Here is a question I doubt will get true answers

[bomelia]

For you Obaama idealists... the ones who really believe Obama is the right guy for the job. If you knew within a 95% certainty that his election would lead to your job loss, would you still have voted for him? C'mon, lets not pick at the question. Yes or no. I will make it poll. If you are brave, you can attatch a comment so we know who you are.

Mike

[Sharroll Celby]

I did NOT vote for him, but if I did, with a 95% certainty of my job loss, I would not have.

How did you EVER come up with this scenario? lol !

[bomelia]

Its a VERY realistic scenario. I work on a military base. Stability in the work force depends almost soley on whether or not the Administration is pro-defence. During the Clinton years, there was an anomoly with regards to this subject. Clinton supported defense research, but choked the active military. No money for pay raises, spare parts, etc. Weird. We did ok in the research sector. Under Bush, we have done so so. Strange, but not when you consider the fact that Bush has had to pay for a war. New projects have had a difficult time. Under BRAC (Base Relignment...) we did pretty good. Several commands have moved here, so money keeps coming. But one command, MDA (Missile Defense) operates under the OSD (Secretary of Defense) and under Bush, they grew like crazy and have been in the process of moving here. Will take to 2015 to complete transition. BUT, Obama is on record saying he will reverse MDA. That is a BIG deal. And yet, drive through their parking lot, and you will find plenty of Obama bumber stickers. Those people voted to effectively lose their job.

Either that or they are completely without a clue.

Mike

[4RE KLR]

I did not vote for him and would not have if I was leaning his way in the above scenario.

I think many people who did vote for him will be surprised when they start loosing their jobs because of it.

Great question Mike. I also wonder who will tell....

[VRM]

I lost my job under Bush and didn't vote for Obama.

But there are plenty more who have also already lost their jobs who did vote for Obama. McCains plan would do nothing for their jobs. Obamas might.

[Art Burtt]

ah what the hell quit your job and sit at home wait for da check to come!

[TButtrick]

If people are to loose their jobs, it's because of the the lunacy of the present administration and not because of what Oboma might do. Bail-outs continue for the execs who F***Ked up but the working stiffs won't get bailed out when they need it.

[trularin]

I am in agreement with the last two posts.

It has nothing to do with "what might happen". I think the cows have already left the barn, closing the door only makes you feel better.

Your obsessing Mike.

[Bill Bess]

First of all, I didn't vote for him because he is an "empty suit" ...no real experience to be President. Next he has a bad record with regard to his past associations, last but most important his plans are just no damm good for America and our people.
With that being said, I wouldn't vote for anyone that might eliminate my job.

Now with the economy in the toilet...I will most likely have to come out of retirement and look for a job to fill in the gaps due to lost income in my 401K account. Maybe a Walmart greeter, a security guard or a CEO might be good way to go.
As you can see ...even retirees have lost their jobs.

Best regards, Bill

[Ron61]

Bill,

Definitely go the CEO route. Then after a year or however long it takes you to bankrupt whatever business you are in, get your $20 million bonus and retire for real.

Ron

[J. T. Toad]

Do you/we really even know who he is? This "enlightening" piece from Obama supporter Camille Paglia paints an ignorant picture of politics.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/...lin/index.html

"Yes, it's true we know relatively little about Barack Obama, and his triumph is a roll of the dice. But John McCain (like Bob Dole) was a major Republican misfire -- a candidate of personal honor and heroic sacrifice who was woefully inadequate for the times. McCain's lurching grandstanding during the Wall Street crisis made him look like a ham actor on a bender. In debate, McCain was always pugnacious but too often bland or rambling, and he often missed glaring opportunities to score off Obama's vagueness or contradictions."

For someone who campaigned on "change" (which I now believe he stole from Arnold) he hasn't been about change at all. Gore? oh come on.

[SP01715]

Originally Posted by TButtrick

If people are to loose their jobs, it's because of the the lunacy of the present administration and not because of what Oboma might do. Bail-outs continue for the execs who F***Ked up but the working stiffs won't get bailed out when they need it.

And who fought against regulation of the mortgage industry? What party backed the bailout from the first vote? Bush has his faults for sure, but the Dems have done more to cause this economic crisis.

[bomelia]

Well, I was just trying to keep this focussed on the new prez elect. Not Bush. Obama (if he is true to his word) will try to cut defense by 25%. Thats about $200 Billion. Thats a lot of folks jobs out there. And I KNOW some of those voters work out here on the base. I just do not get their thinking.

Steve, how did Bush cause you to lose your job? Or was there no cause & effect?

