Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Largest Mass Resignation in US History as 100k Federal Workers Quit

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 182 posts

Re: Largest Mass Resignation in US History as 100k Federal Workers Quit

#161

Post by rayiner »

hypeatei wrote: post #147
rayiner wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Identify the law Trump was charged under that made it illegal to “interfere in the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.”

He doesn't have to be charged with them, the intention is what matters, but regardless the three points brought up were (as shown in your own lawfaremedia link): - Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) - New York Election Law § 17-152 - violations of federal, local, and state tax law

Your quote above from the article you linked says:

> [T]he DA has explained the case concerns an attempt by Trump to interfere in the outcome of the 2016 presidential election outcome.

If the DA himself says that Trump’s crime is interfering with the 2016 election, why doesn’t the DA have to charge the law that covers that, and prove every required element of the crime under that law?

Re: Largest Mass Resignation in US History as 100k Federal Workers Quit

#162

Post by rufus_foreman »

throw0101c wrote: post #145
txru wrote: post #70

There are two elements of this situation that I'm consistently trying to open-mindedly hold in balance. One part is what I call "The Great Defederalization". In a myriad of ways, the federal state that was erected between FDR and LBJ is being torn down. That state existed on a group of decisions that allowed independent agencies outside of the direct oversight of the president: the Humphrey's Executor agencies, NLRB,…

> That can work-- we should engage in creative destruction, the administrative state did restrict economic growth, and it did create carve-outs out of the Constitution. The highest level of economic growth (GDP), and total factor productivity growth, was between 1929 and 1973. It was also the time period when income inequality plummeted (post Gilded Age). All three metrics have gone down hill since 1980 and the mains…

>> The highest level of economic growth (GDP), and total factor productivity growth, was between 1929 and 1973

That's also the time period that immigration to the US was at its lowest. The Immigration Act of 1924 strictly limited the number of immigrants allowed. That law was reversed by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Only 5% of the population were immigrants by the 1970 census, the lowest in US history. It's close to 15% now, a level which hasn't been reached since around 1900.

Income inequality plummeted because immigrant labor wasn't allowed to enter the US to drive down the wages of US workers.

H1B labor drives down the wages of US workers. Illegal immigrant labor drives down the wages of US workers. If you care about income inequality, then maybe consider supporting enforcing the immigration laws, and maybe consider supporting ending the H1B and other programs that drive down the wages of US workers and increase income inequality.

Re: Largest Mass Resignation in US History as 100k Federal Workers Quit

#163

Post by pfannkuchen »

sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #59
pfannkuchen wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the constant equating of illegal immigrants with Jews who lived legally in Germany for many generations and who had done nothing illegal or wrong at all very disturbing. It minimizes what happened there.

And that happened where in my comment?

If not for Nazi Germany, would the behavior of the current admin, especially with respect to ICE, be labeled “fascist”? My impression is that the optics of vanning people is reminiscent of the optics of what happened in Germany, and so the label comes out. This is bolstered by Nazi Germany being probably the most covered topic in American history class for the past many decades, as well as similar coverage in Hollywood, to the point where “bad guy” and Nazi/fascist are basically synonyms.

Are you coming from somewhere else?

Re: Largest Mass Resignation in US History as 100k Federal Workers Quit

#164

Post by throw0101c »

rufus_foreman wrote: post #162
throw0101c wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That can work-- we should engage in creative destruction, the administrative state did restrict economic growth, and it did create carve-outs out of the Constitution. The highest level of economic growth (GDP), and total factor productivity growth, was between 1929 and 1973. It was also the time period when income inequality plummeted (post Gilded Age). All three metrics have gone down hill since 1980 and the mains…

>> The highest level of economic growth (GDP), and total factor productivity growth, was between 1929 and 1973 That's also the time period that immigration to the US was at its lowest. The Immigration Act of 1924 strictly limited the number of immigrants allowed. That law was reversed by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Only 5% of the population were immigrants by the 1970 census, the lowest in US history…

> Has the surge in immigration since 1970 led to slower wage growth for native-born workers? Academic research does not provide much support for this claim. The evidence suggests that when immigration increases the supply of labor, firms increase investment to offset any reduction in capital per worker, thereby keeping average wages from falling over the long term. Moreover, immigrants are often imperfect substitutes for native-born workers in U.S. labor markets. That means they do not compete for the same jobs and put minimal downward pressure on natives’ wages. This might explain why competition from new immigrants has mostly affected earlier immigrants, who experienced significant reductions in wages from the surge in immigration. In contrast, studies find that immigration has actually raised average wages of native-born workers during the last few decades.

* https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2016/1/27/the-e...

Re: Largest Mass Resignation in US History as 100k Federal Workers Quit

#165

Post by rufus_foreman »

throw0101c wrote: post #164
rufus_foreman wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> The highest level of economic growth (GDP), and total factor productivity growth, was between 1929 and 1973 That's also the time period that immigration to the US was at its lowest. The Immigration Act of 1924 strictly limited the number of immigrants allowed. That law was reversed by the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. Only 5% of the population were immigrants by the 1970 census, the lowest in US history…

> Has the surge in immigration since 1970 led to slower wage growth for native-born workers? Academic research does not provide much support for this claim. The evidence suggests that when immigration increases the supply of labor, firms increase investment to offset any reduction in capital per worker, thereby keeping average wages from falling over the long term. Moreover, immigrants are often imperfect substitutes…

I have heard people claim that cracking down on immigration will increase labor costs for farmers in California who rely on immigrant labor to harvest their crops. That would be a contradiction of your study that you cite.

