone experienced (and if they do, you should permanently replace that person). If they are there, that means fewer delays and delays=$$$.

So burn out or fatigue isn't a major concern? These things can lead to other issues that affect productivity, such as mental and physical health issues. The fact is, the U.S. worker actually gets the least amount of time off in the developed Western world. Workers in virtually every European country get far more time off than U.S. workers do, and businesses still manage to function and be profitable.

[CBWx2]

If funding the troops was so important to John Boehner and Mike Pence, then why attach a Planned Parenthood rider to a budget deal in the first place? Is defunding Planned Parenthood more important than paying our men and women in the armed forces? Shaving the minuscule amount of funding they receive isn't going to make a difference in the big picture. Why draw a line in the sand there?

Well, that is exactly what the Democrats have done haven't they? They have put Planned Parenthood above the needs of the troops, Seniors and the unemployed.

Actually, to be honest this is a really stupid reason not to come to a deal, and one which I think is not the real and only cause of failure. However, The Democrat Senate leadership have been playing real cheap political points all day; in fact all week. Just demonstrating that perhaps the Republicans should go for a bit of payback!

Are you aware of how Planned Parenthood even became an issue? You do realize that this was not part of the original budget proposal, right? The R's added a rider in congress when they passed the proposal over to the Senate. By your logic, the R's should be able to simply add any and every rider they want to the budget, and the D's should have to vote for it, because otherwise they are not with the troops. Do you realize how asinine that sounds? Had they simply voted on the budget and not added all the riders, we wouldn't be here. If this was about funding the troops then that is exactly what they would have done.

How about you vote on a budget, and save that other crap for open debate?

[Biggs3535]

I wonder why the Libs didn't pass a budget last year when they had total control?  Nah, it's pretty clear for those with eyes why they didn't.

[John Galt?]

In the short term individual level, this is true. But in the big picture when you are talking about millions of workers getting tens of millions of days off, it is a huge cost. If you need 5000 people to job X and they all get 10 sick days, and 14 vacation days, you'd only need ~4,750 getting no days off. So as people retire and quite, there is 250 less people to replace. Also, missed days do cost money in that work is being done less efficiently. Fill-ins and temps rarely do as good a job as someone experienced (and if they do, you should permanently replace that person). If they are there, that means fewer delays and delays=$$$.

So burn out or fatigue isn't a major concern? These things can lead to other issues that affect productivity, such as mental and physical health issues.

link?

I didn't say ELIMINATE sick and vacation days, I said REDUCE the amount of PAID days-off until the budget is under control. In the REAL world of business, would you rather have less vacation time and keep your job, or be laid off??

Which is more stressful and could lead to health issues, less vacation pay, or NO FRIGGIN JOB?

The fact is, the U.S. worker actually gets the least amount of time off in the developed Western world. Workers in virtually every European country get far more time off than U.S. workers do, and businesses still manage to function and be profitable.

And virtually every European country has a significantly lower per Capita GDP. So you're saying we should learn from those LESS  successful than us??

That's like saying Honda should adopt GM's pre-2009 policies.


Also, the two groups representing the most high income jobs, Business Owners (privately held businesses) and Commissioned salespeople, DON'T GET PAID VACATIONS. Strange that the groups that have to rely entirely on themselves and their own abilities, and who have the ambition to achieve more while having the drive to accomplish more, don't complain about all these stress and health issues.

to paraphrase Dire Straights, there's too many people that want "money for nothin' and their chicks for free"

[CBWx2]

In the short term individual level, this is true. But in the big picture when you are talking about millions of workers getting tens of millions of days off, it is a huge cost. If you need 5000 people to job X and they all get 10 sick days, and 14 vacation days, you'd only need ~4,750 getting no days off. So as people retire and quite, there is 250 less people to replace. Also, missed days do cost money in that work is being done less efficiently. Fill-ins and temps rarely do as good a job as someone experienced (and if they do, you should permanently replace that person). If they are there, that means fewer delays and delays=$$$.

So burn out or fatigue isn't a major concern? These things can lead to other issues that affect productivity, such as mental and physical health issues.

link?

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/workschedules/

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/long-work-hours-linked-heart-disease/story?id=13292157

The fact is, the U.S. worker actually gets the least amount of time off in the developed Western world. Workers in virtually every European country get far more time off than U.S. workers do, and businesses still manage to function and be profitable.

And virtually every European country has a significantly lower per Capita GDP. So you're saying we should learn from those LESS  successful than us??

That's like saying Honda should adopt GM's pre-2009 policies.

It's not like saying that at all. GM was facing bankruptcy. These companies in question are not. They may be slightly less productive, but they are successful businesses that have a healthier and happier workforce.

Also, the two groups representing the most high income jobs, Business Owners (privately held businesses) and Commissioned salespeople, DON'T GET PAID VACATIONS. Strange that the groups that have to rely entirely on themselves and their own abilities, and who have the ambition to achieve more while having the drive to accomplish more, don't complain about all these stress and health issues.

to paraphrase Dire Straights, there's too many people that want "money for nothin' and their chicks for free"

Business owners and commissioned sales people also often times don't have to punch a clock. They make their own hours, and in having this flexibility, can take time off at their own leisure. If that's the trade off for scheduled vacation time, then sign me up. I'm all for it.

[John Galt?]

Business owners and commissioned sales people also often times don't have to punch a clock. They make their own hours, and in having this flexibility, can take time off at their own leisure. If that's the trade off for scheduled vacation time, then sign me up. I'm all for it.

Interesting how you suddenly ignore the PAID part of the equation. yes biz owners and Salespeople can take time off at their leisure, but also on their own dime. They don't get PAID vacations.

The original discussion was PAID days off (or as I call it-"money for nuthin"). If a salaried Govt. Employee wants a couple weeks off to recoup from the stress of having a guaranteed income, an easy friggin job, full health benefits, and a sound retirement plan just to move papers around, then fine-give him a couple weeks off-just don't pay him for not doing the little work he does.

[dbucfan]

I would offer the two links provided by CBW have little to do with government workers - which if I caught the gist of the discussion - was the topic