5 ms·

It's really hard not to wonder if there is a political motivation to break the Federal government so that even the U.S. left would seek to devolve it.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
James_Henry 6y ago
I'm willing to guess that many of the issues in the FDA are not caused by normal left/right politics but by bureaucracy, tradition, and other more behind the scenes issues.
aaronbrethorst 6y ago
This has been an explicit aim of the American right since the Reagan administration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast
- James_Henry 6y ago
  Issues like the one posted don't seem to be consequences of financial or other neglect from the federal government thought. There is definitely something else going on here.
- so33 6y ago
  > The nine most terrifying words in the English language are "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help." - Ronald Reagan > In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. - Ronald Reagan https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan
- roenxi 6y ago
  I wasn't following politics in the Regan administration, but I assumed destroying the government's competence was potentially the right wing's response to the total failure of the Starve the Beast strategy. Starving the Beast as a strategy just led to very high government borrowing, which is even worse for taxpayers - now they theoretically have to pay for government spending, plus a real rate interest.
  - sfj 6y ago
    We're they starving the beast? I hadn't noticed...
- rayiner 6y ago
  Reagan was in office almost 40 years ago. We have had 24 years of Republican Presidents during that time. Have we: 1) Rolled back social security or Medicare? 2) Rolled back the administrative state in any respect? 3) Developed any significant power back to the states? None of that happened. Government spending as a percentage of GDP increased, from 30% to 35%. Just more slowly than in the immediate post-New Deal era. Characterizing attempts to hold the line or make modest reforms as wanting to “break the federal government” is a cute bit of rhetoric, but you’d have to be very gullible to believe it. We’re about to go into an election where 2 of 3 leading Democratic candidates proposed new programs that would take US government spending as a percentage of GDP past that of Sweden. More than half of the economy would be the government, versus a mere third today. By contrast, did any serious Republican candidate propose a corresponding opposite movement? Decreasing total government spending by 15 points to 20% would take us into the 1940s and 1950s (so still post New Deal). No? That should tell you a lot about how much basis your assertion has in reality.
  - lambdasquirrel 6y ago
    Is that so? I recall a strong push to get rid of "ObamaCare." The suggestion here is that the Republicans aren't able to pull back these social programs because even their own constituents would be up in arms. The next best strategy is to so thoroughly break the Federal Government that no one would support it anymore.
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
The FDA is pointlessly obstructing our coronavirus response, everyone knows they're doing this, but there are no serious proposals to do so much as temporarily bench them. If it's an accelerationist strategy, it's not a very good one because we're not accelerating towards devolution.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

James_Henry 6y ago

I'm willing to guess that many of the issues in the FDA are not caused by normal left/right politics but by bureaucracy, tradition, and other more behind the scenes issues.

aaronbrethorst 6y ago

This has been an explicit aim of the American right since the Reagan administration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starve_the_beast

James_Henry 6y ago
Issues like the one posted don't seem to be consequences of financial or other neglect from the federal government thought. There is definitely something else going on here.
so33 6y ago
> The nine most terrifying words in the English language are "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help." - Ronald Reagan > In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. - Ronald Reagan https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan
roenxi 6y ago
I wasn't following politics in the Regan administration, but I assumed destroying the government's competence was potentially the right wing's response to the total failure of the Starve the Beast strategy. Starving the Beast as a strategy just led to very high government borrowing, which is even worse for taxpayers - now they theoretically have to pay for government spending, plus a real rate interest.
- sfj 6y ago
  We're they starving the beast? I hadn't noticed...
rayiner 6y ago
Reagan was in office almost 40 years ago. We have had 24 years of Republican Presidents during that time. Have we: 1) Rolled back social security or Medicare? 2) Rolled back the administrative state in any respect? 3) Developed any significant power back to the states? None of that happened. Government spending as a percentage of GDP increased, from 30% to 35%. Just more slowly than in the immediate post-New Deal era. Characterizing attempts to hold the line or make modest reforms as wanting to “break the federal government” is a cute bit of rhetoric, but you’d have to be very gullible to believe it. We’re about to go into an election where 2 of 3 leading Democratic candidates proposed new programs that would take US government spending as a percentage of GDP past that of Sweden. More than half of the economy would be the government, versus a mere third today. By contrast, did any serious Republican candidate propose a corresponding opposite movement? Decreasing total government spending by 15 points to 20% would take us into the 1940s and 1950s (so still post New Deal). No? That should tell you a lot about how much basis your assertion has in reality.
- lambdasquirrel 6y ago
  Is that so? I recall a strong push to get rid of "ObamaCare." The suggestion here is that the Republicans aren't able to pull back these social programs because even their own constituents would be up in arms. The next best strategy is to so thoroughly break the Federal Government that no one would support it anymore.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

The FDA is pointlessly obstructing our coronavirus response, everyone knows they're doing this, but there are no serious proposals to do so much as temporarily bench them. If it's an accelerationist strategy, it's not a very good one because we're not accelerating towards devolution.