• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trump's Second Term

theprestige said:
I think we can actually get more aid to Ukraine, faster. I think we can actually get Russia to collapse and rout, if we send more aid, faster. You're right that "just keep doing what we're doing" doesn't suffice. Let's do more. Faster.
Click to expand...
Why didn't we?

Because, to be honest, the West (meaning both the US and Europe) didn't want Ukraine to win. We didn't want Russia to collapse and route. Why? Because we were worried about the risk of nuclear escalation. That's why we never gave Ukraine enough aid for that to happen. And that's STILL the case. We STILL aren't willing to do that, we are STILL worried about the risk of nuclear escalation, or even direct non-nuclear confrontation. Maybe we should be willing to take that risk, to really arm Ukraine to the teeth and let them take the fight to Russia, but the reality is that we're not. Instead, the path the West chose was attritional warfare, because it weakens Russia at minimal risk to the West, and hey, we're not dying.

There's a Machiavellian cruelty in this approach.
theprestige said:
And territorial gains are a terrible metric, for a weak defender. Attrition over time and space is the play for Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Because that's the only play they have. But it's a really costly one for Ukraine.
theprestige said:
We can and should do a lot more to make that attrition as time-and-space efficient as possible.
Click to expand...
Perhaps we should, but we aren't willing to. And I don't just mean Trump. I mean Biden before him, and all of Europe as well.
 
stanfr said:
Fun fact: Yarvin is an atheist. Which leads to an interesting alliance/struggle between the Christian Nationalists and incel cybertech bros...who would win out?
Click to expand...
Well, like Hitler and Stalin, they'll fight it out over the corpses of those they conspired to kill off first.
 
Andy_Ross said:
It looks like DOGE canceled the Security and Exchange Commission's Westlaw access, because Elon's team saw "Thomson Reuters" and thought it had to do with the news agency.
Click to expand...
Resume said:
My god these folks are stupid. Destructively stupid.
Click to expand...
Ongoing proof that these supposed baby geniuses aren't even as smart as a relatively well-informed adult. "Grope around in the dark and break things." And more proof for why we need ordinary oversight. Not just because policy decisions should be made by small, unelected teams in the dark, but because people make mistakes.

DOGE has sold Elon Musk's and Donald Trump's fan base on the notion that everyone in government is automatically evil and not to be trusted, so no one with any experience or expertise will be allowed to check what's happening. It's as if a teenager walks into the operating room, arrogantly pushes the surgeon aside while accusing him of assault, and then continues the operation using a weed whacker. And the administrator of the hospital is giving a thumbs-up to the family.
 
I've now seen a number of dismissal notices for federal employees. All those that I've seen, or seen references to, state that the employee is being dismissed for "performance" reasons. This is not a layoff or a reduction in force. This is a dismissal allegedly for cause. This means those workers will be unable to collect unemployment, because most state unemployment offices deny benefits to anyone terminated for cause. And it will also make it considerably more difficult for them to find other employment. They are being summarily terminated with no review of performance, no prior notice, and no opportunity to receive normal benefits from a reduction in force. Even in an at-will employment state, such terminations would be legally actionable. The D.C. circuit court has already ruled that the labor unions that represent federal workers lacks standing to challenge the dismissals.

This smacks of deliberate cruelty.
 
JayUtah said:
I've now seen a number of dismissal notices for federal employees. All those that I've seen, or seen references to, state that the employee is being dismissed for "performance" reasons. This is not a layoff or a reduction in force. This is a dismissal allegedly for cause. This means those workers will be unable to collect unemployment, because most state unemployment offices deny benefits to anyone terminated for cause.
Click to expand...


Sorry, but I disagree.

Unfortunately, I have a few years of experience with unemployment, and being dismissed for cause does not automatically mean they'll be denied unemployment benefits.


-
 
Last edited:
JayUtah said:
Ongoing proof that these supposed baby geniuses aren't even as smart as a relatively well-informed adult. "Grope around in the dark and break things." And more proof for why we need ordinary oversight. Not just because policy decisions should be made by small, unelected teams in the dark, but because people make mistakes.

DOGE has sold Elon Musk's and Donald Trump's fan base on the notion that everyone in government is automatically evil and not to be trusted, so no one with any experience or expertise will be allowed to check what's happening. It's as if a teenager walks into the operating room, arrogantly pushes the surgeon aside while accusing him of assault, and then continues the operation using a weed whacker. And the administrator of the hospital is giving a thumbs-up to the family.
Click to expand...
It reminds me of China's Cultural Revolution.

Which means the next step will be a Hundred Flowers. The king and his hand will graciously welcome criticism of their reign, carefully make note of who has made cogent points, and then crush them.
 
JayUtah said:
I've now seen a number of dismissal notices for federal employees. All those that I've seen, or seen references to, state that the employee is being dismissed for "performance" reasons. This is not a layoff or a reduction in force. This is a dismissal allegedly for cause. This means those workers will be unable to collect unemployment, because most state unemployment offices deny benefits to anyone terminated for cause.
Click to expand...
Depends on the cause. For example, in New York, you can get unemployment if you were fired because you didn't meet performance expectations, but you aren't eligible if you were fired because you violated company rules. So under New York rules at least, a federal employee fired because of performance reasons would be eligible.
 
JayUtah said:
I've now seen a number of dismissal notices for federal employees. All those that I've seen, or seen references to, state that the employee is being dismissed for "performance" reasons. This is not a layoff or a reduction in force. This is a dismissal allegedly for cause. This means those workers will be unable to collect unemployment, because most state unemployment offices deny benefits to anyone terminated for cause. And it will also make it considerably more difficult for them to find other employment. They are being summarily terminated with no review of performance, no prior notice, and no opportunity to receive normal benefits from a reduction in force. Even in an at-will employment state, such terminations would be legally actionable. The D.C. circuit court has already ruled that the labor unions that represent federal workers lacks standing to challenge the dismissals.

