Comments on: Hans Bader on disabled-hiring quotas

By: OBQuiet

OBQuiet — Thu, 26 Sep 2013 04:26:59 +0000

DEM,

I agree with the idea but not your point. In relation to my income, $20,000 is a significant part of my years earnings. From the perspective of the Federal government, with annual ‘income’ of an estimated $2.7 this year (worse if we look at spending) $310M only about 1/100th of one percent. That would be the equivalent of about $11 on $100k NET income(8-9 if you compared with spending). Lunch at Five Guys and closer to my dollar or two than the roof difference in relative terms.

What was it that Everett Dirksen supposedly said: A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you’re talking real money.

I don’t oppose the fact that we spend that much on something. I oppose the fact that we spend ANYTHING on MOST things. If more attention was paid to doing less, seeing less being paid would get our attention.

By: DEM

DEM — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 17:02:02 +0000

OB, I am not sure about that. If a contractor quoted you a price of $20,000 or $40,000 to repair your roof, would you proceed, or try to get a more precise estimate? The saying a “dollar or two” doesn’t really count because both amounts are deminimis.

By: rxc

rxc — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 11:28:34 +0000

Maybe all these employers could start to count everyone who is overweight, wears glasses or hearing aids, has arthritis or back pain, fertility issues, smokes, etc, as disabled, and thereby meet these new quotas. There are also a LOT of disabled vets (like me) who don’t really have any debilitating conditions who could be counted. Think of it as a game – every time some part of the govt declares some new condition to be a disability, your quota is easier to satisfy to another part of the govt.

By: OBQuiet

OBQuiet — Wed, 25 Sep 2013 03:51:14 +0000

While I agree with you in principle, I would point out that simply having a 1-2x range of cost is not that much of an issue. It is often the case with projects and purchases. “A Dollar or two” comes to mind.

Even on TOTAL dollars($310m range), the amount isn’t that great compared to MANY federal projects.

That last bit is the problem I have with it. Why do we let the feds spend so much at ALL?

By: DEM

DEM — Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:10:15 +0000

Consequences? Ha! People work for the government precisely to avoid facing consequences. Look no further than Lois Lerner who, despite being caught red-handed in the IRS scandal, was given a 5 month paid vacation then resigned.

Anyway, Bader ends with this: “OFCCP Director Patricia Shiu rejected that figure, saying the disability hiring rule is expected to cost between $349 million and $659 million.”

She may as well have said “I have no idea how much this will cost.” Think about that estimate — her upper band in almost twice the lower! Only the government would greenlight a major project in the face of that level of uncertainty. Well, I take that back. I think OFCCP is absolutely certain that their estimates are wrong. They just don’t care.