#principles #ResigningOnPrinciples #ResigningOnPrinciple #jobs
Many government employees are resigning because their bosses want them to violate their principles.
Such behavior deserves admiration, but not everyone can afford to do it.
Many people so desperately need their jobs they can’t just say, “I quit.”
If the violation of principles is so extreme, it might be better to let the boss fire you without legitimate cause, because you’ll have better standing in court, should you go that route.
If you have a job that is in great demand, then quitting on principle is indeed the right thing to do.
The federal government is undergoing extreme turmoil. Many believe it is totally unnecessary.
People are being fired without going through the necessary process. Those doing the firing are just flying by the seat of their pants, without careful analysis and without regard for the consequences to the agencies they are cutting.
As a result, they are trying to rehire some of those employees after realizing they had made a mistake.
Certainly, everyone wants the government to be as efficient and as cost-effective as possible.
But, everyone also wants a government that works. Despite a lot of anti-government rhetoric, most people in the U.S. depend on their government for something, even if it’s just safety and security in their lives. We don’t live in a nation of hermits.
Frustration with government procedure is common, but few people who think about the issue want to see those services go away.
The principles come in when those doing the firing violate the way the agency(ies) they are cutting are supposed to work.
Many agencies operate independently, without favor to anyone and for the best results for everyone. It seems that those doing the firing want these agencies to be more selective about who they are serving.
If you have a relatively low-level job in these agencies, you may have little choice but to follow orders, even if those orders are coming from someone who may not be entitled to give them.
Or, you can say NO, or even HECK NO, and accept the consequences.
If you consider yourself a good, principled person, this may be difficult. Your principles may indeed be worth more to you than your livelihood.
But, you also must understand that not everyone can feel that way, even if they want to.
So, if you can, stick to your principles. They have served you well throughout your life and career.
If you can’t, you must do what you must to survive.
Will all this have a good result in the end? No one knows. But, for the short term, there will be chaos and personal disruption.
Here’s to hoping everyone lands on his or her feet, no matter what happens.
Peter
Monthly Archives: February 2025
ECONOMY IN PERIL
#economy #government #GovernmentEmployees #tariffs #inflation #eggs
Egg prices are soaring because of the bird-flu spread.
That is likely to affect prices diners will pay in restaurants.
If the market doesn’t bear those higher prices, restaurants could go out of business.
Then, if a number of federal employees lose their jobs, unemployment could go way up.
If those workers do not have paychecks, they won’t spend as much. It could put other stores out of business.
Will those furloughed federal workers find private-sector jobs? Perhaps some will. Perhaps others may have to take jobs that don’t pay as well as their government jobs, or do not have the same benefits they had with the government.
That will affect their spending, which could trickle down to other businesses.
When tariffs are added to the mix, they will raise the cost of many other goods. Most, if not all, of those increased costs will be passed on to consumers.
Much of this economic turmoil is government inflicted. Much of it is unnecessary.
Most people want to see government run as efficiently as possible. Many want to see less government overall.
Almost no one wants to see a broken government – particularly one that was broken deliberately.
The act of breaking government eventually will affect most, if not all, U.S. citizens and residents.
Even if you believe government needs to be overhauled, there are ways to do it that are both legal, humane and proper. They do not involve potential invasions of individual privacy.
Objections to what is going on are largely not objections to efficiency and lowering costs. They are over the manner in which they are being accomplished.
Perhaps some good will come from this turmoil. Perhaps we will be in a better place after the operatives are finished.
But, in the meantime, the economy – and the personal wealth and well-being of many individuals—could be adversely affected.
If you don’t like what’s going on, tell your representatives. Their jobs are on the line if the outcome is not good.
It’s easy to be frustrated, exhausted and demoralized by what is happening.
But, as with most adversity, one has to look for what is good in one’s life, what can’t be taken away and what each person can do to improve his or her own future.
It takes great personal strength to do that during these times.
Here’s hoping that everyone finds that strength and uses it to better his or her own life, and the lives of others.
Things are what they are, but they don’t have to be this way.
Peter
Egg prices are soaring because of the bird-flu spread.
That is likely to affect prices diners will pay in restaurants.
If the market doesn’t bear those higher prices, restaurants could go out of business.
Then, if a number of federal employees lose their jobs, unemployment could go way up.
If those workers do not have paychecks, they won’t spend as much. It could put other stores out of business.
Will those furloughed federal workers find private-sector jobs? Perhaps some will. Perhaps others may have to take jobs that don’t pay as well as their government jobs, or do not have the same benefits they had with the government.
That will affect their spending, which could trickle down to other businesses.
When tariffs are added to the mix, they will raise the cost of many other goods. Most, if not all, of those increased costs will be passed on to consumers.
Much of this economic turmoil is government inflicted. Much of it is unnecessary.
Most people want to see government run as efficiently as possible. Many want to see less government overall.
Almost no one wants to see a broken government – particularly one that was broken deliberately.
The act of breaking government eventually will affect most, if not all, U.S. citizens and residents.