This smacks of deliberate cruelty.
Click to expand...
Former federal employees receive unemployment benefits from the federal government and not from states' unemployment funds, though the program is administered by the various states. According to this article
www.nbcnews.com

Fired federal workers will likely be eligible for unemployment — which the government will cover

Generally, workers can receive unemployment benefits even when employers claims they were fired for poor performance.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
to be denied unemployment compensation an employee would have to have committed misconduct and not just terminated for poor performance.

A bigger issue is how many of the "probationary" workers who were fired had worked long enough to qualify for unemployment benefits.
 
Last edited:
They're being sacked "for performance" when in actual fact it's DOGE sacking them because they were just following orders. Most likely orders not just by Biden, but previous presidents and administrators.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
Former federal employees receive unemployment benefits from the federal government and not from states' unemployment funds, though the program is administered by the various states. According to this article
www.nbcnews.com

Fired federal workers will likely be eligible for unemployment — which the government will cover

Generally, workers can receive unemployment benefits even when employers claims they were fired for poor performance.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
to be denied unemployment compensation an employee would have to have committed misconduct and not just terminated for poor performance.

A bigger issue is how many of the "probationary" workers who were fired had worked long enough to qualify for unemployment benefits.
Click to expand...


Usually, they would've had to at least worked more than three months, but I'm not sure, because I've never worked less than six months before collecting.

Benefits are usually decided on quarterly earnings for the last year, and the last quarter is usually not part of that equation.


-
 
Last edited:
JayUtah said:
That's encouraging too. Here in Utah we seem to be a little less lenient.
Click to expand...
www.nolo.com

Collecting Unemployment Benefits in Utah

Learn the eligibility requirements for Utah unemployment, the amount and duration of Utah unemployment compensation, & how to file an unemployment claim.
www.nolo.com www.nolo.com

"If you were fired because you lacked the skills to perform the job or simply weren't a good fit, you won't necessarily be barred from receiving benefits. You will, however, be disqualified from receiving benefits for a period of time if your employer had good cause to fire you because you intentionally, willfully, or recklessly committed an act (or failure to act) that harmed your employer's interests. You will face a longer disqualification period if you were fired for committing a crime of dishonesty."

Seems similar.
 
As of the close of the day on February 19, my positive/negative score on the Trump administration stands at -158.

19 February 2025
0: Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth tells military to prepare for an 8% budget cut (Good? Bad? Don't know)
-1: Executive Order: Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s “DOGE” Deregulatory Initiative
-1: Executive Order: Commencing the Reduction of the Federal Bureaucracy
-1: Trump lies that the Russia-Ukraine war "never had to start" [41]
-1: Trump says the money Europe spent on the war is "guaranteed" while the US will get nothing back (one of these is wrong) [41]
-1: Trump lies half the money the US sent to Ukraine war is missing (Zelenskyy says half the amounts never arrived) [41]
-1: U.S. State department cancels subscriptions to The Economist, NY Times, Politico, Bloomberg, AP, and Reuters
-1: Trump: "CONGESTION PRICING IS DEAD. Manhattan, and all of New York, is SAVED. LONG LIVE THE KING!"
-1: White House social media account posts (faked) picture of TIME cover showing Trump as King, including "Long Live The King"

Footnotes:

41. Trump: "Think of it, a modestly successful comedian, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, talked the United States of America into spending $350 Billion Dollars, to go into a War that couldn't be won, that never had to start, but a War that he, without the U.S. and "TRUMP," will never be able to settle.

The United States has spent $200 Billion Dollars more than Europe, and Europe's money is guaranteed, while the United States will get nothing back.

Why didn't Sleepy Joe Biden demand Equalization, in that this War is far more important to Europe than it is to us - We have a big, beautiful Ocean as separation.

On top of this, Zelenskyy admits that half of the money we sent him is "MISSING." He refuses to have Elections, is very low in Ukrainian Polls, and the only thing he was good at was playing Biden "like a fiddle."

A Dictator without Elections, Zelenskyy better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left. In the meantime, we are successfully negotiating an end to the War with Russia, something all admit only "TRUMP," and the Trump Administration, can do.

Biden never tried, Europe has failed to bring Peace, and Zelenskyy probably wants to keep the "gravy train" going.

I love Ukraine, but Zelenskyy has done a terrible job, his Country is shattered, and MILLIONS have unnecessarily died - And so it continues.....
 
Ziggurat said:
…"If you were fired because you lacked the skills to perform the job or simply weren't a good fit, you won't necessarily be barred from receiving benefits. You will, however, be disqualified from receiving benefits for a period of time if your employer had good cause to fire you because you intentionally, willfully, or recklessly committed an act (or failure to act) that harmed your employer's interests.. You will face a longer disqualification period if you were fired for committing a crime of dishonesty."

Seems similar.
Click to expand...
I think I can see where Musk and Trump intend to save some cash by refusing welfare to the newly unemployed they have created. Intentionally too, is my guess.
 
EHocking said:
I think I can see where Musk and Trump intend to save some cash by refusing welfare to the newly unemployed they have created. Intentionally too, is my guess.
Click to expand...
The dismissal notices mentioned above do not appear to include any such claims.
 
Just how much will they "save" by cruelly denying benefits for the few thousand probationers they have sacked for cause? A couple of hundred million? That's a tiny speck in a single drop in the ginormous ocean of US debt. Clearly, the cruelty is the point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom