Posted on Jan 29, 2015
Anyone NOT drinking the Kool-Aid on Sequestration? Must we always spend MORE?
6.25K
2
6
1
1
0
Dont get me wrong, I am not a fan of the way this was implemented - by its scope and design, a fail safe, so bad that it was supposed to force Congress to work together??
BUT...I like the concept of the military (and preferably the government as a whole) becoming more efficient and cost effective.
Every article I read leaves me with the impression that the military can never operate with less than the previous year's budget.
I am not a fan of being directed to do MORE WITH LESS...but what I hear is that we cant even do the SAME WITH LESS by implementing some cost saving measures.
The 'kool aid' is that there is no fraud/waste/abuse in the military, at all! There is no useless TDY, there is no one deployed that really doesnt have a job, there are NOT too many GO's or E-9's, we dont have any civilians sitting around with not much to do (protected by a union), no office is creating most of their own work, there is no equipment just sitting in storage, we shouldnt slow down the PCS rate as a cost saving measure...etc etc etc
Do we fire off excess rounds at the range, do we go on a spending spree at the end of an FY....
Are we operating as efficiently as possible?
Thats just the military, dont get me started on Congress and DC.
After all, when we waste the taxpayer's money (IF you feel that we ever do), then arent you wasting my money, and yours...and our children's?
another way of putting it....when certain factions talk about how gay marriage is threat to the institution of marriage, as if rampant divorce and infidelity were not. On the same logic...some people say that sequestration is bad for the economy, as if government corruption, fraud (construction projects in Afghanistan) and being the world's policeman are of no threat to the economy...
what am I missing?
BUT...I like the concept of the military (and preferably the government as a whole) becoming more efficient and cost effective.
Every article I read leaves me with the impression that the military can never operate with less than the previous year's budget.
I am not a fan of being directed to do MORE WITH LESS...but what I hear is that we cant even do the SAME WITH LESS by implementing some cost saving measures.
The 'kool aid' is that there is no fraud/waste/abuse in the military, at all! There is no useless TDY, there is no one deployed that really doesnt have a job, there are NOT too many GO's or E-9's, we dont have any civilians sitting around with not much to do (protected by a union), no office is creating most of their own work, there is no equipment just sitting in storage, we shouldnt slow down the PCS rate as a cost saving measure...etc etc etc
Do we fire off excess rounds at the range, do we go on a spending spree at the end of an FY....
Are we operating as efficiently as possible?
Thats just the military, dont get me started on Congress and DC.
After all, when we waste the taxpayer's money (IF you feel that we ever do), then arent you wasting my money, and yours...and our children's?
another way of putting it....when certain factions talk about how gay marriage is threat to the institution of marriage, as if rampant divorce and infidelity were not. On the same logic...some people say that sequestration is bad for the economy, as if government corruption, fraud (construction projects in Afghanistan) and being the world's policeman are of no threat to the economy...
what am I missing?
Sequestration
Budget
Efficiency
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
0
0
0
Sir my experience in Afghanistan tells me that they certainly is waste in the Army, and at a financially untenable level. Flat screen tvs, printers, laptops, vehicles, projectors, etc. I could go on and on about other equipment that I witnessed being shredded because "it is cheaper to destroy them than to ship them". I'm only a CPT but I can figure out some way where that false choice can be avoided. I'm pretty sure that if the Army sold it to Soldiers they'd find a way to take care of the shipping. Even at a reduced price, the Army will still make some of that money back.
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
I talked to a therapist once. The military is what's called a complex adaptive system . It is when the macro structure consist of several micro structure evolving and forming to react to each other. The PLs, COs, budget analyst, congress, the IRS, and the Chiefs of Staff are their own player with their own agenda and mission. They act in the individual interest rather than the whole. This is common for government or non-profits because we don't follow the corporate stakeholder theory in that our mission is to maximize taxpayers value. Therefore, any decision to save money may not trump the interest of another group.
Even the Kool aid itself was a necessary mechanism to motivate soldiers and maintain accountability and care of equipment. The government in the 1950s did not have the resources to conduct mass inspections and mass inspection was not conductive to good morale. Rather, we needed employees to align themselves with the values of the organization to attain efficiency.
Even the Kool aid itself was a necessary mechanism to motivate soldiers and maintain accountability and care of equipment. The government in the 1950s did not have the resources to conduct mass inspections and mass inspection was not conductive to good morale. Rather, we needed employees to align themselves with the values of the organization to attain efficiency.
0
0
0
You are spot on...I stopped drinking the Kool-Aid years ago...it is unfortunate the Gov. is not worried about efficiency or cost effectiveness at all, they need to line the pockets of those who got them elected.
(0)
(0)
SGT Steven Eugene Kuhn MBA
You know what @PO2 William Allen Crowder - It is getting old the way you comment, is it possible that you ask a question that is not you suggesting that the person you are asking is somehow guilty of what you believe to be a problem, which was not stated...NOT TO MENTION I am a disabled Vet and my comment IN NO WAY suggested what you wrote "Are you throwing us under the bus"
It would do you well to be less confrontational and when asking questions, make no suggestions, I for one am allergic to such actions.
Just a friendly suggestion.
Steady on,
Steven
It would do you well to be less confrontational and when asking questions, make no suggestions, I for one am allergic to such actions.
Just a friendly suggestion.
Steady on,
Steven
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google