Re: Helmet efficacy test

On 4/19/2025 11:24 AM, Frank Krygowski 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.
>
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...
>
>

 Mr Clinton's second term, while positive in that regard as you note, was mostly unrelated to Mr Gore's first term mission. The results were positive, as we agree.
 Large effects included the successful closing of many surplus military bases directed by the Base Closure Commission which amazingly did close redundant bases in 1995 after an 8 year fight.
 https://congressionalresearch.com/97-305/document.php
 And Mr Gingrich's valuable assist on reduced spending.