It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump to unveil office aimed at overhauling bureaucracy with business ideas

page: 2
24
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 06:17 AM
link   
Wait.. Jared Kushner is head of it?

Well, that might take *all* out of it - innovations, ideas, etc.
Because Kushner's main competence is being the son-in-law..

Edit: found the word: Nepotism. Cronyism.
edit on 27 3 2017 by ManFromEurope because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 06:28 AM
link   
We could say the same about Conservatives and Republicans in regards to Hillary, couldn't we? Or perhaps Obama? Wouldn't you agree?

a reply to: brutus61


edit on 27-3-2017 by MiddleInsite because: word misspelled



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 06:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
We could say the same about Conservatives and Republicans in regards to Hillary, couldn't we? Or perhaps Obama? Wouldn't you agree?

a reply to: brutus61



I would agree that there nut jobs on both sides of the fence yes. What I do not agree with is working to destroy our nation by constantly remaining divided because of partisanship. We have a president(for better or worse) who I believe is trying to right some wrongs that have been going on for far too long. I support him in this even though I sometimes cringe at his methods. He is the president, I am not. For example illegal immigration. We can clearly see by looking around the world that this is a significant problem. If we don't agree with his methods we can offer other suggestions that might work instead of just shutting it down because he is not on "our team". Everything he is doing, he believes is for the betterment of America. He may be wrong in some instances but he is definitely right in many others. Partisanship seems to be the new American disease.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 07:21 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 07:36 AM
link   
Well, if Trump were serious, then he'd appoint one of those "business leaders" like Musk or Gates to lead the effort.

The fact that he's appointing "the son-in-law" tells me this is another sounds-good/does-nothing plan (at best, that's what we can hope for.)

And just to point to the core error here ...

The matter of governance is either control or maintenance (or both) which is and always has been a cash-negative flow.

The goal of business is profit and an increase in capital which MUST BE cash-positive.

(Cash or assets, choose your accounting system.)

While it can sound good in a generic way to "run the government like a business" ... the actual prime model would be to run it like a non-profit or homeowners association ... you make sure everything is taken care of (maintenance) and you don't spend money you don't have (cash-neutral).

That's OPTIMAL.

The problem with applying a for-profit model to national governance would require a massive up-front investment which would be paid back over time ... and government is cash-negative.

We are being set up for bigger deficits than Reagan and, in true Trump fashion, the Bankruptcy of the United States.

Yeah, I have to hope this is only more smoke-and-mirrors; if not, may Random Chance favor us.

(In my opinion.)
edit on 27-3-2017 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 07:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

translation:

Trump=bad

got it.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Gryphon66

translation:

Trump=bad

got it.


Well, it seems in your world there's nothing more complex than a basic false dichotomy ... so, yah, go with it.

/shrug



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 08:21 AM
link   
a reply to: WaldekBoleslaw

If done well, this is a good thing. I'm suspicious of "privatization" but mostly for things that could harm people (like prisons) by creating a negative incentive, or that leave people open to the whims of the bubble and burst markets.

I've seen firsthand how completely outdated and frustrating the government technology systems are for Social Security and Medicaid.

For example, my disabled son has Medicaid and might have been able to collect SSI, but we weren't sure. So I went to the SS office and was told I needed to fill out a ginormous amount of paperwork that showed his proof of disability, etc.

It was insane. He was already approved for Medicaid with a disability rider our state provides for services that allow him to be cared for at home, or should the need arise, in a group home or other circumstance. Why did I need to fill that out?

The answer was that they needed their own set of records because the SS computer system and the Medicaid system had no way to talk to each other. My Medicaid card for him didn't allow them access to enough information!

Turns out in the end I didn't need to fill out the freaking paperwork after all because he can't get SSI if he's living at home - we aren't poor enough. He gets it if he goes to a group home so we were told by another organization that he might be able to get that while living at home.

I'm fine with not getting the SSI, but I'm not fine with losing all the hours of my life it took to fill out their stupid forms.

A technology update that allows for Fed and State information packets to be shared in regards to these kinds of programs would be a boon! Type in the Medicaid number and bam - you have secure access to his Medicaid status and proof of disability info.

The VA is another such antiquated and isolated system. Vets get lost in the shuffle and it is so unnecessary.

Let the geniuses craft the tech and then pay for it.

It is as important as roads and bridges as far as infrastructure goes!!

If we ever want a more efficient system in place that could handle single payer, and eliminate waste and fraud, this kind to tech update on a massive scale could save lives, time, money and prevent fraud and waste.

I applaud this effort, if Congress will fund it properly.


edit on 27-3-2017 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude
I've always said: Trump could cure cancer and some people would attack him for over-population.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

I hear you, but the practical reality is that the systems are hopelessly outdated and need an updat.

No on has wanted to take that on. If the geniuses can design the ideal framework for interconnection, you know there will be pros and cons.

The cons will be that somehow it will be turned into another potential law enforcement tool that could be abused. On the pro side, it might help deal with fraudulent claims and assist in running down Medicaid and Medicare fraud schemes and false businesses/doctors participating in fraud.

