Linked to this Kalshi question:
If there are more than 250000 federal employees no longer working relative to the January 2025 employee count before Jan 2026, then the market resolves to Yes. Outcome verified from FRED.
Note the resolution criteria—what matters is the change in the count of federal employees, not whether we can confirm Trump and/or Elon directly fired them. For reference, the specific chart Kalshi links to appears to be this one.
1,000I'm confused why this market is trending so high while the chart is showing that they're not even quite halfway to 250k with 2 months to go. Sure, there's probably delay, and sure the shutdown might bring a glut. But double the YTD, after DOGE has already basically given up the ghost? What do you all see that I don't?
@Stralor About 150k employees took a buyout at the start of the year, and their last day was september 30, but this has not shown up in data yet because of the shutdown https://www.npr.org/2025/09/30/nx-s1-5545715/federal-employees-fork-deferred-resignation-trump
@brod it’s not certain at all that none of the 154k have shown up in the numbers. For all we know, maybe half of them are already baked in.
@MachiNi No it is fairly certain that if not all, the vast majority will not have shown up on the FRED numbers yet. They’re on the federal payrolls due to the nature of the buyout deal. What’s more uncertain is whether they’ll all be off immediately in the next data release or whether it’ll take a few releases to clear.
@bens I really don’t think it’s that clear — I could dig up the article that made me doubt it but I won’t. Different agencies report numbers differently, so apparently some could have been dropped from the payroll before September. Don’t quote me on that. I might be wrong
@Robincvgr what makes it not wild is if it really was the target, which it seems it was. If they’re getting close, which they are, we don’t know how close it’ll be until the end. So it has to be a coin toss this late in the game.
@MachiNi I think that's evidence for a high probability, not 50/50. If I have a goal to make 120,000 widgets in a year, and I've made 10,000 widgets a month for 10 months of that year, I think that you would think it's more likely than not that I get to 120,000
(This is arguendo, I don't have a take on whether it really was the target or not.)
@Robincvgr paradoxically I think it’s better evidence earlier in the process, because it’s only later that falling short of your target in any given month can make you miss it altogether. I think of it like aiming to run a PB or WR in a marathon. Being a few seconds off target pace in the early miles means nothing. But if you’re still on a razor thin margin close to the end it’s far from guaranteed you’ll make it. And this is exactly what we’re seeing here. If you look at the data we have, it really looks like it’s going to be close and we won’t know until the very end. The last month could decide whether it’s 245k or 255k.
@Robincvgr but they didn’t, so far they did 10k a month, which is half the goal. What everyone is expecting is the firing during sept and oct.
@MindBenderMads correct, and there’s a huge uncertainty about how many of the people who took the buyout are still on the payroll or not. And again, if it’s close, how many extras they fire during the shutdown might decide the outcome.
@Robincvgr at this point it's pretty clear that about 250,000 federal employees have been cut, I think this market is mostly trading on how many months it takes for that data to show up in FRED, especially given the data reporting uncertainties with the shutdown. The administration does not care about the explicit month that the DRP recipients trigger in FRED, for example, just us degenerate gamblers care about that.
https://www.newsweek.com/jd-vance-says-deeper-cuts-possible-government-shutdown-10867289
VP Vance. Deeper cuts as the shutdown continues
@brianwang Vance is the biggest BS artist in the administration. Remember the cats and dogs thing?
I am curious about the logic of these RIFs though, if you have some insight on what's going on. I don't think the shutdown gives them any power to cut workers that they wouldn't otherwise already have, so is the reasoning here that the shutdown is giving them a way to limit backlash for cuts they already wanted to do?
@jb456 shutdown's structure enables seamless execution amid reduced operations. OPM guidance explicitly allows RIF-related work to continue without lapses, exempting HR and administrative staff handling these processes from furloughs. This means paperwork, notifications, and planning aren't halted by the lack of funding, unlike routine operations. In a normal environment, full staffing might slow things down with more oversight or union challenges, but the shutdown's chaos reduces active resistance—furloughed workers often can't access systems to check emails or respond promptly. The White House prepped agencies with RIF plans before the shutdown hit, streamlining rollout. RIFs used to pressure Democrats' in shutdown talks versus Democrats using undelivered services from shutdown to try to shift public opinion. Republican base and some independents support less government. Administration is moving around tariff money and impounded funds to pay for what they want to fund (military salaries). Shutdown primarily halts non-essential discretionary spending (annual appropriations, 30% of budget), while mandatory spending (70%, entitlements) and "excepted" activities (protecting life/property) continue. About 900,000 federal workers are furloughed, 700,000 work unpaid (backpay guaranteed post-shutdown). States face indirect hits via delayed grants. Administration has reprogrammed limited funds from existing sources—primarily unobligated balances and tariff revenues—to sustain critical programs amid the funding lapse. These actions prioritize essentials like food aid and military operations.
@MachiNi You're right. I'm so sorry. Allow me to correct myself. To our shame, the Hon. JD Vance, Vice President of the United States, is the biggest BS artist in the administration.
@brianwang I think the guidance you explained means that they have the same ability to RIF workers during the shutdown that they would otherwise... the HR functions associated with RIFs are protected from the shutdown. I don't think the shutdown gives any additional ability to fire workers.
The idea that the shutdown's chaos makes it more difficult to resist is interesting but I'm not sure I buy it. The unions that represent government employees aren't themselves part of the government and so they aren't shut down. I feel like if federal employees aren't allowed to check their work email that may actually make it harder to lay them off? Because you would need to find a different way to give them notice.
So I feel like associating RIFs with the shutdown is more of a political strategy to shift blame and turn the screws on Dem senators than an actual causal connection. For sure, that could still mean more layoffs than otherwise would have occurred though.