Trump Will Succeed In Greatly Reducing The Size Of The Federal Government

mark46 · Feb 12, 2025

Sure, much of the ending and closing down agencies and even firings are illegal and will be stopped by the courts.

HOWEVER, the Executive Branch under Trump can lay folks off and have hiring freezes. Certainly, folks who refuse to show up to work can be disciplined and perhaps forced to leave or to take lesser paying jobs.

And surely many programs will not be approved by Congress at their current levels even if they continue.
=========
Trump is doing a lot of truly crazy things that are causing death throughout the world and hurting US farmers. That is a somewhat separate issue.
=======
The BOTTOM LINE is that Trump can greatly reduce spending and hiring legally. Our eye is off the ball, focusing on the legality of completely ending whole departments. BTW, how much funding do folks think the Department of Education will get from the new Congress even if the Department continues to exist? 50%, maybe?
=====
As an aside, Musk is out of control. A current State Department memo says that they will purchase $400M is Tesla armored vehicles. There is really no such thing other than their failed line of EV pickup trucks. I thought that Trump doesn't want to encourage electric vehicles, Maybe Trump will eventually prevent many purchases.

Reluctant Theologian · Feb 12, 2025

The slimming down of the Federal workforce is necessary to eliminate the Federal budget deficit and will greatly enhance the agility of this and future administrations. The vast majority of those lay-offs will not significantly reduce the productive output of the economy in terms of actual production of food, equipment, housing, education, health, security, well-being (because you can't eat the output of a DEI workshop).

However, there will be a large number of ex-Fed Gov employees how who may find it very difficult to find a new job as their previous experience and possibly skill-set is only attractive to Government agencies and not the private economy. And the whole NGO industry is gutted anyway - NGOs in the USA and worldwide have to re-learn how to obtain their funds from private sources; this requires much more effort to proof/convince private donors that money is spent well - as opposed to writing an aid proposal and collect millions from Governments/UN/etc.

So I would encourage the new admin to actually plan for that and foster re-skilling of those ex-employees to do actual useful work for the productive economy. Learn to weld, learn to teach, learn to build, learn to cook, learn to farm, etc.

Pommer · Feb 13, 2025

mark46 said:
Sure, much of the ending and closing down agencies and even firings are illegal and will be stopped by the courts.

HOWEVER, the Executive Branch under Trump can lay folks off and have hiring freezes. Certainly, folks who refuse to show up to work can be disciplined and perhaps forced to leave or to take lesser paying jobs.

And surely many programs will not be approved by Congress at their current levels even if they continue.
=========
Trump is doing a lot of truly crazy things that are causing death throughout the world and hurting US farmers. That is a somewhat separate issue.
=======
The BOTTOM LINE is that Trump can greatly reduce spending and hiring legally. Our eye is off the ball, focusing on the legality of completely ending whole departments. BTW, how much funding do folks think the Department of Education will get from the new Congress even if the Department continues to exist? 50%, maybe?
=====
As an aside, Musk is out of control. A current State Department memo says that they will purchase $400M is Tesla armored vehicles. There is really no such thing other than their failed line of EV pickup trucks. I thought that Trump doesn't want to encourage electric vehicles, Maybe Trump will eventually prevent many purchases.

I must have missed the MAGA memo that asserted that there are “too many people working in the government”. Have ye a link?

public hermit · Feb 13, 2025

Yeah, Musk is out of control. If this is what we need, it needs to be done by a committee of elected officials, not some rando who happens be rich and a buddy of POTUS. The GOP and Trump supporters seem to want oligarchy instead of democracy.

rambot · Feb 13, 2025

I'm not sure why you guys are saying "Musk is out of control". I think it's pretty clear that Musk is firmly IN control.

mark46 · Feb 13, 2025

Pommer said:
I must have missed the MAGA memo that asserted that there are “too many people working in the government”. Have ye a link?

???
This has been a key conservative and then MAGA tenet since at least 1964, certainly since 1980.

