I look at it this way, the media and left will find any reason to blame Trumps admin for anything negative. Refer cure for cancer example.

Are there people who will be negatively impacted and who don't deserve to be fired, i'm sure there are/will be.  Wil mistakes also happen with across the board firing, of course. Look the the recent nuclear something division. They fired 400 people, only to bring them back a few days later after they realized their mistake.

With the recent DLNR firings of noobs, the alternative is to fire the more XP people with pensions/retirement?  Of the 2, the noobs are the lesser of 2 evils.

No one is blaming all the prior mis-management and slackers.  Blame all the managers for adding stuff to buy at the end of the year so their budget isn't reduced later.

Also, it would take far to long to audit ever single employee to see if their position is needed.

Rip the bandaid off and rebuild is the way I look at it.

A person I know works DOD and transferred to another department. The new department isn't ready for her as they're behind for X reason. And her current department already planned her exit date. So now she was told to just go home and get paid her normal salary and wait till the new department is ready for her.  They have no ETA and told her it could be a few days to months.  Guess what, it's been 3 months already. She just came back from a 3 week vacay while on our tax dollars still paying her salary.  She also said they had another transfer and the guy was cruising at home for 6 months until the department was ready for him.  She's single and rents a big home, IDK what she does but I find it hard to believe that she would spend her monthly income on a place this big.  Maybe she also gets COLA or some thing equal to it?

A guy I know was air traffic in X state.  He is also part of the national guard in his home state.  When he has drill, he gets sent to work at his home states ATC as there's a shortage, this way the feds pay for his airfare and lodging.  So he doesn't have to pay out of pocket to go back for drill.  IDK why he hasn't transferred to his new homes state Guard.  Basically, his supervisor found a way for him to save from paying out of pocket for drill.

The guard and reserve have fewer billets than actie units.  The billets are even fewer as you rise in the ranks.  My first section chief in the Air Force was a captain when he got out and joined the Air Force Reserves.  His billet was a Communications/Computer unit commander.  Since there was no vacancy in Utah where he moved to, he was flown back to OK every month.  But, instead of the standard 3 day training, he'd come back around Monday or Tuesday to give himself time to make it in case of delays, catch up on paperwork, and plan the training for his unit that weekend.  It usually turned into a 6-7 day trip home on Uncle Sam's dime.

After a few years, a billet became vacant in Utah, and he transferred there.  It's difficult to play musical chairs when there are so few chairs most times with people already in the one you need. 

I was unaware the US government has a duty to become a charity organization for other countries.

I recall a story about a representative in the late 1800s visiting his constituents to talk about the things he wants to do to help the country and, of course, win their support in his upcoming reelection.

One wealthy rancher had a chance to speak to his representative alone.  One of the bills the representative recently voted for was for flood recovery assistance for people in Ohio.  The rancher explained:  Nowhere in the Constitution does it say the federal government has the duty, nor the authority, to spend taxes collected from all the states on charitable programs.  Churches, philanthropists and volunteers have been providing charitable services for the unfortunate forever.  By the government stepping in, all those groups and individuals will expect the government to continue that service in every disaster or unfortunate situation where people can't do for themselves.  As such, people will feel less of a need to donate or volunteer since the government is doing the job.

Taking my taxes to perform relief work is not charity -- it is theft.  It's theft of our taxes to do something the Constitution does not empower the government to do.

There are no "legitimate charitable expenditures" when I as an individual tax payer and voter was never asked if I want my taxes to go to that charity.  Now the government is giving my taxes to groups and relief efforts I may not agree with, and in so doing will demand even more taxes to do all the things they should be doing according to the Constitution.

Spare me the emotional arguments that we are our brothers' keepers or that but for the grace of God go I.  It's not the government's role -- a role they not only stole from actual charities, but also discourages charities from continuing to do.  Why pay taxes into a "charitable" government as well as donate to charities?  I'd be paying double for the same charitable work, at least half of which supports a bloated, inefficient staff of paid employees rather than performing with the aid of unpaid volunteers.

Legal duty? Not at all. Moral duty? Thats a matter of opinion.
Then there is the strategic question where we give money to a "charitable cause" in order to garner some benefit from another country which gives us a strategic advantage and that opens up a lot of doors in terms of what charitable causes we could undertake.

For charitable work within the country I would argue it is constitutional for the feds to tax and spend that tax to help a certain city or state after a natural disaster as that could easily be described as falling under the general welfare clause. For money to be spent on foreign charitable causes you can at least argue that the constitution doesn't say the government is allowed to do that.

