Replies

Cutting 25% does not need the reduction of people’s salaries,...

So you're going to cut 25% of the program, but keep 100% of the bureaucrats that run the program?

...it would need the reduction of 25% of agency spending, and perhaps a 25% reduction in personnel.

2) A 25% reduction in personnel is a 100% reduction for the personnel you fire. They'll be real pleased with you, won't they? So which is better, cutting everybody’s pay by 25% or firing 25%?

Don't kid yourself. You have to cut the bureaucracy hard to cut spending if you're looking to cut spending by 25%, and if you're cutting the bureaucracy will fight tooth and nail. I think a lot of the big mouths posting around here think it will be easy - I guarantee they will be disappointed.

They'll be real pleased with you, won't they? So which is better, cutting everybody’s pay by 25% or firing 25%?

Reality bites even the public sector. You apparently have not dealt with budget cuts in the private sector. People get laid off all of the time, so what?

So they're mad, so what?

I would advocate a 75% reduction in all non-military personnel, and a 25% reduction in the size of the military. I would also legislate a permanent freeze on ALL non-discretionary spending. Let the rationing begin!!!

What, is the government going to get slower and more inefficient? And the downside is...