Thoughts?

[Grantguy]

So correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Senator Rand Paul publish a report that showed BILLIONS, yes that's with a B, Billions of dollars of duplicated spending across all federal agencies with programs that are duplicated and serve to perform the same function? Whatever happened to THAT report???? Oh that's right, it got buried and blown off as right wing conspiracy theory didn't it?!?!?

Here's my take: First off, STOP SENDING OUR MONEY TO EVERYONE ELSE AROUND THE WORLD!!! IF WE CAN'T TAKE CARE OF AMERICA FIRST, THEN WE CAN'T AFFORD TO TAKE CARE OF OTHER COUNTRIES AND THEIR PROBLEMS!!!! Secondly, STOP GIVING FREE HANDOUTS TO ILLEGAL ALIENS ENTERING THIS COUNTRY ILLEGALLY!!! IF WE CAN'T AFFORD TO TAKE CARE OF A HOMELESS VETERAN THAN WE CAN'T AFFORD TO TAKE CARE OF AN ILLEGAL ALIEN!!! Thirdly, SOME OF THESE AGENCIES DUPLICATE WHAT THEY DO IN A LOT OF INSTANCES, FOR EXAMPLE FBI AND ATF TEND TO OVERLAP ALOT...SO WHY DO WE NEED BOTH??? GET RID OF ONE OF THEM!!! OR BOTH ALL THEY DO IS KILL PEOPLE ANYWAY, JUST ASK THE AIRPORT DIRECTOR"S FAMILY FROM LITTLE ROCK, OR THE FAMILIES FROM RUBY RIDGE!

My last position on this topic revolves on the fact that our money is FIAT....it's based on NOTHING absolutely NOTHING but the good faith of the AMERICAN PEOPLE....which essentially makes us all SLAVES to the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!!! and that's why when BRICS comes online fully, THOSE COUNTRIES ARE gonna eat our lunch and WE WILL BE A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY from that point on! Back our currency by something substantial and we MIGHT stand a chance....If you notice Gold and Silver have been on a tare here lately!?!?!? Why do you think that is?????? It's physical, it's real, it's divisible, and they are finite resources....and lastly no country can continue to exist that DOES NOT produce anything of its own....MANUFACTURING has ALL but left AMERICA for CHINA....that's got to come back...come hell or high water! put America back to work and I promise ya this country will come back from the brink! Well that's just my 2 cents! Maybe I'm way off but these all things I see.....


Cheers!

1. We’re not alone as Americans on this planet. As a fellow veteran, I understand that foreign aid, support, and engagement is critical to ensure a safe America and protect democracy. Stating that we should “stop sending money to everyone else around the world” is remarkably short sighted, in my opinion.

2. We can afford and find effective ways to address immigration (a problem under both parties) AND improve care for homeless veterans. It seems misplaced to have these in juxtaposition.

3. The FBI and ATF do much more than “just kill people.” They’re both federal law enforcement agencies; serving to uphold this country’s laws. Based on the previous comments in your post, I would think that you would be supportive of taking care of America and its laws. I agree with you that many federal agencies have overlap with one another however, many times that overlap is intentional and/or could be a result of coordination on authorities and jurisdiction. Again, I think suggesting that we should eliminate one or both is remarkably short sighted.

4. Look at recent manufacturing and employment data. The majority of conservative outlets enjoy pushing this narrative of a “failing economy” for partisan purposes. The numbers tell a different story.

5. “This country will come back from the brink”… the brink of what?

[Bubba]

I think the problem is the way that information is presented in terms of the "money being sent everywhere." For the most part, that's not the case at all. For example, in the case of Ukraine. It's mentioned that $100 million is being sent to the Ukraine. I believe the government says that in order to make things simple for people to understand. Sadly, people assume we're making a cash transfer to Ukraine. That's utterly ridiculous! What they're sending, is old stuff from the 80s, 90s and early 00s to Ukraine that was sitting in storage (and costing money while sitting there!). Instead, they're sending things that are valued at $100 million to Ukraine (bombs, weapons, etc.). Then, $100 million is dispersed among defense companies to rebuild that stock supply AND give us the newest stuff. On top of that, it saves us on storage costs and keeps a rival busy. Honestly, in the words of Mitch McConnell, what's there not to like???

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/2 ... r-00143925

[Grantguy]

Exactly Bubba - I almost included this precise point in my above post. Foreign assistance, especially in the Ukraine example, is grossly misunderstood by the American electorate. The false narratives being pushed around it are pretty abhorrent, in my opinion.

