Re: men in women's bicycle races

On Wed, 14 May 2025 08:03:32 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

On 5/14/2025 7:43 AM, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/13/2025 10:14 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 5/13/2025 3:18 PM, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/13/2025 1:18 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 5/13/2025 8:45 AM, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/12/2025 11:29 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 5/12/2025 6:05 PM, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/12/2025 1:33 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

>
But Mr. Timid Tricyclist just won't let it go. It
allows him to hide from discussing the current
administration's crazy incompetence. What a dupe.
>
>

Pick an administration. Any administration. Select
any of myriad examples of 'crazy incompetence'.
>
USS Gettysburg shot down a fighter from her own
carrier group (USS Truman) in the Biden
administration in December.
>
Then USS Truman lost two fighters overboard (one from
sliding tow vehicle in April, one landing arrest
failure in May.) in the 2d Trump administration.
>
https://www.businessinsider.com/us-navy-aircraft-
carrier- red-sea- lost- another-super-hornet-2025-5?op=1
>
One never runs out of examples.

>
Is each military mishap the fault of an executive
administration? I'd think that even the appointment
of, say, a low experience drunken Fox network
personality would require quite a bit of time to
noticeably affect the competence of the world's
largest military.
>
Appointing an egotistical and inexperienced cyber dude
to pull in other cyber dudes with no relevant
qualifications, to hack away randomly at every
possible government agency, firing then rehiring
hundreds or thousands of competent workers? That's
administrative incompetence - one example among many.
>

>
Well, yes, your term 'crazy incompetence' pervades
governments (not only US Federal government!)  in every
administration. Hayek brilliantly wrote on the inherent
failures of large bureaucracies, by their nature, well
before key exemplars were born!

>
First, it takes a large administration to run a large
institution, and a very large administration to run a
large country. I doubt there are any exceptions. And in
any large administation you'll be able to find examples
of anything - competence, incompetence, stupidity,
brilliance. Isn't "we have one of everything" one of
your talking points?
>
That does NOT mean all administrations are equal. The
unproductive chaos generated by unleashing Musk and his
buddy boys seems unique in our history. I doubt one
legitimate scientist thinks Kennedy is fully sane, let
alone competent. And the "Hillary Emails!!!" crew is
giving an astonishing pass to the signal chat leaks. I
could list more, but I think the current administration
is on its way toward record incompetence on multiple
fronts.
>
If you're defending all that, I'm curious about your
thought processes. Will it be "Yeah, but Obama wore a
brown suit"?
>
>

The British Empire in the late Victorian era ran with a
skimpy budget and a slim staff.
>
https://blog.nationalarchives.gov.uk/uk-government-did-
we- rule-the- empire-with-4000-civil-servants/
>
And Britain didn't even have a 10th Amendment!
>
Excess in funding and excess in hiring leads to 'mission
creep' outside lawful useful limits. As we see.
>
p.s. thanks for snipping my example. There are more.

Please! You of all people should understand the etiquette
of trimming posts. Of course "there are more." I won't
bother to dig for videos of Bush I saying "Read my lips:
No new taxes" or Bush II dolled up in military costume to
proclaim "Mission accomplished" but we should remember how
those worked out.
>
And about the size of the British empire administration:
ISTM the point of the article you linked is that there
really were countless thousands of people administering
it. It was a very different world in the 1800s, far less
complex and moving at a far slower place with far simpler
technology; and the article seems to say that large
numbers of administrators were at work, although perhaps
employed by colonies or local government, not central
government. You certainly can't pretend that any current
major nation can get by with a few thousand employees!
>
In any case, you've deflected away from my point. Do you
really think the Trump administration is as competent as
any other one in recent history? I don't, and the general
run of experts (including those working for Trump's first
administration) seem to rate this crew near the bottom of
the curve.
>
The main qualification for hiring was, obviously, fealty
to the wannabee king. That doesn't tend to bring in the
best people.
>

 
Larger Empire with more people and spread out uniquely world
wide, all run with written correspondence, paper ledgers, no
calculators and yet still in the thousands not millions. Add
in a very good score for lack of inflation, a gold-solid
value for Sterling and excellent growth. Hard to beat their
record.
 
One might argue, and I will, that the administrations of
Victoria's Empire was greatly more effective and efficient
than any barnacle encrusted modern state, full of
apparatchiks with their hands in the till.
 
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/pentagon-audit-2666415734/
 
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4992913-pentagon-
fails-7th-audit-in-a-row-but-says-progress-made/
 
Honest and competent are not words anyone would use as
regards the hundreds of US government entities.
 
To your solicitation of my opinion, yes I think the 2d Trump
administration has so far been about average for efficiency
and honesty. I do have hope but I would not bet on it.  The
thieving scheming one-worlder swamp will fight to the death
against both.
 
To policy, which is a different question, I'd rank a solid
B+. You would not. Meh.
 

>
n.b.  The Pentagon link from the prior administration above
reflects a consistent pernicious series of failures spanning
several administrations, including the 1st Trump term, going
back decades. It is not a temporal anomaly.

I understand that Trump had negotiated some tariff agreements with
China in his first term. He, and the Republican mouthpieces are
claiming that Biden didn't enforce them sufficiently, but they did
bring in revenue.

--
C'est bon
Soloman