[untitled]
1 comments
> Transforming existing agencies inside out, might be close to impossible
Our country has a rich history of remaking its federal bureaucracy. The key is there was a mission in mind that was clearly communicated and unwaveringly pursued by someone with authority to act.
DOGE is Musk's fever dream. He pitched it to Trump (not the other way). There has been no mission articulated other than to reduce "waste" (never defined), with an incomptent cadre of remarkably-clueless young men haphazardly darting between federal government buildings in no clear order and having done zero prior homework. There is evidence they're creating more chaos--and thus waste--than they're identifying, and even everything supposedly identified has been slashed so incompetently that it's unlikely we'll realise any savings from it. (I'd love to tally up the government's legal time stolen by this Friday-night email me your job description nonsense.)
DOGE is a power grab. It looked concerning early on, particularly when it showed a whiff of political acumen in prioritising the shutdown of USAID. But it's being pursued so incompetently, now, that I'm now less worried about prosecuting the DOGE bros than I am about containing its cost.
Our country has a rich history of remaking its federal bureaucracy. The key is there was a mission in mind that was clearly communicated and unwaveringly pursued by someone with authority to act.
DOGE is Musk's fever dream. He pitched it to Trump (not the other way). There has been no mission articulated other than to reduce "waste" (never defined), with an incomptent cadre of remarkably-clueless young men haphazardly darting between federal government buildings in no clear order and having done zero prior homework. There is evidence they're creating more chaos--and thus waste--than they're identifying, and even everything supposedly identified has been slashed so incompetently that it's unlikely we'll realise any savings from it. (I'd love to tally up the government's legal time stolen by this Friday-night email me your job description nonsense.)
DOGE is a power grab. It looked concerning early on, particularly when it showed a whiff of political acumen in prioritising the shutdown of USAID. But it's being pursued so incompetently, now, that I'm now less worried about prosecuting the DOGE bros than I am about containing its cost.
Increasing government efficiency is not difficult. It just takes time, and there are no quick victories. And in most cases, you need to spend more money in the short term.
The key actor is the legislative branch. It can set goals and priorities. It can reform regulations and put an end to unnecessary activities.
Situations where people commonly employ lawyers or other professionals to deal with government bureaucracy are a key indicator of inefficiency. When such situations can be identified, the government needs to consider if the professionals are truly necessary. Or can the processes be simplified enough that professional help is no longer necessary in most cases.
The key actor is the legislative branch. It can set goals and priorities. It can reform regulations and put an end to unnecessary activities.
Situations where people commonly employ lawyers or other professionals to deal with government bureaucracy are a key indicator of inefficiency. When such situations can be identified, the government needs to consider if the professionals are truly necessary. Or can the processes be simplified enough that professional help is no longer necessary in most cases.
Might be better to create 2.0 agencies. Say, IRS 2.0, USPS 2.0, NASA 2.0, DOD 2.0, start them from scratch and then eventually shut down the 1.0 agencies.
Transforming existing agencies inside out, might be close to impossible.
The Innovator's Dilemma would likely be a case on why it's really hard to transform existing organization, it's possible, but extremely hard; better to let startups disrupt existing companies.