4 ms·

There's zero evidence so far that Trump had anything to do with that. Certainly he shouldn't. But of course, we should have a fully-functioning and fully-staff

by Bud 8y ago

There's zero evidence so far that Trump had anything to do with that. Certainly he shouldn't. But of course, we should have a fully-functioning and fully-staffed FAA, too. But we don't, because of Trump intentionally hamstringing it, and because of antics like trying to get his personal pilot named head of FAA when he came into office.

dagoat 8y ago
John Dunkin is the pilot you refer to. Do you think that he should be excluded from the job based on his Trump affiliation - or are there specific things he lacks that would mean he would be unsuitable for the job? It appears that Mr. Dunkin has decades of experience as a pilot and has no previous affiliation with the FAA.
- bdavisx 8y ago
  Decades of non-management experience in the same field qualifies you to run a 30,000 employee agency? I've got decades of non-management software dev experience, perhaps I should be in charge of Microsoft?
  - dagoat 8y ago
    Good point. And I think that is an important consideration. However, to be clear, he does have smaller scale management experience - most likely consistently, but at the very least during the Trump campaign. Perhaps he would be wrong for the job, but certainly there are examples of both experienced and less experienced/inexperienced persons doing awful jobs at the helm of agencies, companies, and even countries. I would also add that being in charge of such a massive organization often means you do not get to make off the cuff or unilateral decisions so easily as you would, say, at a 50 person organization. You do certainly get to steer, but there are many other hands on the wheel. As for you being CEO of MS, Satya is doing a decent enough job + I know nothing of your background and you come off as under confident in your ability to do the job. So I'll go with no :p
- TheLoneAdmin 8y ago
  He lacks any kind of management experience.
  - jki275 8y ago
    Claiming an airline pilot lacks "any kind of management experience" displays a significant lack of understanding of the job of an airline pilot.
    - Bud 8y ago
      No, it doesn't. Your post does display a great facility for redefining what "management" means, in bad faith, though.
      - jki275 8y ago
        That's an odd assertion. This particular guy may or may not be the guy to run the FAA, I have no idea on that. But I do know that he runs an airline for a massive multi-billion dollar corporation with multiple aircraft and crews. Claiming he has no management experience is simply false. Even someone who is not in that kind of position, but a major airline pilot, has significant management experience simply by virtue of the position. They're not like fighter pilots alone and unafraid up there flying around for fun.
gpm 8y ago
> Certainly he shouldn't. Don't think I agree with this. The president shouldn't have to be involved. But if the FAA is acting in a bone headed manner, the president, as the head of the executive, is the check & balance that can get involved and fix the problem. Likewise the president is the one ultimately responsible to the people for the FAA's actions. We don't know what extent Trump influenced the decision, but he was certainly involved, he made the announcement after all [0]. [0] Announcement https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs3NlxY5-iU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs3NlxY5-iU
- dTal 8y ago
  You've misused "checks and balances" a bit there, which generally refers to the rock-paper-scissors way in which the three branches of government (executive, legislative, judicial) are prevented from amassing too much power. As the FAA is in the executive branch and the president is directly in charge, it's not really a "check and balance" in that sense.
  - gpm 8y ago
    Checks and balances is a more general term than something describing the 3 branch system. A classic example within one branch is requiring both the senate and house to pass a bill. To the extent that you think the FAA is actually serving as an extension of the will of the president you're right that I misused it, but I don't think that describes reality.

by Bud 8y ago

dagoat 8y ago

John Dunkin is the pilot you refer to. Do you think that he should be excluded from the job based on his Trump affiliation - or are there specific things he lacks that would mean he would be unsuitable for the job? It appears that Mr. Dunkin has decades of experience as a pilot and has no previous affiliation with the FAA.

bdavisx 8y ago
Decades of non-management experience in the same field qualifies you to run a 30,000 employee agency? I've got decades of non-management software dev experience, perhaps I should be in charge of Microsoft?
- dagoat 8y ago
  Good point. And I think that is an important consideration. However, to be clear, he does have smaller scale management experience - most likely consistently, but at the very least during the Trump campaign. Perhaps he would be wrong for the job, but certainly there are examples of both experienced and less experienced/inexperienced persons doing awful jobs at the helm of agencies, companies, and even countries. I would also add that being in charge of such a massive organization often means you do not get to make off the cuff or unilateral decisions so easily as you would, say, at a 50 person organization. You do certainly get to steer, but there are many other hands on the wheel. As for you being CEO of MS, Satya is doing a decent enough job + I know nothing of your background and you come off as under confident in your ability to do the job. So I'll go with no :p
TheLoneAdmin 8y ago
He lacks any kind of management experience.
- jki275 8y ago
  Claiming an airline pilot lacks "any kind of management experience" displays a significant lack of understanding of the job of an airline pilot.
  - Bud 8y ago
    No, it doesn't. Your post does display a great facility for redefining what "management" means, in bad faith, though.
    - jki275 8y ago
      That's an odd assertion. This particular guy may or may not be the guy to run the FAA, I have no idea on that. But I do know that he runs an airline for a massive multi-billion dollar corporation with multiple aircraft and crews. Claiming he has no management experience is simply false. Even someone who is not in that kind of position, but a major airline pilot, has significant management experience simply by virtue of the position. They're not like fighter pilots alone and unafraid up there flying around for fun.

gpm 8y ago

> Certainly he shouldn't. Don't think I agree with this. The president shouldn't have to be involved. But if the FAA is acting in a bone headed manner, the president, as the head of the executive, is the check & balance that can get involved and fix the problem. Likewise the president is the one ultimately responsible to the people for the FAA's actions. We don't know what extent Trump influenced the decision, but he was certainly involved, he made the announcement after all [0]. [0] Announcement https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs3NlxY5-iU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs3NlxY5-iU

dTal 8y ago
You've misused "checks and balances" a bit there, which generally refers to the rock-paper-scissors way in which the three branches of government (executive, legislative, judicial) are prevented from amassing too much power. As the FAA is in the executive branch and the president is directly in charge, it's not really a "check and balance" in that sense.
- gpm 8y ago
  Checks and balances is a more general term than something describing the 3 branch system. A classic example within one branch is requiring both the senate and house to pass a bill. To the extent that you think the FAA is actually serving as an extension of the will of the president you're right that I misused it, but I don't think that describes reality.