Yup the goal was never to get rid of immigrants, the goal is simply to inflict cruelty upon them. Now watch as conservatives gleefully support this as well as deny how terrible it will be.
Ok. I did find a reference to Chrysler's buyout program, as an example, but I contend there is a substantive difference between a single corporation that basically does a single thing (i.e., produce cars) offering this kind of buyout to restructure its product line and offering buyouts to the entire federal workforce simultaneously. They may be similar in kind but certainly not similar in degree.
Well, the first question always comes to mind with Trump is "Is that even legal?" Also, yes, it exists, but housing 30,000 people, food, water, etc... They aren't criminals. I would wonder if the UN steps in here. Not that they have authority, but this just feels very wrong.
We've been through this - even getting rid of every federal employee would not save enough to eliminate the deficit.
Yes, I have a question...article said:
There are bound to be both logistical and capacity issues with Guantanamo; Hence the obvious next step, which is to build camps across the continental US to handle the overflow and to increase efficiency. Illegals can be moved to such camps by train, eliminating the expense of air travel. They could even save more money by using cattle trucks to move them.
Is it "What the actual fuck?"? I am guessing most of the questions people have will be variations on that one.
www.rawstory.com
“All” is a mischaracterization of what was in that article. She listed that among multiple things that NGOs might do.
`You beat me to it. The headline doesn't match the article. Rawstory is not a good source for news.
Just to be clear, how much of this was apathetic incompetence or are you actively trolling the United States?
I have always enjoyed actively trolling the United States, but in the last few weeks it has become impossible - nothing I can say could possibly be as enraging as the shit now emanating from the Oval Orifice.
To be fair, she seems to be making shit up herself.
What the heck is she on about with this accusation?
I've never worked for government but I have worked from some really big corporations over long periods of time. Generally what happens is that sales are really good so they hire a bunch of people for production who then hire a bunch of more administrators. And then over time those administrators get even more lazy and try to prove how hard they are working so they can get their headcount numbers increased even more. Everything works out well but all the administrators start slacking (because of all the headcount) but still making a lot of money. It should be noted that production headcount is more tied to the actual production but administration is not. Anyway for one reason or another sales will inevitably tank and the CEO starts closing plants and laying off people. When he starts closing the plants and laying off all the excess headcount I guarantee he is not thinking about quality or anything else except survival. Maybe he should be but he isn't. They just keep laying off until the line can't run any longer and then and only then will they start hiring back only what it takes to run again.
Claim uncited. Are you suggesting that 900,000 Federal Bureaucrats are all upper management?
