|
...for the upcoming presidential election: Clickety[^] 
No, it doesn't belong in the Soapbox, because it's not politics - not really... Just fun... ish... 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
modified 8-Sep-16 11:01am.
|
|
|
|
|
Can you ship a few of them over to Israel? We could really use some slightly less incompetent politicians here. 
Getting competent politicians is beyond even God's power.
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: Getting competent politicians is beyond even God's power.
Competent and politician are mutually exclusive terms.
|
|
|
|
|
So the malicious Goat-Conspiracy started in Texas, 1986!
... such stuff as dreams are made on
|
|
|
|
|
A Xerox company......
|
|
|
|
|
PRAC - group of European Medicines Agency 
|
|
|
|
|
That's a BIIIIG mother of a fish[^]!
I guess that was Carpe Diem (Day of the carp)??? 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
I'd just like a chance to prove that money can't make me happy.
Me, all the time
|
|
|
|
|
I'll see your carp and raise you...well another carp[^].
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
The company I work for did not win the contract re-compete with the DoD, so the new company is going to be trying to negotiate lower salaries and reduction in benefits (if they hold true to the contractor company paradigm).
All of this has to take place before October 1. There are (or were) 63 seats on the contract, and I've already GOTTEN half a dozen headhunters contacting me letting me know that the position I currently hold is available.
The new company currently has nine employees. How can they possibly be eligible to bid if they don't appear to even have an HR department, much less one that has the staff to handle a 600% increase in employee count? They're listed as being "economically disadvantaged". That doesn't sound good at all.
Over the next few weeks, I'm probably going to switch over from my typical cheery, sensitive demeanor, to someone that is more surly, short-tempered, and just plain rude.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
One: sorry for your situation; it's a tough place to be.
Two: as much as you dislike it, consider leaving the contracting environment and taking a 'corporate job', even if its only for a couple of years to give you a chance to review/reflect.
|
|
|
|
|
Good luck with the job search...
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Over the next few weeks, I'm probably going to switch over from my typical cheery, sensitive demeanor, to someone that is more surly, short-tempered, and just plain rude.
Thanks for the warning. Surly JSOP would never have provided one.
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. ~ Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Mullikin wrote: Surly JSOP would never have provided one
See?! This is proof that I've mellowed with age. However, I still have a demonstrated ability to go from zero to assh0le in less time than it takes the latest OS update to disable Windows 10.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: in less time than it takes the latest OS update to disable Windows 10
Heavens to Murgatroyd, Quickdraw! That'ths Fathst!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Having worked on an air force base and intermingled with the government workers (especially some in contracts), logic has nothing to do with this. If you did some investigation of this company, you would likely find a gay, black, female veteran with PSD and war wounds as the CEO/President with the corporate backers behind her. Not criticizing any particular class of people... just saw it happen again and again.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
How in Hell does an "economically disadvantaged" company with only nine employees win a contract with the DoD?
I smell backhanders. Or OBB.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: I smell backhanders. Or OBB.
Oh hush! The current US administration is the most honest and transparent administration in history! They would never...
Damn! I almost made it through that with a straight face.
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. ~ Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
The contract is categorized as LPTA - Lowest Price Technically Acceptable. In other words, if you bid lower than everyone else, you win. Period. The company also scores points according to its typical imaginary disadvantages, such as age, gender, sexual orientation and race of owner, the owner's veteran status, whether or not they're disabled, and the newest kid on the block, economical status.
Like someone else already stated, a gay handicapped veteran minority woman owned business will almost always fare better in the government procurement process than a more capable company with a proven track record of success in meeting contract goals that has staff on-hand.
I think there's a law/regulation that says the incoming company has to offer the incumbent employees the jobs they already have, but there is no law/regulation that says the offer has to be reasonable in terms of pay/benefits.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: The contract is categorized as LPTA - Lowest Price Technically Acceptable. In other words, if you bid lower than everyone else, you win. Period. The company also scores points according to its typical imaginary disadvantages, such as age, gender, sexual orientation and race of owner, the owner's veteran status, whether or not they're disabled, and the newest kid on the block, economical status.
