Comments on: Bush shrinks federal pay raises.

By: Trogg

Trogg — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 00:00:56 +0000

I trust the workers understand that the King’s decision to shrink pay raises is all about patriotism, protecting the homeland, and supporting the troops. That said, they should support the King and be proud to vote Republican again in 2008. We must all sacrifice when we’re at war, correct?

By: shoeless

shoeless — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:26:38 +0000

I do stand corrected. Thanks for that. Yeah, how does money â€˜runâ€™ anywhere? It donâ€™t got no legs.

Comment by StratRat

Money don’t got no wings either. That’s why it has to palletized and flown to Iraq on C-130 transport planes.

By: Blue Stater

Blue Stater — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:11:10 +0000

The expensive areas are by and large in blue cities in blue states. Coincidence? I don’t think so.

By: missmolly

missmolly — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:01:57 +0000

OK — it’s still early and I haven’t had my caffeine yet, and that may be the reason why I’m having difficulty wrapping my head around this one. But I still have a few questions.

1) Aren’t federal workers living in “expensive regions” already getting paid commensurate with the cost of living in their area? If they’re not, that needs to be fixed immediately.

2) Have these “expensive regions” experienced a rise in the cost of living that’s several times higher than the rest of the country? If not, there’s no justification for a 12.5% bump if a worker is already getting paid a salary that fits the local area.

3) Why was the 12.5% bump even considered? Who made that decision?

If a federal worker in San Francisco has always made the same amount of money as a federal worker in Omaha who’s doing the same work, then I’d say it’s about high time the government recognized the differential in local cost of living and adjust pay accordingly.

However, if local cost of living has always been a factor in determining pay, I don’t see the need to give a 12.5% bump to the high-rent workers unless the cost of living has increased that much in their area.

If I was controlling the purse strings, I wouldn’t have cut the raise due to “budget” reasons (our current President’s spending record has destroyed his credibility in that area), I would have cut the raise because, unless there has been a skyrocketing cost of living increase, there’s no justification for it.

Bush should have explained this better. But, considering his track record, that’s asking way too much of him.

By: hendersonn2704

hendersonn2704 — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 12:04:25 +0000

the obvious word here is strike.
Sure Bush has restricted Union rights but you dont need a Union ofr a wildcat walkout. Its not that difficult to organise your workplace in face of what is a below inflation pay rise and so a pay cut??
Strike indefinetley untill you get what was promised, have other Unions and federal workers strike in support of the aims.

By: donmyers

donmyers — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 07:47:22 +0000

The government isn’t running out money; social security by design needs to be adjusted periodically; public employees generally are not awarded large raises as are found in the private sector and the Chinese are not buying Giant Stadium. However, many would like you to believe the sky is falling that you should sell your house now; live in a bomb shelter with your gold and silver that you acquired from selling all of your mutual funds. And if there still is a April 15, 2008 the IRS will be very interested in you paying your fair share, the Capital Gains, via the alternative minimum tax that you received for cashing-in in 2007.

By: Sabyen91

Sabyen91 — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:31:48 +0000

GL, nice Mel Brooks. Extremely appropriate.

By: Sabyen91

Sabyen91 — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 05:31:09 +0000

Well, this is kind of obvious. Bush cutting wages for the working man. I am not shocked.

By: GL2814

GL2814 — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 02:59:31 +0000

Republicans: “All fellow members of the GOP, hear me. Shall we continue to build palace after palace for the rich? Or shall we aspire to a more noble purpose and build decent housing for the poor? How does the the GOP vote?”

Bush, Cheney, and the GOP: “F**K THE POOR!”

** Slightly altered from History of the World, Part I, but you get the point! **

By: tadc

tadc — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 02:03:47 +0000

There was no proposal to increase anybody’s pay by 15%! That’s ridiculous. That is very sloppy reporting, and you should know it. That is absurd on the face of it! Look up “locality pay”. If there is a general 3% pay raise, they will use locality pay to spread the raises around unevenly, so that some areas get less than 3% and some get more. Most (”rest of US”) may only get 2.75% and workers in some of the metropolitan area will get as much as 3.5%.

By: OleHippieChick

OleHippieChick — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 01:24:29 +0000

He walked right.
Through the door.
He walked right through the door.
Hey alright, funkified.
It’s mine.

He wants it all. Every thin dime. He’s taking it, too.

He’s extremely disappointed his Social Security deform didn’t work out. Yet.

By: Ret. Col. Jack Ripper

Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 01:01:02 +0000

That’s modern conservatism for you. Cronies get paid, every body else gets screwed and any talk of raising taxes on the wealthy is “class warfare.”

By: Doc Rock

Doc Rock — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:52:19 +0000

Bohica Bush

By: linda

linda — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:30:50 +0000

gosh, and just who would those majority workers be in those expensive major metropolitan areas….

this is deliberate, just to show how much he despises america.

By: gummitch

gummitch — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:22:59 +0000

But but but . . . the trolls keep telling us that we’re in the middle of a robust economy. Everything is dandy, recession is not just around the corner, the dollar is safe as houses (oops) . . . did someone forget to give all this information to The Deciderer?

By: MiMiCcs

MiMiCcs — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:13:50 +0000

The inflation figures being reported are 1/2 the actual figures.

http://www.shadowstats.com/cgi-bin/sgs?

As a result, GDP growth is overstated, and real wages have been in significant decline. The American working class is being waterboarded and do not even know it. No wonder government has no respect for it’s critters, not only are they sheep, but they are dumb sheep.

At least Bush tried to take care of his people, since they know the real story and he has to count on them to keep the secrets. Not sure anyone should be satisfied with a 3% raise, but hey, if you believe inflation is only 3%, whatever keeps you happy. Baah.

By: Nature Rules

Nature Rules — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:11:56 +0000

Since the Treasury is drained and the credit cards are maxed-out, do you think Republicans will finally go away?

Comment by Above the Clouds â€” November 28, 2007 @ 7:05 pm

Don’t bet on it. Not since they have established their own private army :(

By: Clyde the Ripper

Clyde the Ripper — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:11:37 +0000

“…do you think Republicans will finally go away?”

Above the Clouds,

Only with the business end of the metaphorical cattle prod inserted in their collective rearmost body orifice.

Let’s start prodding!

By: Above the Clouds

Above the Clouds — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:05:44 +0000

Since the Treasury is drained and the credit cards are maxed-out, do you think Republicans will finally go away?

By: StratRat

StratRat — Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:00:50 +0000

You are only partially correct. The US Treasury doesnâ€™t have any money but the money didnâ€™t â€œrunâ€ out. The money was carried out by a bunch of theiving bastards called the bushco.

Comment by Clyde the Ripper

I do stand corrected. Thanks for that. Yeah, how does money ‘run’ anywhere? It don’t got no legs.