US government struggles to rehire nuclear safety staff it laid off days ago

Post by ty6853 » Sun, Feb 16, 2025, 1:25 PM UTC

throw0101d wrote: post #194

glimshe wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The advocates of Musk's firings will say that if these people could command a higher salary, they should be in the private industry producing goods and services for the population rather than the inherently wasteful government positions.

> […] they should be in the private industry producing goods and services for the population rather than the inherently wasteful government positions. In this particular case, the government positions were maintaining the US's nuclear arsenal. Not sure how "wasteful" having a nuclear deterrent is.

Post by roenxi » Sun, Feb 16, 2025, 1:26 PM UTC

suzzer99 wrote: post #153

tossandthrow wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only works because you allow yourself to sorely disrespect human beings, their livelihood and their feeling of safety. A strategy that seems to be hot in the US, but is an utter ethical abomination and shameful.

Before the election, Vivek or Elon or one of the galaxy-brains floated the idea of firing every other employee in the federal government based on the last digit of their social security number. The cruelty is the point.

Post by rsanek » Sun, Feb 16, 2025, 1:27 PM UTC

sour-taste wrote: post #2

This is LITERALLY the twitter layoffs playing out again. They fired people who had credentials and other things they needed so had to hire them back. Everything else aside why repeat the same mistakes? Just go a little slower and give agencies time to compile accurate lists of necessary employees

Post by cr125rider » Sun, Feb 16, 2025, 1:28 PM UTC

_fizz_buzz_ wrote: post #44

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US's GDP isn't based on the amount of bloat in its government. Sure spending finds its way into the economy, but tax dollars saved also will. As for Twitter/X - the goal isn't revenue but profit, and Twitter was not in a good shape before Elon. Musk recently noted they are barely breaking even now, and the recent sale of X debt was just above original pricing. Considering big advertisers are coming back to X, tha…

The twitter deal kind of worked out for Musk because Trump won the presidency. It's a way to buy favors from the US government now. Basically a corruption vehicle. From a end user stand point, twitter is terrible now. Lots of bots, full of life hack and crypto scams and a lot of scientists and other interesting people completely abandoned the platform.

Post by roenxi » Sun, Feb 16, 2025, 1:28 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #154

jimnotgym wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it politics that people don't want to do business with shitty people? I'd call that being human. If I owned a bill board space, and set everything around it on fire, wouldn't you think it was my fault that advertisers didn't want to pay to use it any more?

No, but then burning everything around the billboard doesn't necessarily make you a shitty person, and also opinions of people siding with advertisers aren't somehow the definitive ones. I mean, why do people who hate what Twitter is now care about it's lost revenue? Especially given what it was, and where the revenue came from, this isn't exactly an argument that generalizes well.