Ultimately it is for the voters to decide by who they elect as those representatives then decide how to spend money. We could certainly go the route of zero foreign aid. Famine happening in Africa? Who cares. Genocide happening in Asia? Not our problem. I don't think most Americans are fine sitting back and letting that happen without any intervention.

Legal duty? Not at all. Moral duty? Thats a matter of opinion.
Then there is the strategic question where we give money to a "charitable cause" in order to garner some benefit from another country which gives us a strategic advantage and that opens up a lot of doors in terms of what charitable causes we could undertake.

For charitable work within the country I would argue it is constitutional for the feds to tax and spend that tax to help a certain city or state after a natural disaster as that could easily be described as falling under the general welfare clause. For money to be spent on foreign charitable causes you can at least argue that the constitution doesn't say the government is allowed to do that.

Ultimately it is for the voters to decide by who they elect as those representatives then decide how to spend money. We could certainly go the route of zero foreign aid. Famine happening in Africa? Who cares. Genocide happening in Asia? Not our problem. I don't think most Americans are fine sitting back and letting that happen without any intervention.

Leave it to you to defend fraud, waste and abuse in this massive government spending. 

We don't use that money for our own people who need it.  Why would you think that money is making it to the foreign people and not into the pockets of their government leaders?

Legal duty? Not at all. Moral duty? Thats a matter of opinion.
Then there is the strategic question where we give money to a "charitable cause" in order to garner some benefit from another country which gives us a strategic advantage and that opens up a lot of doors in terms of what charitable causes we could undertake.

For charitable work within the country I would argue it is constitutional for the feds to tax and spend that tax to help a certain city or state after a natural disaster as that could easily be described as falling under the general welfare clause. For money to be spent on foreign charitable causes you can at least argue that the constitution doesn't say the government is allowed to do that.

Ultimately it is for the voters to decide by who they elect as those representatives then decide how to spend money. We could certainly go the route of zero foreign aid. Famine happening in Africa? Who cares. Genocide happening in Asia? Not our problem. I don't think most Americans are fine sitting back and letting that happen without any intervention.

The government is not intended to be a charity.  It never was and never will be.  Treating the treasury like a never ending stream of cash for anything and everything is what has brought us to this point.

The government should not be a charity.  I do not want my money wasted on a specific program that my representative votes for along Democrat party lines (the norm).  I don't care how many members of Congress vote to spend that money.

When you give your own money to help others, that's called charity. 
When you give other people's money to help others, that's called theft.

Elon posted about the choices we have as US citizens. 
Would you rather have the government send a check/bank deposit to every voter
    in the amount of $5,000, or
would you rather continue funding gender studies in Pakistan?

Legal duty? Not at all. Moral duty? Thats a matter of opinion.
Then there is the strategic question where we give money to a "charitable cause" in order to garner some benefit from another country which gives us a strategic advantage and that opens up a lot of doors in terms of what charitable causes we could undertake.

For charitable work within the country I would argue it is constitutional for the feds to tax and spend that tax to help a certain city or state after a natural disaster as that could easily be described as falling under the general welfare clause. For money to be spent on foreign charitable causes you can at least argue that the constitution doesn't say the government is allowed to do that.

Ultimately it is for the voters to decide by who they elect as those representatives then decide how to spend money. We could certainly go the route of zero foreign aid. Famine happening in Africa? Who cares. Genocide happening in Asia? Not our problem. I don't think most Americans are fine sitting back and letting that happen without any intervention.

individuals, like yourself, have always had the option to send your check for thousands to Angelina Jolie and her charities.  There's countless TV ads featuring starving children in Africa, with a toll-free number for making your donation with your credit card.  So easy.   have you?  you really want the US Govt to be the middle man?  Chuck Schumer deciding where to spend your donation?  I sure-as-shit don't.

Ultimately it is for the voters to decide by who they elect as those representatives then decide how to spend money. We could certainly go the route of zero foreign aid. Famine happening in Africa? Who cares. Genocide happening in Asia? Not our problem. I don't think most Americans are fine sitting back and letting that happen without any intervention.

I could give two shits about other countries and their suffering when our own people are suffering. And I say that both as an American and a Kanaka 'Ōiwi.

Before we sent money blindly overseas, why don't these countries own leaders help their people more? I mean, I don't expect their presidents to live in a shithole shack, but I've seen the different African countries leaders homes and all the lavish things. I have seen 1 Easter Euro leader, I 4got what country, but it's a small one and he has a small Mr. Bean type car.

