|
|
|
|
|
|
by legitster
498 days ago
|
|
|
I'm not against the idea of cutting the government's budget, but this administration is trying to perform surgery with a sledgehammer. Besides, solving the real high level problems are going to be a disaster. There are two ways for them to cut the budget. 1: Cut programs - 2: Increase efficiency 1. Reduce programs. The problem for them is that Red states are overwhelming subsidized by Blue states. Just cutting programs across the board is going to hurt their constituents the most. https://apnews.com/article/north-america-business-local-taxe... 2. Reduce costs. The reason government projects are so expensive is because of their insane review and oversight requirements. And the reason they have these is because of their constant exposure to lawsuits from citizens and NGOs. Cutting costs would involve eliminating review processes and recusing planners - you would effectively need to increase the power of the federal government to make it more efficient. I expect the administration to come back with a smarter list and a more targeted set of grants to cancel. But this whole endeavor is going to be a massive lark for them. |
|
|
Maybe, but in my experience, most of the overhead was there to avoid any kind of passive corruption for low-level employees. Also help avoid pressure, because high-level employees have no reasons to pressure temp worker/low-level employees (if they want to use their access to do a qui pro quo, they can, but they couldn't use a temp like me to do their bidding).
I was a temp in a bureaucracy highly susceptible to corruption though (IRS equivalent), maybe this kind of overhead can be found in bureaucracies without as easy access to money/power as mine had, but in that case, i would argue that it is more habit than external pressure.