[bloobs]

Exactly Bubba - I almost included this precise point in my above post. Foreign assistance, especially in the Ukraine example, is grossly misunderstood by the American electorate. The false narratives being pushed around it are pretty abhorrent, in my opinion.

It's not about the facts, details or even the blunt reality that sells to the typical American electorate....its how and who tells the story (sadly): https://youtu.be/vOvLFT4v4LQ?t=6214

[twinkc]

So let me count the ways: I started in the military (go Army!), then at NIH where I worked as an epidemiologist in Neurological Disorders & Stroke Institute, and then the Eye Institute, then I worked in budget in the Allergy and Infectious Diseases Institute, then as a writer/editor for the NIH director, then in data analytics for the Heart Lung and Blood Institute, then as budget officer for the Fogarty International Institute. Then I left the government for a job in e-commerce. Then I went back into the government and worked as a budget officer for the Peace Institute, then as director of management in the office of Science in the Dept of Energy, then budget and management at the Energy Information Administration, then I helped set up a new Loan Guarantee Program within the Dept of Energy. Then I left to help set up a new data analytics program in the IG at Dept of Commerce. Then I left to help set up the Affordable Health Care Program (aka "Obama Care") in the Centers for Medicare. Then I went to Industry & Security in Commerce where I got my SES. Then I went to Energy & Efficiency in the Dept of Energy where I subsequently retired.
I write this not to tire any one (it was an invigorating career) but to say that as I worked my way up the career ladder and across government agencies, there were overlapping functions but missions were different even if they appeared from the outside to be the same. Most times, as stated by GrantGuy, the overlap is intentional with reinforced joint program missions by leveraging different expertise and broader perspectives. For example, the Fogarty International and World Health Org; the Bureau of Industry and Security (export control) with the FBI and the counter intelligence communities; national laboratories in the Dept of Energy with research laboratories in the Dept of Defense; and so on and so on. I'm not discounting that there may be more Fed workers not always needed at times. There's always someone not pulling their weight. But the fact remains, most functions in the government are born out of necessity to provide "public good" where the private sector doesn't see a benefit (e.g., ROI) in doing so.

[Bubba]

So let me count the ways: I started in the military (go Army!), then at NIH where I worked as an epidemiologist in Neurological Disorders & Stroke Institute, and then the Eye Institute, then I worked in budget in the Allergy and Infectious Diseases Institute, then as a writer/editor for the NIH director, then in data analytics for the Heart Lung and Blood Institute, then as budget officer for the Fogarty International Institute. Then I left the government for a job in e-commerce. Then I went back into the government and worked as a budget officer for the Peace Institute, then as director of management in the office of Science in the Dept of Energy, then budget and management at the Energy Information Administration, then I helped set up a new Loan Guarantee Program within the Dept of Energy. Then I left to help set up a new data analytics program in the IG at Dept of Commerce. Then I left to help set up the Affordable Health Care Program (aka "Obama Care") in the Centers for Medicare. Then I went to Industry & Security in Commerce where I got my SES. Then I went to Energy & Efficiency in the Dept of Energy where I subsequently retired.
I write this not to tire any one (it was an invigorating career) but to say that as I worked my way up the career ladder and across government agencies, there were overlapping functions but missions were different even if they appeared from the outside to be the same. Most times, as stated by GrantGuy, the overlap is intentional with reinforced joint program missions by leveraging different expertise and broader perspectives. For example, the Fogarty International and World Health Org; the Bureau of Industry and Security (export control) with the FBI and the counter intelligence communities; national laboratories in the Dept of Energy with research laboratories in the Dept of Defense; and so on and so on. I'm not discounting that there may be more Fed workers not always needed at times. There's always someone not pulling their weight. But the fact remains, most functions in the government are born out of necessity to provide "public good" where the private sector doesn't see a benefit (e.g., ROI) in doing so.

