[copo233]

> I would moreover argue that if a government scheme can be sabotaged like this in the first place, the government scheme is itself at fault [...]

This is the weirdest argument. I mean, you seem to be arguing for some kind of government that's not answerable to elected leaders or voters? I mean, how else would you be able to run a program that couldn't be shut down by the leadership of an organization - public or private?

[zozbot234]

Shutting a program down is transparent. What GP said was that ineffective government programs, and red tape more generally, are uniformly due to some sort of devious intentional sabotage by the other side. My argument was a response to that.

[copo233]

Yes, I can read. Your argument is nonsensical.

[dang]

Would you please stop breaking the guidelines so we don't have to ban you again?

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html