"aemeijers" wrote in message
On 8/14/2011 8:27 PM, Gordon Shumway wrote:
(snip)

First, by eliminating the cumbersome bureaucratic red tape and the
redundant layers of supervision would streamline the task. Fewer
employees and restrictions equal less cost.

Second, by eliminating the cumbersome bureaucratic red tape and the
redundant layers of supervision would streamline the task. Fewer
employees and committees to get approval from equals faster completion
time.

Third, by eliminating the cumbersome bureaucratic red tape and the
redundant layers of supervision would streamline the task. We all are
aware that the congress critters (all of them) would have trouble
finding their ass with both hands. Therefore, without their meddling,
the finished product could only be more accurate.

In closing, if I am elected president...

That's three bulleted list items that say the same thing. "First (second
and third) by eliminating the cumbersome bureaucratic red tape and the
redundant layers of supervision would streamline the task." Such a telling
error to make when discussing redundancy. It's a clue that private
citizens can be just as redundant as Federal employees.

stuff snipped

In most cases, work has been
contracted out so politicians could get a sound bite that they 'reduced'
the number of government workers. They lied. All they did is sub the
work out. If I was benign dictator, number of employees would be defined
as the number of warm bodies in the building.

Yessir. I've been involved in lots of government contracting (lots of no
bid, special circumstance stuff, too) and I've never seen it save the
buckets of money people claim it will. Worse, still, there's just another
layer added to the process that often works out to confuse and delay the
work being done. Contracting out software is one of the worst areas because
once the contractor leaves or takes another job, good luck getting timely
maintenance from someone who understands the system. Oh, the eff-ups I've
seen with contracted software.

--
Bobby G.