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

20k federal workers take "buyout" so far, official says

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 579 posts

Re: 20k federal workers take "buyout" so far, official says

#191

Post by encoderer »

spacemanspiff01 wrote: post #158
transcriptase wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the OPM grants them a sabbatical or extended vacation or a hundred other things they have the discretion to do. Pretending or hoping everything unorthodox or unprecedented is somehow illegal is already becoming tiresome to read about in comment sections and it hasn’t even been a month of this administration.

If they were serious about the offer, they would get it passed through Congress on a party line vote via reconciliation, they have the votes, there is nothing the Dems could do to stop it. The fact that they have not is telling.

All it tells me is that I agree with you and yes congress would ratify it, so doing this is pointless and only going to slow you down.

Why would it make sense for them to do this? Democrats would still howl in disapproval no matter what they did.

Re: 20k federal workers take "buyout" so far, official says

#192

Post by reaperducer »

Larrikin wrote: post #137
Shank wrote: post #15

I think the main issue for anyone wanting to take the offer is simply: this was never authorized by congress, so the money to pay people to September is questionable if it exists at best. Meanwhile, there's a government funding deadline on March 14, 2025. So there's a very real chance at this deal offering something closer to ~1 month of pay before it suddenly gets dropped due to budget negotiations. It would be an i…

Aren't Twitter workers still trying to get their severances and they took the offer when Twitter actually had the money to pay.

Aren't Twitter workers still trying to get their severances and they took the offer when Twitter actually had the money to pay.

Considering that SpaceX is so far behind on its bills that dozens and dozens of companies in Texas have had to place liens against the company, my guess is that neither the Twitter people, nor the SpaceX people, nor the federal buyout people will ever see a dime.

For some reason, links to stories about the leins and SpaceX becoming notorious for not paying its bills are hard to come by, but it's in the printed newspapers regularly; as recently as yesterday. Here's and older link I could find: https://www.chron.com/culture/article/spacex-overdue-bills-t...

Re: 20k federal workers take "buyout" so far, official says

#193

Post by netsharc »

ryandrake wrote: post #161
bigmattystyles wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds illegal

Almost any reply to a political thread in the next four years is going to be "That sounds illegal" but it's only illegal if the law gets enforced. I encourage anyone responding with "That sounds illegal" or "They can't do that" to also include in their response, "...and it will be enforced by [xxxx]." and try to come up with a realistic xxxx. EDIT: I'm not making any judgment about whether this particular thing is le…

Indeed... welcome to the newest "failed state". Although, that term reminds me of Sarah Chayes' book on corruption, reviewed at length in [1].

> But, as Chayes studied the graft of the Karzai government, she concluded that it was anything but benign. Many in the political élite were not merely stealing reconstruction money but expropriating farmland from other Afghans. Warlords could hoodwink U.S. special forces into dispatching their adversaries by feeding the Americans intelligence tips about supposed Taliban ties. Many of those who made money from the largesse of the international community enjoyed a sideline in the drug trade. Afghanistan is often described as a “failed state,” but, in light of the outright thievery on display, Chayes began to reassess the problem. This wasn’t a situation in which the Afghan government was earnestly trying, but failing, to serve its people. The government was actually succeeding, albeit at “another objective altogether” — the enrichment of its own members. Washington supported Hamid Karzai and his ministers and adjutants in the hope that they could establish a stable government, help pursue Al Qaeda, and keep the Taliban at bay. But the Karzai government wasn’t a government at all, Chayes concluded. It was “a vertically integrated criminal organization.”

[1] https://archive.is/E6zXj

Re: 20k federal workers take "buyout" so far, official says

#194

Post by jdross »

_qbxi wrote: post #168
ryandrake wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost any reply to a political thread in the next four years is going to be "That sounds illegal" but it's only illegal if the law gets enforced. I encourage anyone responding with "That sounds illegal" or "They can't do that" to also include in their response, "...and it will be enforced by [xxxx]." and try to come up with a realistic xxxx. EDIT: I'm not making any judgment about whether this particular thing is le…

Illegal acts should be called out, even if our government is failing to enforce the law. Otherwise it will become easy for the acts to get ignored entirely.

It would be nice if anyone would state a law being violated. A lot of people seem to be making a lot of assumptions too about what DOGE/Elon are doing vs what the president or directors of the agencies (for instance) are doing

Re: 20k federal workers take "buyout" so far, official says

#195

Post by duxup »

root_axis wrote: post #93

My personal and probably not unique prediction is that these people will be let go and not be paid - same thing he did with twitter.

I think they'd "like" to, but he legal protections for the employees in this case are vast compared to twitter. But as an employee, I would worry that they would try... we already have an administration that SCOTUS has decided is above the law in other ways.

Re: 20k federal workers take "buyout" so far, official says

#196

Post by rob74 »

Molitor5901 wrote: post #24
manbart wrote: post #2

Doubt it... You'd be a fool to think you'd actually get the money

[flagged]

The budget for USAID was also appropriated by Congress, but they still decided to freeze everything "pending review" (instead of at least reviewing while initially leaving things running), and then locked out domestic employees and recalled overseas employees - all without consulting Congress. So they obviously don't care one bit about what they are legally required to do. And why should they, as long as they have the supreme interpreters of laws firmly in their corner?

Re: 20k federal workers take "buyout" so far, official says

#197

Post by AnimalMuppet »

verall wrote: post #164
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK. What do they want? Seriously, what do you claim they want? A fascist dictatorship? You still need a functioning government for that. (It doesn't function for the people , but it still requires a large number of competent employees.) Anarchy? Mad Max? Everybody dies, so no government employees are needed? Takeover by Canada, Mexico, China, or Russia, so it becomes their problem? Or do you just claim that they're s…

> A fascist dictatorship? You still need a functioning government for that. Not really, just a functioning police force.

That functioning police force needs a functioning tax collection system to fund it, and a functioning civil society to pay for it. So you need enforcement of contracts, and a functioning financial system, and working roads, and all kinds of stuff. You can't just sit there and say "we've got the police, so none of the civilians can touch us" - not for long, anyway.

Re: 20k federal workers take "buyout" so far, official says

#198

Post by duxup »

Being asked to take a deal that the administration may be offering illegally is a wild situation to be in. Especially when the administration doing so seems to have little regard for the law, and SCOTUS has deemed them above the law to some extent.

Are you making a deal they will actually pay, and could it be that the administration simply chooses to ignore the courts?

Re: 20k federal workers take "buyout" so far, official says

#199

Post by snailmailstare »

ziddoap wrote: post #185
ryandrake wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost any reply to a political thread in the next four years is going to be "That sounds illegal" but it's only illegal if the law gets enforced. I encourage anyone responding with "That sounds illegal" or "They can't do that" to also include in their response, "...and it will be enforced by [xxxx]." and try to come up with a realistic xxxx. EDIT: I'm not making any judgment about whether this particular thing is le…

> it's only illegal if the law gets enforced. It is completely valid to say something is illegal and unenforced. Consider that non-enforcement doesn't suddenly make something legal. Enforcement can start at any time. (Will it? Who knows!)

The larger problem is that they are at the border of or past crimes that either will get prosecuted eventually or we are at the end of democratic controls (starting at term limits) so that these people never get prosecuted.
Post reply on HN