Thank Heaven that there are people who make up rules like that, to help prevent tax money being wasted.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
When you try to please everybody, you end up pleasing nobody. I just wish they would realize that.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
I worked for Dept of Energy for a number of years and had to take some courses in how things are done (and warnings on things not to do).
I was called on to review sets of proposal - which had a number of criteria and they were given points by (at the time) four different people with related science backgrounds. The one with the most points got the contract - not necessarily the lowest bid.
The lowest bid goes more for items that are objective - buying a Jeep, for example.
Now, back to the evaluation procedure: at the time, I was known for being 'incorruptible' - which implies I spoke my mind. I was the odd-man-out on a contract evaluation. They had a favorite picked (HP) and I wouldn't change my vote - they tried to convince me - how they wanted unanimity so it couldn't be appealed - but I wouldn't budge. I didn't get many more tech evaluations after that.
<Annoyed interlude>
But hold on - you blamed the current administration? Such pure BS - the sleaze I described occurred during the Reagan administration. My part of the agency had over $300M to disperse and it went to fund projects in what we now term "red state". If I went on about the previous admin to the current and its corruption it, would embarrass even the Soapbox. Get off the BS-Box and accept that all the politicos and their appointees (except Fiorello LaGuardia) give out appointed positions and the appointees have their own agenda.
</Annoyed interlude>
Same with "close enough for government work" - I learned that that is the result of a court ruling (in favor of a business) and has nothing to do with Federal employee behavior. The incorrectly made items were ruled by the judge to be in "Substantial Compliance" and the Fed had to pay for them. That set a precedent.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Get off the BS-Box and accept that all the politicos and their appointees (except Fiorello LaGuardia) give out appointed positions and the appointees have their own agenda.
I didn't say anything about the current administration, but in the end, the current administration is ultimately responsible because they could very well correct the problem if they really wanted to. It's like being the captain of a ship. No matter who was actually responsible for the ship running aground, the captain is the one ultimately responsible because he's in charge.
I don't care who started it (and that is completely irrelevant). I care that it's still a problem.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
If I read what wasn't there, my apologies.
The problem about being responsible for everything, however, is intractable. In an ideal situation, an organization will need a tree of delegation of duties. As the organization increases in size - well obviously the number of branches increases and the number of leaves.
Ultimately, one relies on a chain of connections that has to make judgments as to what should be passed on and how high. If everything went to the top then it would be pointless chaos. Even one's own body has spinal reflexes so that the brain can spend more time on brain stuff.
So yes - whoever is running the current administration is ultimately responsible (a la Harry Truman) but in a practical sense, how many layers can you manage?
There's the second aspect: the administration, in practical terms, includes more than the executive branch. Look at the stalled/blocked Zika funding legislation. The money's there but the legislative majority won't remove a couple of unrelated 'poison pills' - so the disease continues to spread. Do we blame the chief executive? Do we blame the judicial? Neither of them can have a say, yet - but the crap's still flying. Like the DOE funding of proposals . . . the executive runs the agencies but the spending is voted for (and earmarked for implicitly or explicitly) by the legislative branch - of course we know this as pork.
So - sometimes you're absolutely right at where the buck stops. The US government, however, isn't a ship with a single captain in any real sense.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
No need to defend him - with GOP legislative branch unabashedly touting their desire to make sure nothing gets done in his administration - and doing their best to do nothing - I have no way to judge how he would have been as president.
For now, however, that den of thieves that care nothing for the well-being of the American people, is run by a particular party and the ruinous results of their political goose-stepping has to accept the blame.
Consider this: they're tying defending of Planned Parenthood (citing an expose that was shown to be fraudulent) because they pander to the religious right's views on how others should live their lives. So they'll let the money run out and the virus will spread. So guess what? One can and should lay squarely at their feet the abortions that result from pregnant woman who have been exposed to the Zika virus because these politicians don't care to stop the spread! And, of course, a lifetime of expensive care and rehabilitation for those that are born with microcepahly. Which expense, of course, they also wash their hands of.
I don't care to defend Obama - but I also know where the real blame lies: Bible Pounding hypocrites and their elected officials.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
