Did you realize that this all has changed and that now we're all (the multilateral trading system does this) on a fast track to privatization of most of those kinds of jobs? Unless you live in a short list of poor, officially 'least developed' countries.
Regardless of what level of government you work at, (Federal, state or local) unless your particular area is exempted via rules which are very narrowly defined.
This has been planned for a long time, back to the late 1980s, to be honest. Its been the subject of countless huge gatherings of officials from all around the world, in various places, generally cities in the developing world, and also in Geneva, Switzerland. The two main 'rounds' were Uruguay and Doha.
The idea is that by doing this, costs would fall and large 'efficiency gains' would be realized while developing countries would get a leg up on repaying the illegitimate debts they owe to the big countries. Since most of them have little in the way of industry of their own but an oversupply of highly educated degree holders, its agreed that labor is their most competitive export, and largely also that they should get to export it, somehow. Then it starts to get tricky, though. There are lots of additional questions on wages, and the degree to which countries should be forced to do this if they didnt already volunteer to do it in a binding agreement like the US did. However, we retained limits which are being contested now. The limits restrict the numbers to a tiny fraction of what they will rise to if we lose that case. Which would aso likely affect other countries as well. Its hard to say.
The main point I am trying to make is that long term, everything involving the spending of taxpayer money is increasingly being impacted by international agreements, which take precedence over local, state and federal policies and regulations. Its a completely different set of priorities, which will seem Byzantine and in many ways evil, since they forbid most of the good things that governments could do in the past. Also, privatizing services which people have depended on to make many things affordable which a deregulation of so many things and strict reliance on market forces might well put out of their reach.
Why the hell would someone want a job which doesn't pay for time to time? The whole reason to have a job is to get paid regulary.
Shutdowns are not that frequent and are usually short-lived. Since employees eventually get paid for the time they were furloughed, in the long term, they do not "lose" anything.
It is a commonly held sound financial principle you should have 3-6 months of salary on hand in savings to weather financial hardships. Since shutdowns never last that long, if you practice sound financial principles, you will not notice a thing.
With the economy booming a lot of public servants probably go look for a job elsewhere and the government is left with the people who can't find (fit in) regular jobs. That will have an effect on the efficiency of the government for sure.
Doubtful. Our benefits are (usually) better than those we would receive in the private sector. For example, in addition to my salary (which is lower than what I would make in the private sector, but nonetheless is very generous) I am in a government-funded defined pension benefit program, pay below-average market rates for my health insurance, and get more time off than Jesus Christ (between vacation, personal days, holidays, etc.) over the course of year I work less than 4 days per week on average. Can't get that in the private sector.