Even if you believe government needs to be overhauled, there are ways to do it that are both legal, humane and proper. They do not involve potential invasions of individual privacy.
Objections to what is going on are largely not objections to efficiency and lowering costs. They are over the manner in which they are being accomplished.
Perhaps some good will come from this turmoil. Perhaps we will be in a better place after the operatives are finished.
But, in the meantime, the economy – and the personal wealth and well-being of many individuals—could be adversely affected.
If you don’t like what’s going on, tell your representatives. Their jobs are on the line if the outcome is not good.
It’s easy to be frustrated, exhausted and demoralized by what is happening.
But, as with most adversity, one has to look for what is good in one’s life, what can’t be taken away and what each person can do to improve his or her own future.
It takes great personal strength to do that during these times.
Here’s hoping that everyone finds that strength and uses it to better his or her own life, and the lives of others.
Things are what they are, but they don’t have to be this way.
Peter
LET CHILDREN BE AS INDEPENDENT AS POSSIBLE
#children #IndependentChildren #SeeSomethingSaySomething #AdultSupervision
A boy, 11, walks to the store alone, about a mile from his home in North Georgia.
A neighbor sees him without an adult and reports his mother to authorities.
The mother is arrested.
The boy was not in danger and was not doing anything wrong.
In decades past, giving children some independence was not only allowed but encouraged.
Those of a certain age remember being dismissed from the house on Saturday or summer mornings and told not to come back until lunchtime.
No parents were watching them. They could, essentially, do what they wanted, with whom they wanted and go wherever their legs could take them for a few hours.
If they got in trouble, they paid for it later. If they got lost, they had to find their way back home.
Today’s climate requires, in many cases, more scrutiny of children. There is much more trouble they could get into today than children could in the past.
More prevalent today are pitfalls of drugs, violence, gangs and even non-custodial parents that could pose a threat to children.
In the North Georgia case, those pitfalls may have been less of a threat.
As discussed last week, it’s difficult to be an independent person today, even as a young adult. It’s difficult to create a life without help.
Does the lack of independence as a child contribute to that phenomenon? That’s a difficult question.
Make no mistake. It’s important for neighbors to look out for each other. If you see something wrong or threatening, say something.
It’s also important that if you see nothing wrong or threatening to mind one’s own business.
Authorities should judge reports of child neglect carefully. Perhaps, if they are called to a scene, they should be inclined to watch the child for a time to see whether there is a problem. If they see no problem, they, too, should drive away.
If they see something that may be amiss, it’s OK to ask the child whether everything is OK.
If the child says yes, and they still suspect something, keep watching.
Children have to learn to navigate life on their own, even at a young age. They also should learn to be aware of their surroundings, know the risks and dangers of certain activities and know what or who would be a threat to their well-being.
Small risks are OK. Skinned knees are not life-threatening. And being encouraged to take small risks can encourage them to take bigger risks as adults. Life is not without risk and parents need to help prevent risk aversion as their kids grow.
The lesson here is to let kids be as independent as possible within their confines. Neighbors should be watchful but not intrusive.
We all benefit when independent children become fully independent adults.
Peter
A boy, 11, walks to the store alone, about a mile from his home in North Georgia.
A neighbor sees him without an adult and reports his mother to authorities.
The mother is arrested.
The boy was not in danger and was not doing anything wrong.
In decades past, giving children some independence was not only allowed but encouraged.
Those of a certain age remember being dismissed from the house on Saturday or summer mornings and told not to come back until lunchtime.
No parents were watching them. They could, essentially, do what they wanted, with whom they wanted and go wherever their legs could take them for a few hours.
If they got in trouble, they paid for it later. If they got lost, they had to find their way back home.
Today’s climate requires, in many cases, more scrutiny of children. There is much more trouble they could get into today than children could in the past.
More prevalent today are pitfalls of drugs, violence, gangs and even non-custodial parents that could pose a threat to children.
In the North Georgia case, those pitfalls may have been less of a threat.
As discussed last week, it’s difficult to be an independent person today, even as a young adult. It’s difficult to create a life without help.
Does the lack of independence as a child contribute to that phenomenon? That’s a difficult question.
Make no mistake. It’s important for neighbors to look out for each other. If you see something wrong or threatening, say something.
It’s also important that if you see nothing wrong or threatening to mind one’s own business.
Authorities should judge reports of child neglect carefully. Perhaps, if they are called to a scene, they should be inclined to watch the child for a time to see whether there is a problem. If they see no problem, they, too, should drive away.
If they see something that may be amiss, it’s OK to ask the child whether everything is OK.
If the child says yes, and they still suspect something, keep watching.
Children have to learn to navigate life on their own, even at a young age. They also should learn to be aware of their surroundings, know the risks and dangers of certain activities and know what or who would be a threat to their well-being.
Small risks are OK. Skinned knees are not life-threatening. And being encouraged to take small risks can encourage them to take bigger risks as adults. Life is not without risk and parents need to help prevent risk aversion as their kids grow.
