The Republican Study Committee has released its budget proposals. Here are a couple of highlights:
- Reduce federal discretionary spending to 2006 levels -- and hold it there for ten years
- Cut the federal workforce by 15% by only hiring one worker for every two who leaves until the 15% reduction is achieved
Can you imagine the Social Security Administration with 9,000 fewer employees? If this were applied to Social Security, it would be impossible for the agency to fulfill its statutory obligations as they stand now, much less as they increase over the next few years as the baby boomer generation ages. Makes perfect sense if you hate Social Security and think that most of the country agrees with you.
I'm a democrat. It's the lack of efficiency at the appeals council level which then require more expensive resources(ogc).
ReplyDeleteIt's the huge $100,000+ salaries being paid to government employees.
Possibly departments that are not needed.
To some degree,the republicans are right about spending.
Doesn't matter if you are a democrat or a republican--those proposals are crazy. SSA won't be able to function with those cuts.
ReplyDeleteWhat is it with the benchmark of $100,000 or more Anon 2:49? What is it? Are you that jealous and small minded? There is waste at all levels in SSA. There is also good work being done at all levels of SSA. Enough with the 100K nonsense.
ReplyDeleteA federal worker earning $100,000+
ReplyDeletesalaries a year should NOT be living the high life at the tax payer expense.
Anon 7:03, Who is living the high life? I don't know what you think federal workers do, especially at SSA but we are all (and I do mean all) under intense pressure to move cases faster than ever, we are all being electronically tracked (our workload) at unprecendented levels and believe it or not, the overwhelming majority of us want to do what is right for the claimant.
ReplyDeleteYes, there are some bad apples and it is fairly common for c-rap to rise to the top. But those workers/managers are a small majority.
Further, highly skilled and educated federal workers (with outrageous student loans) are paid significantly less their counterparts in the private sector.
If you really want to save money, stop all that bogus contracting out. Sure the initial figures look good but when a good portion of the work is shoddy and has to be redone, where are the savings?
If your thing is money, then direct your ire at private contractors who waste more money then all the the substandard workers/managers making over 100K put together and multiplied by 10.
"Further, highly skilled and educated federal workers (with outrageous student loans) are paid significantly less their counterparts in the private sector".
ReplyDeletePerhaps when the poor claimant's case is before the administration,the above excuse can be used for payment of the claim.
"A federal worker earning $100,000+
ReplyDeletesalaries a year should NOT be living the high life at the tax payer expense."
Hey genius, the congressmen you seem to so love who propose this nonsense make $175,000 a year, and work only about half the year. Typical conservative - you hate your sad life so you try to bring everyone else down with you.
I agree that the proposal (to reduce federal workforce levels to FY 2006 staffing) is short sighted and counterproductive. However, I wish those defending the current levels could admit that there are far too many individuals in the agency making a 100K salary based on what is essentially a federal tenure system. I worked with them. It was not until I left and made a living on my own, without the guarantee of a monthly check that I realized how overpaid those folks were. And while I have paid my student loans (and am paying those of my kids); I have yet to determine what a “counterpart in the private sector” would look like. Would this counterpart have the same holidays and benefits? This is a tired old refrain from a cloistered perspective. Working hard and being scrutinized is not a trait limited to the SSA workplace.
ReplyDelete3:43 PM, January 21, 2011
ReplyDeleteIt seems somebody agree with me.
REVISED
ReplyDelete3:43 PM, January 21, 2011
It seems you agree with me
Anon 3:43, if the job was so cushy yet overpaid, why did you leave? Its not so easy working for the gov't that's why. As for the private sector counterpart both doctors and lawyers who work in the private sector (not in their own practice for the most part) earn more money, get better perks and get more respect. Most federal employees are dedicated to federal service and that is why they stay. You sound like you are very jealous of the fed's benefits but couldn't hack the environment yourself. There are many over paid worker's everywhere. Your rant about feds who make over $100K is getting old.
ReplyDeleteHark, the strawman cometh...
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone wish to address the featherbedding in the PSCs that results in three module managers for approximately 50 people? Does this happen anywhere in private industry? How much money could we save by replacing 2 assistant managers, whose work is 90% clerical, with a grade 3 clerk?
ReplyDelete