Over at Politico Meredith Shiner has a good article on the office morale problems that are caused when congress members must designate their employees as either "essential" or "non-essential" when it comes to shutting down the government.
When it comes to cutting the budget, shouldn't these non-essential people be the first ones on the chopping block? I mean if there's ever at time to unload unnecessary bulk from our spending burden, this would be it. Keep the service personnel like janitors, lawn mowers, cafeteria workers, etc. They should start lopping off bureaucrats by the thousands from the regulatory agencies to begin with. None of them are essential nor do they produce any good or service. They exist to limit the liberties of productive Americans and little else. Give them all pink slips and say "good riddance".
3 comments:
Yeah, I've always wondered what they mean by non-essential personnel. And why the hell do we have positions if they are not essential. Makes no sense to me. And it would be great if they would take time to unload them. But of course the ones labeled non-essential WOULD be the janitors, lawn mowers, cafeteria workers , etc...
I;ve seen the same mentality when hospitals have to cut costs. They fire a dozen or so patient care technicians-- low paid, but actually take care of people---instead of one highly paid administrator. SO patient care suffers, but certainly not the paper pushing.
Precisely the point Billy! I wish there was one republican in DC who could point out the self-serving absurdity of democrats' cost-cutting in such clear terms as this analogy, that even the stupidest Americans can see is outrageous and manipulative.
Post a Comment