RDKirk · Feb 13, 2025

Reluctant Theologian said:
The slimming down of the Federal workforce is necessary to eliminate the Federal budget deficit and will greatly enhance the agility of this and future administrations.

The numbers I've seen indicate that federal workforce cuts are a pittance of the federal budget deficit. Civilian federal employee costs are about 5-7% of the total budget. Presuming a 50% reduction, that's only 2.5 - 3.5%. And if you think any office can stand a 50% cut without staggering, you're dreaming.

Reluctant Theologian said:
The vast majority of those lay-offs will not significantly reduce the productive output of the economy in terms of actual production of food, equipment, housing, education, health, security, well-being (because you can't eat the output of a DEI workshop).

You don't know that. You're presuming the people left can immediately learn how to do other people's jobs. You're also presuming no loss of people in critical positions. Also, the people willing to accept "buy outs" would be those who are senior (most knowledgeable) at the higher working levels, not just managers. It's going to be "Mabel, who's been here long enough to cover for anyone else's absence" that will take the buy-out. The CIA's Analysis branch is subject to these cuts, and knowing personally how that branch works, it will be the people who know things nobody else knows who leave.

rambot · Feb 13, 2025

Reluctant Theologian said:
The slimming down of the Federal workforce is necessary to eliminate the Federal budget deficit and will greatly enhance the agility of this and future administrations.

I don't think anyone has a problem with some "intelligent" and "laser like" cuts. But that is not what I have been seeing.

Reluctant Theologian said:
The vast majority of those lay-offs will not significantly reduce the productive output of the economy in terms of actual production of food, equipment, housing, education, health, security, well-being.

1) You have no way of knowing that.
2) There are more ways other important measures than the "productive output".

Reluctant Theologian said:
However, there will be a large number of ex-Fed Gov employees how who may find it very difficult to find a new job as their previous
experience and possibly skill-set is only attractive to Government agencies and not the private economy.

It's strange to me how ignorant you choose to pronounce yourself to be when you make statements like this. AS though nobody EVER transitions from private to public or the other direction. That's silly.

Reluctant Theologian said:
And the whole NGO industry is gutted anyway - NGOs in the USA and worldwide have to re-learn how to obtain their funds from private sources; this requires much more effort to proof/convince private donors that money is spent well - as opposed to writing an aid proposal and collect millions from Governments/UN/etc.

Now you're just making stuff up.

Reluctant Theologian said:
So I would encourage the new admin to actually plan for that and foster re-skilling of those ex-employees to do actual useful work for the productive economy. Learn to weld, learn to teach, learn to build, learn to cook, learn to farm, etc.

Oh geez. The ignorant condescending tone of this post is laughably off base and denude of any connection to the reality of the skill sets of government workers.

Aryeh Jay · Feb 13, 2025

mark46 said:
???
This has been a key conservative and then MAGA tenet since at least 1964, certainly since 1980.

And now they are going to follow through? Asking for a friend.

Say it aint so · Feb 13, 2025

Reluctant Theologian said:
The slimming down of the Federal workforce is necessary to eliminate the Federal budget deficit and will greatly enhance the agility of this and future administrations. The vast majority of those lay-offs will not significantly reduce the productive output of the economy in terms of actual production of food, equipment, housing, education, health, security, well-being (because you can't eat the output of a DEI workshop).

However, there will be a large number of ex-Fed Gov employees how who may find it very difficult to find a new job as their previous experience and possibly skill-set is only attractive to Government agencies and not the private economy. And the whole NGO industry is gutted anyway - NGOs in the USA and worldwide have to re-learn how to obtain their funds from private sources; this requires much more effort to proof/convince private donors that money is spent well - as opposed to writing an aid proposal and collect millions from Governments/UN/etc.

So I would encourage the new admin to actually plan for that and foster re-skilling of those ex-employees to do actual useful work for the productive economy. Learn to weld, learn to teach, learn to build, learn to cook, learn to farm, etc.