Mike

[TButtrick]

Originally Posted by SP01715

And who fought against regulation of the mortgage industry? What party backed the bailout from the first vote? Bush has his faults for sure, but the Dems have done more to cause this economic crisis.

You can sit there and throw the blame any direction you wish. They are all politicians and none of them have our best interests in mind. The latest news from Hank Paulson is astonishing. The 700 Billion bail-out strategy which was so desperately needed in 72 hours or the sky would fall, has now been abandoned. Initially the funds where to buy back bad loans and foster new lending but the mortgage companies decided that they'd use the funds for acquisitions which would look better on their balance sheets. So why aren't mortgage companies modifying their mortgage loan terms to get the ball rolling? Why should they. If they did, they wouldn't be able to feed from the trough and it now it looks like the auto industry is going to wiggle it's way through the crowd to feed from the same trough. Its despicable and we are all getting the F**KING of our lives.

Funny how we all despise those slackers who don't work for a living and take handouts whenever they can at the expense of the working man. Well, now they're wearing suits and ties and calling themselves concerned industry leaders, congressmen, and senators. Congress worked 93 days last season folks. 93 FREAKIN DAYS!!! They're conservative republicans and they're liberal democrats and they are ALL politicians. There are 544 of them in addition to our president and they should all be burned at the stake. I didn't vote republican or democrat. I voted all the incumbents out of office.

[cobra bill]

Originally Posted by bomelia

Well, I was just trying to keep this focussed on the new prez elect. Not Bush. Obama (if he is true to his word) will try to cut defense by 25%. Thats about $200 Billion. Thats a lot of folks jobs out there. And I KNOW some of those voters work out here on the base. I just do not get their thinking.

Steve, how did Bush cause you to lose your job? Or was there no cause & effect?

Mike

I work for the federal government as well, and it would be easy to cut 25% out of the budget, get rid of no bid contracts! they have all but eliminated civil service, and turned everything over to contractors. There are more contractors in the war zone then soldiers! and the average pay for them is
$1020,000 That's insane! in Vietnam we had the highest level of civilian contractors in any war until now and it was only 20% of troop levels, now its 150% and its all no bid no oversight!.

[bomelia]

If they are risking their lives, they ought to get better than 25K a year. $102K sounds about right. Bureaucrats want to make the big DBR and GS15 incomes for pushing paper and checking off the boxes, but love to short change the guys taking the bullets for them.

Same with the aholes in government running education. Teachers should be contracted at high pay. Bereaucrats should recieve low pay... that way there would be less of them.

As far as no bid contracts, I would know nothing about that. We compete for everything we do.

If everything went in house, nothing would get done. Goverment folks are too busy taking courses so they can get promoted. And going on cherry retreats so they can learn to think outside the box. And so on. Its the contractors who do the work. And you know it.

Mike

[cobra bill]

Well maybe ware you are from, but we have always worked our a$$es off for our government trying to put out the best product possible, as it is we have to repair work that the contractors have supposedly done, we QA every piece coming in the door and going out, the contractors only do one in ten, now they do put more equipment out, but at what cost though, they only are supposed to do basic maintenance, we are a depot level maintenance facility, and can take a M1A1 down to the bare hull and rebuild it from the ground up, most of us have kids in the military and the last thing we want is to send them an inferior product.

[TButtrick]

Originally Posted by bomelia

If they are risking their lives, they ought to get better than 25K a year. $102K sounds about right.
Mike

Dude,

It's a volunteer thing. It includes room and board, cool cloths, medical, and free education. It's a good gig. Been there, done that. Unfortunately, we treat them like sh!t when they enter back in civilian life. Happy Vets Day.

[bomelia]

Everything is a "volunteer thing." If it were trully volunteerism, they would get NO compensation. No, they sign up voluntarily for a job that puts their lives at risk. They should get paid a helluva lot more than they do.

The reality is, they are fresh out of school and like everybody, they start at the bottom and move up the "corporate" ladder like most folks. Only in their case, the risk is much higher. And for that, they should recieve just compensation. Not just "3 hots and a cot". You want the best of the best? Pay them. Thats why contractors show up.

Bill is like a lot of government snobs. Thinks nobody works as hard as the governement bureaucrat. When something goes wrong, its the contractors fault. When it goes well, the the bureaucrat's name all over the white papers cause he funded it. There are good government folks and bad ones too. Same for contractors. Don't paint with such a broad brush Bill... it only makes you look like the snobs I am talking about.

Mike (Dude)

[TButtrick]

Volunteerism - the willingness of people to work on behalf of others without being motivated by financial or material gain. Did you serve?