>> Continued From the Previous Page <<
“I have always found this assumption that there is a class of people (who happen to work for us) that are above things that we have faced our whole life,” one conservative observer pointed out.
It’s a valid frustration. In the private sector, people are expected to prove their worth every day. They must work hard, innovate, and justify their positions—or risk being replaced. That’s the nature of a free-market economy. But in government, many employees remain in their roles simply because they “show up.” Performance often takes a back seat to seniority and bureaucratic inertia.
The COVID-19 pandemic further exposed this imbalance. Remote work policies allowed many government employees to work from home, often with little oversight. “Covid took the ‘showing up’ requirement away. Now they just had to stay in their pajamas and turn on the computer,” one observer noted. This shift highlighted a deeper issue—if the government could function with employees working remotely, could it also function with fewer employees overall?
The reality is that no one is entitled to a lifelong job simply because they work for the government. Employment should always be based on performance and necessity. As one conservative put it, “Government employees (federal, state, or local) are not guaranteed employment forever. They shouldn’t be looked at in a different way than my lowly ‘private sector’ boss looks at me. We should all serve at the pleasure of our employer.”
This principle applies everywhere else in the workforce. In the private sector, employees face competition and accountability every day. They must continually learn, adapt, and prove their value—or risk losing their jobs. “The idea is to make yourself unreplaceable,” one commentator noted. That’s how businesses thrive, and it’s how government should operate as well.
Layoffs are never easy, and no one enjoys job uncertainty. But challenges in the workplace often push individuals to grow, develop new skills, and seek better opportunities. “When experiencing work setbacks in my life when I have been released from a job, it hurts. It’s painful and extremely stressful to get a new job. However each time it’s happened (whether I deserved it or not), it’s made me reevaluate my skills, learn new ones, and go to MAKE IT HAPPEN (though not pleasant),” one observer shared.
KICK OUT The Cold and Say Hello to The Handyheater! Warming Any Spot INSTANTLY!
The idea that an entire sector of workers should be shielded from these experiences—while their salaries and benefits are funded by the very taxpayers who lack such protections—is unfair. “The idea that there is a class of people who are on my payroll that are exempt from this kind of stress is offensive to me,” another commentator stated.
In America, no one should be above the realities of the workforce. Success should be earned, and job security should be tied to performance—not bureaucratic longevity. Trump’s latest move challenges a long-standing norm in Washington, and whether you support him or not, it’s a conversation worth having. If the private sector must constantly evolve and adapt, why should the government be any different?
