Re: Helmet efficacy test

On Sat, 19 Apr 2025 12:24:54 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On 4/19/2025 10:25 AM, AMuzi wrote:

 
I am a bit more reserved [about Trump], being either blessed or cursed with a fairly
good memory.
 
Mr Reagan set up the Grace Commission, led by the energetic informed and
competent Peter Grace, which wrote an excellent guide to removing
blatant fraud waste and abuse of Federal expenditures.
 
https://archive.org/details/GraceCommissionReport
 
Which naturally accomplished roughly nothing once various Congressmen
discovered the problems were in their districts.
 
Mr Clinton began a priority domestic policy in early 1993 by assigning
Mr Gore to do the same. Despite apparent sincerity and the best wishes
of taxpayers across the political spectrum, nothing happened.

>
Double check your memory.
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_policy_of_the_Bill_Clinton_administration
>
"Below are the budgetary results for President Clinton's two terms in
office:
>
    He had budget surpluses for fiscal years 1998–2001, the only such
years from 1970 to 2023. Clinton's final four budgets were balanced
budgets with surpluses, beginning with the 1997 budget.
    The ratio of debt held by the public to GDP, a primary measure of
U.S. federal debt, fell from 47.8% in 1993 to 33.6% by 2000. Debt held
by the public was actually paid down by $453 billion over the 1998-2001
periods, the only time this happened between 1970 and 2018.
    Federal spending fell from 20.7% GDP in 1993 to 17.6% GDP in 2000,
below the historical average (1966 to 2015) of 20.2% GDP.
    Tax revenues rose steadily from 17.0% GDP in 1993 to 20.0% GDP in
2000, well above the historical average of 17.4% GDP.
    Defense spending fell from 4.3% GDP in 1993 to 2.9% GDP by 2000, as
the U.S. enjoyed a "peace dividend" in the wake of the fall of the
Soviet Union. In dollar terms, defense spending fell from $292B in 1993
to $266B by 1996, then slowly rose to $295 billion by 2000..."
>
Oh, and from
https://www.yahoo.com/news/fact-check-clinton-initiative-cut-140000196.html
>
"[Did] Clinton initiative cut over 377K federal jobs in the 1990s - True
- During his time in office, U.S. President Bill Clinton oversaw the
termination of 377,000 federal employees."
>
Thing was, his administration did it via rational methods - by studying
the structure of government organizations, by getting both parties on
board, by offering buyouts to the employees it strategically wanted to
trim. Trump's (or rather, unelected Musk's) approach is instead to send
young boy hackers in to disable important and productive agencies at
random, plus simultaneously suck up whatever data they can. All without
the approval of congress.
>

I support Mr Trump's posturing, despite his relatively lax habits in the
first term.  But in our convoluted actual system, 'draining the swamp'
sounds great until you run into the swamp's lethal defenses...

>
"Draining the swamp" is simplistic nonsense. Biologically, many if not
most swamps provide valuable functions. They support beneficial
ecosystems, they filter water or protect coastlines, etc. Those ignorant
of biology see swamps as just useless mud.

Nonsense, irrelevant analogy...

Those ignorant of administration see government agencies as just useless
bureaucracies - doing worthless stuff like medical research, vaccination
programs, pollution monitoring, feeding hungry kids, promoting education...

Spending money the government doesn't have for ridiculous,
nonessential services, many of them in other countries who are not our
friends.

...and why are we giving any money to colleges and universities so
they can offer nonsense degrees such as "Gender Studies?"

 It's not a though most every teenager in high school doesn't already
know everything they need to know about gender.

--
C'est bon
Soloman