this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2024
159 points (97.0% liked)

politics

19145 readers
5938 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 65 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

The GOP has been claiming the government doesn't work for decades.

They get elected, sabotage the system, and then claim that their incompetence proves how bad the bureaucracy is.

[–] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 32 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] CodexArcanum@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Because if and when we get into a position to deal consequences to these freaks, I don't want them to be able to say they were just goofy little guys who got in over their head. They may have many bouts of incompetence, but that's not the core problem.

The problem is that the GOP and the people who make it are, willfully, a traitorous, criminal, and rogue organization that is no longer interested in playing by the rules.

It's working exactly as designed

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

It's not a bad idea to decentralize the federal government as a way to make telework pretty much impossible to walk back on, you get a more diverse and representative public service that's closer to the population it should be working for.

But I don't think that's Trump's objective here...

[–] geekwithsoul@lemm.ee 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

There's also advantages to the DC metro area being a "company town" in that it attracts interested public servants with particular skill sets. The DC metro area has a huge number of folks not from here, so it's not like there's a "DC mindset" at the individual level. And the feds have been pretty good on telework (fed contractors, not so much)

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

I wouldn't say that it's the same as having people from all over the place that keep on living in their community. Live a couple of years in the city and your mindset won't be the same even if you're from a rural area. Add to that the door it opens to give good jobs in regions that need them and centralization makes even less sense.

[–] Not_mikey@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Also could be good to help struggling cities and provide jobs. Probably can't have some national security department in Detroit in case those damn Canadians try to invade, but maybe the USDA or something could bring a lot of well paying jobs there or any rust belt city.

Could also save the government some money because cost of living is low enough that hiring a white collar worker in Detroit is way cheaper then in the DC metro.

[–] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago

At the same time it's even better if they're all paid the same wage as it puts pressure on the private sector to get up to speed.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 points 1 week ago

The CDC has been held up as the example of what could be done. The organization that became the CDC started in Atlanta, but it shows you don't need to be near Washington, DC to be important.

The idea is to move more research based organizations to lower cost cities since they don't have to be in DC to be effective, the federal government could save on living expenses, and the agency could act as stimulus to the area.

[–] Jessica@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The article says Washington 10 times, but it's referring to Washington, D.C. if anyone else was confused.

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Well considering they don't work for the President, they should just say no. They could also unionize if the party that claims to be pro-union was actually pro-union.

[–] SlicingBot@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

FYI many federal employees are part of unions (with some exceptions)

[–] stringere@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Isn't the federal civil service the largest union in the US?

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago

I encourage you to read about the differences between federal employee unions and private sector ones. Public sector does almost nothing. Many people are even excluded from being able to unionize. About all they can do is petition Congress for changes. Good luck with that.

Propublica - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Propublica:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.propublica.org/article/donald-trump-election-federal-agencies
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support