Mr. Beast on Youtube does things for other countries himself, instead of jsut throwing money because I'm sure he's aware of the fraud inolved as 1 reason.  He builds wells for water in Africa for villages that have to walk 5 miles to get it. Why doesn't their own gov do this?  Corruption, plain and simple.  He even critizied health care insurance for not covering prosthetic legs in a recent video in the USA.

People enter politics for a myriad of reasons. 

But every one of them claim they want to help and serve the people.

Then 4 years later they run for re-election and again the stupid people put them in office.

Not realizing that these politicians has increased their wealth 10 fold on a 5 figure salary.

While the people they serve get poorer and poorer and get taxed up their wazoo.

Just ask the Honolulu City Council members.  They know.

HI DLNR complaining about being fired.  I mean, they claim that they do a lot, but how much is really needed or cannot be done by the remaining workers?  It's not like we have a big National Park like Yellow Stone that gets tons of visitors a year.

I see many people illegally fishing near walls  Waikiki and DLNR is usually never around at night.

Trump to inspect Fort Knox.

Will they do a live stream of the event?
I hope it does not end like Geraldo Riveras expose on Al Capones vault.
It could spell disaster for the US Dollar and the financial system if an audit shows
the cup board is bare or we really don't own the gold that is there.

The left/media is saying that not all those millions of people are getting benefits. We know that 12 people who are 150 years old are and the checks have been getting cashed.  This alone is millions in wasted money/fraud assuming that each of the 12 died at age 100, just to make the numbers easier to estimate.

Something about an old system that doesnt' update cuase it would cost about $3million to update the living status.

That's why I was asking how many of these millions are getting benefits.  Even if it's only a fraction, use my example of the 12 above costing millions over 50 years of fraudulent check cashing.

Trump to inspect Fort Knox.

Will they do a live stream of the event?
I hope it does not end like Geraldo Riveras expose on Al Capones vault.
It could spell disaster for the US Dollar and the financial system if an audit shows
the cup board is bare or we really don't own the gold that is there.

I always thought Ft. Knox was in Kentucky, surrounded by the armor school.  But then in Die Hard w/a Vengeance, it's in NYC. lol. "why the hell you keep calling me Jesus? Do I look Puerto Rican to you?".

focus
that was not fort know in die hard with a vengeance
that was the federal reserve bank of new york...

I always thought Ft. Knox was in Kentucky, surrounded by the armor school.  But then in Die Hard w/a Vengeance, it's in NYC. lol. "why the hell you keep calling me Jesus? Do I look Puerto Rican to you?".

focus
that was not fort know in die hard with a vengeance
that was the federal reserve bank of new york...

German guy said something like "german german german...fort knox"

But u are right. FEd reserve as Suh Suh Suh simone said.

I know some non-profits who's grants are in limbo now. Some even doing a current activity and were told by the state that they most likely would get paid, but unknown when, and IF they even still will get paid.

I guess fed grants use the state as middlemen.  Makes sense as each state knows it's own issues.

focus
that was not fort know in die hard with a vengeance
that was the federal reserve bank of new york...

Then former is where they are pretending to keep the gold they stole.
The latter is where they facilitate the theft of literally everything else.

my "brother" was at the NY Fed on 9/11
he stayed there the first night because he would have to walk to his hotel
he told me "there's more gold here than in fort knox, this is the most heavily built building in NYC"

Then former is where they are pretending to keep the gold they stole.
The latter is where they facilitate the theft of literally everything else.

my "brother" was at the NY Fed on 9/11
he stayed there the first night because he would have to walk to his hotel
he told me "there's more gold here than in fort knox, this is the most heavily built building in NYC"

If I'm not mistaken, Fort Knox is the repository for a large portion of the United States' official gold reserves. 

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is where other countries deposit their gold for safe keeping as part of The Federal Reserve's "financial stability objectives"

my "brother" was at the NY Fed on 9/11
he stayed there the first night because he would have to walk to his hotel
he told me "there's more gold here than in fort knox, this is the most heavily built building in NYC"

Is this the bldg with no windows?

If I'm not mistaken, Fort Knox is the repository for a large portion of the United States' official gold reserves. 

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is where other countries deposit their gold for safe keeping as part of The Federal Reserve's "financial stability objectives"

What if they're playing 2 card monte with the cold? Moving it form 1 place to the other for inspections? I mean, Superman and Clark Kent were never in the same place.  Musk live stream Knox, Trump live stream german german fort knox.