12 ms·
I hate Trump, but some of this isn't actually that bad sounding. I have some doubts though if such a divisive and hated guy can manage to get stuff through thou
by jernfrost 10y ago
I hate Trump, but some of this isn't actually that bad sounding. I have some doubts though if such a divisive and hated guy can manage to get stuff through though. He has not made himself into a person people want to cooperate with.
For some things though, he makes the problem sound way simpler than it is. E.g. removing existing regulations when introducing an new one and reducing government employees.
We got a right wing government in Norway thinking much along these lines promising removal of red tape, fewer public sector employees etc.
They failed. Reality is just a lot more complicated. Instead they have resorted to stupid tricks to make it look as if they are reducing public sector employees. They more some employees to other organizations which are not technically part of government. They they can make the statistics look pretty. But they are still paying for the services of these people.
The problem with e.g. reducing public sector employees is that every new government has big ambitions they want to happen YESTERDAY. That can only happen by public sector employees making it happen. The more ambitious your changes, the more new bureaucrats you frequently need to hire to get this done.
New ambitions typically also means a lot more rules and regulations have to be added.
I know this problem well from Software development. We want to reduce the number of useless lines of code. Except from users and managers there is a tremendous pressure and incentive for new functionality to be added. That means more lines of code not less.
Laws and regulations will be the same. People want the new stuff. They don't want to hear that you spent all this time removing stuff which doesn't really give anybody anything new, except a nice refactored law book.
Likely you are going to need to hire lots of people to actually start cutting down on regulation. Identifying what can be removed and figuring out how the rephrase things requires actual work, which somebody has to do. And if they are doing that they are not implementing the new policies of the administration.
- _betty_ 10y agoI thing the idea behind the removing existing regulations rule works better for software than it does for laws. It basically boils down to Leave things tidier than when you arrived. No massive refactor projects, just fix up little things when you're in the area. Sure you never end up with a particularly nice codebase but it's not getting worse and it's not costing the business massive amounts to make something prettier for little benefit. Also works well with backlogs, especially for client projects, you want a new feature? what are you willing to drop off the backlog to get it? It's generally well known that most products contain a crap tonne of unused features and removing them reduces technical debt (eg potential bugs, overweight/slow apps). I don't see it as a hard rule to sell in software.