I used to work for a Fortune 500 company. While there I had seen several layoffs. What a company that small compared to the size of the US government never did is just take a sludge hammer and layoff indiscriminately kind of like Trump et al are doing. These actions, the freezes, are already having an effect in farming. It is also going to have an affect on how actually effective the actual act of governing will be, which will quickly become more unresponsive to those they govern. Breaking stuff is easy, rebuilding it will take years.

mark46 · Feb 13, 2025

Aryeh Jay said:
And now they are going to follow through? Asking for a friend.

I do believe that there are parts of government that will be greatly reduced in size.

Pommer · Feb 13, 2025

mark46 said:
I do believe that there are parts of government that will be greatly reduced in size.

Why is reducing the number of employees the Federal government has, a goal in running a nation of 350,000,000 souls?

Reluctant Theologian · Feb 13, 2025

RDKirk said:
The numbers I've seen indicate that federal workforce cuts are a pittance of the federal budget deficit. Civilian federal employee costs are about 5-7% of the total budget. Presuming a 50% reduction, that's only 2.5 - 3.5%. And if you think any office can stand a 50% cut without staggering, you're dreaming.

You don't know that. You're presuming the people left can immediately learn how to do other people's jobs. You're also presuming no loss of people in critical positions. Also, the people willing to accept "buy outs" would be those who are senior (most knowledgeable) at the higher working levels, not just managers. It's going to be "Mabel, who's been here long enough to cover for anyone else's absence" that will take the buy-out. The CIA's Analysis branch is subject to these cuts, and knowing personally how that branch works, it will be the people who know things nobody else knows who leave.

You're right just the workforce reduction would make only a small dent - but when workforce nrs are reduced, other associated costs often can go as well. About 28% of the whole budget has to be cut - not doing so is spending the country into bankruptcy or inflation or both.

The same is true for many other countries of course, but the USA seems to be worse than than the EU.

RDKirk · Feb 13, 2025

Reluctant Theologian said:
but when workforce nrs are reduced, other associated costs often can go as well.

That assertion needs further explanation.

Reluctant Theologian · Feb 13, 2025

RDKirk said:
That assertion needs further explanation.

Reduced head count also means less office space, less overhead that comes with the work force .. etc.

And don't underestimate the improvement of agility in decision making. But like Musk says - eliminating the deficit is not optional, it's essential. (now I certainly don't agree with everything he says - but he's right about that).

To eliminate the USA Federal deficit - cuts are necessary to the amount of USD 5 billion per day. I seem to recall DOGE is already at USD 1 billion per day now. So given this pace I might think it's achievable within a year. But I'm not naive, it will come with massive resistance and very big adjustments in society.

For believers charity is a duty - but that's at the individual/private level; I indeed think a Government should first and foremost deal with organising its own society well with tax payers' money. Social security already is already some form of charity domestically, but at the moment the USA Federally can't really afford charity in the rest of the world - they just don't have the money.

RDKirk · Feb 14, 2025

Reluctant Theologian said:
Reduced head count also means less office space, less overhead that comes with the work force .. etc.

You're still talking less than 10%. The government isn't going to get rid of major government properties. Anything like substantial consolidation of facilities would take a decade.

Reluctant Theologian said:
And don't underestimate the improvement of agility in decision making. But like Musk says - eliminating the deficit is not optional, it's essential. (now I certainly don't agree with everything he says - but he's right about that).

You're conflating a single-digit reduction of workforce into "eliminating the deficit," which it certainly won't. In fact, it will increase cost--as any major corporation could tell you--in the short run.

Reluctant Theologian said:
To eliminate the USA Federal deficit - cuts are necessary to the amount of USD 5 billion per day. I seem to recall DOGE is already at USD 1 billion per day now. So given this pace I might think it's achievable within a year. But I'm not naive, it will come with massive resistance and very big adjustments in society.

They haven't cut anything yet--those are projections.

Trump Will Succeed In Greatly Reducing The Size Of The Federal Government

Well-Known Member

אַבְרָהָם

Future History Slab Carver

social troglodyte

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Senior Member

Stuck on a ship.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Future History Slab Carver

אַבְרָהָם

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

אַבְרָהָם

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner

Similar threads