Can you find an example of the opposite? Can you find me a California farmer who is happy with the crackdown on immigration because now his labor costs will decrease? That does not exist, for reasons of reality.

Where is the corporate support for decreased immigration if it will lower corporations labor costs?

Re: Largest Mass Resignation in US History as 100k Federal Workers Quit

#166

Post by txru »

throw0101c wrote: post #145
txru wrote: post #70

There are two elements of this situation that I'm consistently trying to open-mindedly hold in balance. One part is what I call "The Great Defederalization". In a myriad of ways, the federal state that was erected between FDR and LBJ is being torn down. That state existed on a group of decisions that allowed independent agencies outside of the direct oversight of the president: the Humphrey's Executor agencies, NLRB,…

> That can work-- we should engage in creative destruction, the administrative state did restrict economic growth, and it did create carve-outs out of the Constitution. The highest level of economic growth (GDP), and total factor productivity growth, was between 1929 and 1973. It was also the time period when income inequality plummeted (post Gilded Age). All three metrics have gone down hill since 1980 and the mains…

Hmm, the rigorous systems of measure for GDP were only pioneered by Clark and Kuznets in the 30s and collected widely in the 40s. There were measures before then but they had much less rigor. I imagine the 1880s-mid 1920s were pretty impressive. Ditto for the 1830s-late 1850s.

What’s more, that time period includes recovery from the crashes of the early 30s, the massive war production of the 40s, and the massive boost that was having the rest of the world’s manufacturing and demand still in ruins in the 50s and 60s.

You could be right— but the data sure is confounded.

Re: Largest Mass Resignation in US History as 100k Federal Workers Quit

#167

Post by hypeatei »

rayiner wrote: post #161
hypeatei wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He doesn't have to be charged with them, the intention is what matters, but regardless the three points brought up were (as shown in your own lawfaremedia link): - Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) - New York Election Law § 17-152 - violations of federal, local, and state tax law

Your quote above from the article you linked says: > [T]he DA has explained the case concerns an attempt by Trump to interfere in the outcome of the 2016 presidential election outcome. If the DA himself says that Trump’s crime is interfering with the 2016 election, why doesn’t the DA have to charge the law that covers that, and prove every required element of the crime under that law?

Because that's how the law in NY is written? I'm not really sure what you're trying to argue here, to be honest. The case played out in the legal system, a judge ruled it should go forward, and a jury convicted Trump on these charges.

  A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.[0]
0: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/175.10

Re: Largest Mass Resignation in US History as 100k Federal Workers Quit

#168

Post by tzs »

rayiner wrote: post #139
bigbadfeline wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 3,000 samples is more than enough to have a statistically significant analysis of a population of 100,000. It's not a valid sample because it's not a random selection - statistical sampling isn't only about sample size. One reasonable conclusion that can be drawn from the above numbers is that the Democrats in government are less stingy about donations, or that the Republicans there don't really like the GOP and ar…

I think that’s an odd theory.

It's not as odd when you look at employment length. One of the stats I've seen is that Democrats who go into the civil service are more likely to stay long term. Republicans are more likely to leave for the private sector.

I'd expect employees who have been there longer, and so are likely making more money, to be both more likely than shorter term employees to make political donations and to be likely to make bigger donations than those shorter term ones that do donate.

Re: Largest Mass Resignation in US History as 100k Federal Workers Quit

#169

Post by nullocator »

timr wrote: post #66
pm90 wrote: post #5

It’s a terrifying experiment in hollowing out the civil service. At some point a critical mass of Federal workers may be lost which brings the entire machinery of the Federal Government to a standstill. It’s also not clear how to recover from something like this.

I'm not terrified. Just to put some perspective on this, per Pew [1], the federal workforce excluding the postal service (which has actually shrunk as a semi-private employer) has grown by about 1% per year since 2000. As of 2024, it was at 2.4M people. The federal workforce is dramatically bigger than it was even a few years ago [2]. Moreover, the vast majority of federal workers don't have anything to do with the k…

Why do we need more cutting? Why does the size of the federal government need to decrease? Please list the ways in which I and my community will benefit from a federal government with less personnel.

Re: Largest Mass Resignation in US History as 100k Federal Workers Quit

#170

Post by rayiner »

hypeatei wrote: post #167
rayiner wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your quote above from the article you linked says: > [T]he DA has explained the case concerns an attempt by Trump to interfere in the outcome of the 2016 presidential election outcome. If the DA himself says that Trump’s crime is interfering with the 2016 election, why doesn’t the DA have to charge the law that covers that, and prove every required element of the crime under that law?

Because that's how the law in NY is written? I'm not really sure what you're trying to argue here, to be honest. The case played out in the legal system, a judge ruled it should go forward, and a jury convicted Trump on these charges. A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud inclu…

So everything is fine as long as you can fit the facts into “how the law is written?”

If so, why are you complaining about the Comey prosecution? 18 USC 1001 is extremely broadly written: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001

> (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully… (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation

It basically makes any lie about “a matter within the jurisdiction … government” into a felony. No surprise that even a blue state grand jury indicted Comey for this.

Post reply on HN