Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
In defense of Trump on these cuts is that one method of effective cost cutting is cut everything and bring back the items that missing causes problems. You have to be careful here as things like the EPA are more long term affects and therefore harder to measure.
However coming in and cutting everything at least is a genuine budget cut over "finding efficiencies" that the right normally trots around. The contraction of government services will cut costs and identify what was needed.
|
Sorry dude, there is no credit to be had here. Not buying groceries for a month to see what you missed most is not an effective way to trim your monthly expenses. It's idiotic. It's flat out idiotic.
Quote:
|
So is it the best way to go about these things? No, but the effects of this will be clearly felt which should get a reaction from voters and in turn change the government going forward. And when the next government / house restores funding and scope to some of these agencies the end result will be improved efficiency and lower cost.
|
Have we still not moved beyond the reality here that people as a collective can't outsmart the bombardment of information they receive? Starting and stopping entire government agencies is not cost effective, it is ludicrously expensive and so inefficient as to directly impact the efficiency of other government agencies and institutions.
If the US ever pulls out of this spiral, and I don't think they will, it will take decades to reintroduce the necessary funding and personnel these programs require with potentially an entire generation bearing the brunt of the lack of services.
Quote:
|
The human cost of these changes suck but it won't be all negative.
|
Yes, this is entirely negative. It has no tangible positive impact on US trade imbalances, budget deficits or long term economic productivity.
It's going to lead to hundreds of thousands, millions?, of jobs lost.
The harm of these cuts simply cannot be understated. The entire apparatus of the federal government is being systematically undercut and sabotaged. This is freakin' catastrophic.
from that washington post article,
Quote:
Also missing from the discussion, at least for the moment, are scientists in political positions within the Trump administration. The administration needs to fill 46 science and technology positions that require Senate confirmation. So far Trump has nominated a single person, for the top job at the Food and Drug Administration.
Trump has yet to put forward a name for the top jobs at NASA, NOAA, the White House Council on Environmental Quality or the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy — the latter position known informally as the president’s science adviser.
|
The abject disaster this administration has been is unprecedented.