4 ms·
FTA: >I also understand that government is bloated and there are many places where we could cut spending The problem with this critique (the right-wing rallyi
by nateberkopec 8y ago
FTA:
>I also understand that government is bloated and there are many places where we could cut spending
The problem with this critique (the right-wing rallying cry since at least Reagan) is that no one ever wants to cut any particular program (which Fred acknowledges later in his charter school story). The right in the US, for example, bemoans government spending every year, then doesn't cut any spending, raises military spending, and then cuts taxes. Again, Fred acknowledges this, but doesn't take the next step of doing the unpopular, hard work of deciding where we can size down. I'd like to hear exactly what spending Fred thinks we should cut, otherwise this position is pretty empty.
> If we were to force it to go through the same technological revolution that the private sector is going through, we would see massive efficiencies
Again, this is what the Republican party has been saying for 30 years, but has been unable to deliver. We can say we want "more efficient government" until the cows come home, but there is something in the system that is preventing us from doing so. What is that thing? Let's talk about that. Otherwise, this post is just a rehash of Republican talking points and slogans, without any real proposals.
- BurningFrog 8y agoA lot of people wants to cut a lot of spending!! It is politically impossible because the spending has very strong political power behind it. That's why it exists in the first place.
- ksdale 8y agoA lot of people say they want to cut a lot of spending, but everyone wants to cut different things. Ask half a dozen people what they want to cut and they’ll say things like everything but military spending, or everything but Medicare or Medicaid or SS, and after you tally up the un-cuttables and cut everything else, you’ve still got a budget that’s 95% of the current one.
- sokoloff 8y agoI’m not anti-military by any means, but I’d be more than happy to cut the JSF project (and replace it with something else, so not 100% net savings). The problem as I see it is the same outcome but different mechanisms as you describe. Those who benefit from a project are very willing to spend time, energy, thought, and money to preserve the status quo, while those who are opposed have a very diffuse opposition to most of the specific programs.
- jki275 8y agoThe JSF project is essentially complete. You're advocating dumping billions of dollars of R&D to start over and build something else, when all that's left now is conventional aircraft building -- and oh by the way that aircraft is now being built by our allies (who helped to fund the R&D) as well.