In my mind, I think the issue in terms of assuming the government is inefficient is born from the distrust of the government. That is very American in nature. If you look at writings from the late 1700s and early 1800s, people at the frontier (today's Midwest) felt like the government didn't help them (they were probably mostly right back then!). That attitude has stuck and many in the Midwest still think the government is out to get them. The problem with this attitude is that (a) the government is made of people. Sure they're fallacies, but in general, I think people do try their best (there are bad apples everywhere...shockingly even in business!). (b) Given that politicians like to be elected, if a problem is made known well enough to them, usually they will try to address that issue. Sometimes its way too late...way too little. There are many other issues, but those in my mind are the biggest. Coming back to my point, since some people distrust the government from the onset...I don't think I could change their minds in whatever way possible. https://data.oecd.org/gga/trust-in-government.htm

On another note, people keep claiming that the government is bloated and needs to be cut (which is also connected to what you're talking about). Interestingly enough, we have less Federal workers p/capita right now, then any time post WWII (https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many- ... overnment/). In fact, less than 2% of all people working in the US, work for the government (that includes military, politicians, etc.). I saw a report recently that we're overpaid, receive too many benefits and are underworked (courtesy of the usual Heritage group). The reality is that they're depending on a study they committed years ago where they were comparing GS-5s to Walmart employees. Yes, a GS-5 received health benefits, a retirement and a livable wage. But someone working at Walmart was receiving "3rd world pay" for the amount of work they did. In fact, I think the argument should have been to look again at Walmart (and other companies like them) for their labor practices...back then (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart ... aries.html) and how much they were costing the taxpayer. I suspect if that same study was made today, with the new pay of $15 p/hour with benefits that groups that want to cut federal employment would have MUCH less ammo than before.

Ok, I guess I rambled too now. Thanks Twinkc.

[Aitrus]

I think that a lot of the heartache people have with government isn't the people working in the civil service (for the most part), it's the bureaucracy, regulations, and oversight that they don't like. Sure, there are bad apples and politically-driven decision makers at the top, and those are bad enough. But free people also don't like being regulated - especially when their tax dollars are paying for that regulation - when all the regulation does is make things more difficult, inconvenient, or raise prices for no tangible reason. Or the reasons for the regulation are politically motivated, serve to redistribute wealth, or cater to / benefit this or that group of individuals / companies / special interest lobby.

On top of it all, there's a sense of dismay / anger / outrage because the people making and enforcing the regulations aren't answerable to the voting taxpayer. Congress can only make laws, unelected individuals create and enforce regulations (which is where most of the heartache is actually aimed towards). Only the elected officials (Congress and President, and State-level legislators / governors) can be held accountable. In theory, the elected officials will keep the bureaucracy and the people who work in it under control - but they don't. The system is too big for any one elected official - or group of officials - to conduct any meaningful oversight and adjustment (especially when the opposition gets in the way with lawsuits, drawn-out Congressional Inquiries, etc.).

The voter has no recourse except to go to his window and yell "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this any more!" And we all know how effective simply yelling at our elected officials is.

[Bubba]

I think that a lot of the heartache people have with government isn't the people working in the civil service (for the most part), it's the bureaucracy, regulations, and oversight that they don't like. Sure, there are bad apples and politically-driven decision makers at the top, and those are bad enough. But free people also don't like being regulated - especially when their tax dollars are paying for that regulation - when all the regulation does is make things more difficult, inconvenient, or raise prices for no tangible reason. Or the reasons for the regulation are politically motivated, serve to redistribute wealth, or cater to / benefit this or that group of individuals / companies / special interest lobby.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the average bureaucrat doesn't actually create laws, they simply enforce what laws are placed in the system. So, the politicians would need to create new laws (or amend present ones) in order to update the regulations.

Perhaps a few examples would help me understand what you mean? I simply cannot imagine a "cubicle bound weeny" making any regulations that impact my life. Perhaps its the interpretation you mean?

Just inquiring here...

[Aitrus]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the average bureaucrat doesn't actually create laws, they simply enforce what laws are placed in the system. So, the politicians would need to create new laws (or amend present ones) in order to update the regulations.

Perhaps a few examples would help me understand what you mean? I simply cannot imagine a "cubicle bound weeny" making any regulations that impact my life. Perhaps its the interpretation you mean?

Just inquiring here...

Yes, but also no. There's a difference between laws and regulations. Only Congress can make laws. Agencies - the IRS, the EPA, OSHA, etc. - they create regulations.

It's regulations, which are linked to fines / penalties / jail time / increased costs, that affect people the most. It's the people within the bureaucracy of the IRS that complicate how we pay our taxes. It's the EPA and OSHA (and many others) that, while admittedly increase safety in some areas, dramatically increase red tape and costs (which are always passed on to consumers) in far more areas.

Congress creates the laws under which agencies are authorized to operate, then the agencies create the regulations that explain how those laws are executed / enforced. It's also agencies that establish what the penalties are for not following the regulations. Pay too little in taxes and owe the IRS a penalty? That's an IRS regulation, not a law. It's also an IRS regulation that allows you to submit a waiver of said penalty, and it's entirely up to the IRS whether that penalty is reduced and/or waived.