The lesson here is to let kids be as independent as possible within their confines. Neighbors should be watchful but not intrusive.
We all benefit when independent children become fully independent adults.
Peter
WORLD IS GETTING OLD — LITERALLY
#aging #demographics #BeingYoung #BeingOld #children #families
China, Japan and other countries are seeing their populations age.
The U.S. is also heading in that direction.
How and why is this happening? People are getting old and dying, but fewer young people are having children to make up for it.
There are all kinds of blame for this to go around. China, for example, once had a one-child policy to control overpopulation, as many of its baby girls were sent elsewhere for adoption.
That policy apparently is now backfiring on the Chinese.
In the U.S. and other developed countries, more young people are putting off having children, or even getting married.
The largest percentage of college students in the U.S. is women, implying that women suddenly are more interested in establishing careers than motherhood.
There are reasons for this. First, many marriages do not last, and women do not want to be left with no way to make a living if a marriage fails.
Second, if a marriage survives, or, even, thrives, two incomes are needed to build a decent life.
Even with two incomes, young people are paying a lot more for necessities than their parents or grandparents did.
Housing, no matter where it is, is in short supply and is expensive. Food costs a lot more than it once did. Consider how the price of eggs affected the last presidential election.
So, being a young person in his or her 20s just beginning adulthood is not necessarily an enviable place. These circumstances have older people celebrating that they are old.
The biggest family expense may be children. They need to be fed, clothed, kept healthy and educated. Even in countries in which the government helps considerably with those expenses, it’s still difficult for young people to have and support families.
In countries in which the government declines to provide sufficient help to families, the challenge is much more difficult.
When both parents work, children need to be cared for. Such childcare often goes unsubsidized, so the parents decide whether one of their jobs is worth that expense. If the answer is no, they are likely to put off having children or quit a job and suffer financially.
Longing for past eras, in which partners played specific family roles, will not bring back those old days.
In short, countries are aging because it is difficult to be young today. If governments want their demographics to improve, they must take action to help young families. It’s great to give young people the freedom to create their own lives, but, today, more often than not, they can’t do it without help.
Moms and dads are finding their financial ties to their children last well into adulthood. This may prevent some from living out their elder years the way they would like.
When mom and dad are gone, their children may miss that support.
So, countries will continue to age. They will continue to struggle finding young workers. They’ll continue to see many family units with only one or two people, and no or few children.
If it’s seen as a problem now, time will only make it worse unless some intervention occurs.
Trying to bring back life from decades past is not a solution. Governments will have to adjust policies to make and grow young families.
If they don’t, the old will continue to age and the young will continue to struggle.
Peter
China, Japan and other countries are seeing their populations age.
The U.S. is also heading in that direction.
How and why is this happening? People are getting old and dying, but fewer young people are having children to make up for it.
There are all kinds of blame for this to go around. China, for example, once had a one-child policy to control overpopulation, as many of its baby girls were sent elsewhere for adoption.
That policy apparently is now backfiring on the Chinese.
In the U.S. and other developed countries, more young people are putting off having children, or even getting married.
The largest percentage of college students in the U.S. is women, implying that women suddenly are more interested in establishing careers than motherhood.
There are reasons for this. First, many marriages do not last, and women do not want to be left with no way to make a living if a marriage fails.
Second, if a marriage survives, or, even, thrives, two incomes are needed to build a decent life.
Even with two incomes, young people are paying a lot more for necessities than their parents or grandparents did.
Housing, no matter where it is, is in short supply and is expensive. Food costs a lot more than it once did. Consider how the price of eggs affected the last presidential election.
So, being a young person in his or her 20s just beginning adulthood is not necessarily an enviable place. These circumstances have older people celebrating that they are old.
The biggest family expense may be children. They need to be fed, clothed, kept healthy and educated. Even in countries in which the government helps considerably with those expenses, it’s still difficult for young people to have and support families.
In countries in which the government declines to provide sufficient help to families, the challenge is much more difficult.
When both parents work, children need to be cared for. Such childcare often goes unsubsidized, so the parents decide whether one of their jobs is worth that expense. If the answer is no, they are likely to put off having children or quit a job and suffer financially.
Longing for past eras, in which partners played specific family roles, will not bring back those old days.
In short, countries are aging because it is difficult to be young today. If governments want their demographics to improve, they must take action to help young families. It’s great to give young people the freedom to create their own lives, but, today, more often than not, they can’t do it without help.
Moms and dads are finding their financial ties to their children last well into adulthood. This may prevent some from living out their elder years the way they would like.
When mom and dad are gone, their children may miss that support.
So, countries will continue to age. They will continue to struggle finding young workers. They’ll continue to see many family units with only one or two people, and no or few children.
If it’s seen as a problem now, time will only make it worse unless some intervention occurs.
Trying to bring back life from decades past is not a solution. Governments will have to adjust policies to make and grow young families.
If they don’t, the old will continue to age and the young will continue to struggle.
Peter