There are going to be pros and cons. A wary eye on the security of our information should be paramount.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   
Trump should take his own advise and structure his cabinet with a business model. Instead it's chaos, inefficient and in open rebellion against him. Trump can't trust anyone even in his close circle of advisers.

www.rawstory.com...

I wonder if this is the business model he is refering to....?


www.newyorker.com...
edit on 27-3-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Key point ignored: Kushner to head office. So nepotism. PLUS oligarchy and plutocracy. Thank [insert] for all those checks and balances, else it would be autocracy too.




nepotism |ˈnepəˌtizəm|
noun
the practice among those with power or influence of favoring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs.

oligarchy |ˈäləˌɡärkē|
noun (pl. oligarchies)
a small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution: the ruling oligarchy of military men around the president.
• a country governed by an oligarchy: the English aristocratic oligarchy of the 19th century.

plutocracy |plo͞oˈtäkrəsē|
noun (pl. plutocracies)
government by the wealthy.
• a country or society governed by the wealthy.
• an elite or ruling class of people whose power derives from their wealth.





posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: soficrow
a reply to: reldra

Key point ignored: Kushner to head office. So nepotism. PLUS oligarchy and plutocracy. Thank [insert] for all those checks and balances, else it would be autocracy too.




nepotism |ˈnepəˌtizəm|
noun
the practice among those with power or influence of favoring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs.

oligarchy |ˈäləˌɡärkē|
noun (pl. oligarchies)
a small group of people having control of a country, organization, or institution: the ruling oligarchy of military men around the president.
• a country governed by an oligarchy: the English aristocratic oligarchy of the 19th century.

plutocracy |plo͞oˈtäkrəsē|
noun (pl. plutocracies)
government by the wealthy.
• a country or society governed by the wealthy.
• an elite or ruling class of people whose power derives from their wealth.








On that point you are completely correct.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Legal Problems?.
Take a little survey...
Participate in our sponsors offers...
Just pay shipping...

...Your "Get Out of Jail Free Card" will arrive in a few short days...

I used to work for a cable company. Do you people realize how ridiculous you look to businesses?.

We could use a different approach to "people management", but not a pure business approach.

"in Your Face Corporatocracy"

Soylent Green anyone?.


edit on ? by MyHappyDogShiner because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: soficrow

Oh there is a oligarchy and a plutocracy in the US but it is not Trump. That would describe those against Trump.

As far as Nepotism, if you want to say that about Kushner then admit the same about Jarrett. Hell, she lives in their house AFTER he is out of office.

I think this is a fantastic idea but main stream politicians hate it because there cash flow is going away. They make their money from lobbying but if you cannot lobby you can maybe get some good ideas to actually come to fruition. What I find interesting is Bannon is not involved at all. I think it is also about compartmentalization.


edit on 03am31amf0000002017-03-27T09:56:33-05:000933 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)

edit on 03am31amf0000002017-03-27T09:59:19-05:000919 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: WaldekBoleslaw

A shiny new job for his son-in-law.

Not like we already have a giant bureaucracy in place which could take on these duties.

Two-fer: expanding the size of government AND some blatant nepotism.

No shame in his game, not even a little.

edit on 27-3-2017 by gladtobehere because: wording



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Race Bannon got outflanked by a Jew.

Imagine that.



Buck
edit on 27-3-2017 by flatbush71 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: AboveBoard

Zero disagreement that the bureaucracy needs to be reformulated, streamlined, cutback, focused, rennovated and revived.

Zero confidence that someone with for-profit experience is going to that.

But, perhaps I am on the "Trump=Bad" Train. I guess we'll see.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: flatbush71

Star for you! Well done.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: soficrow

Kushner is the leader, not the muscle. Apparently Trump has faith in his ability... until shown otherwise, I am in no position to dispute that faith. I don't know the guy.

Gates and Musk have the same problem that most innovators have: they tend to get tunnel vision on a project. Kushner is there to keep them from straying away from the big picture. Turn either of those guys loose, and you'll get amazing things, but they might not be the kinds of things you need.

These are some pretty big goals, and it's going to take big ideas to implement them. Internet is going to have to change to give universal access. The two best options I know if at this time are satellite access (which may require a new protocol) or fiber via power lines (probably the easiest to implement). My area just got the latter a couple years ago, and while there have been some bugs, it has worked extremely well covering such a rural area. The one issue is, there are still some areas where even power isn't available, like wilderness areas used for camping or hiking. Perhaps a mixture of the two technologies?

In cities, it's just a matter of implementation. Just thinking out loud, fiber-driven WiFi repeaters mounted on power poles would be able to duplicate GPS at a lower cost and with higher accuracy in developed areas, and open the door for automatic fire reporting or traffic accident reporting. That's faster and more accurate responses, and that's lives saved.

I'm wondering if we could develop sensors to periodically check road conditions. Repairs could be scheduled more efficiently, and cars could even be equipped with traffic congestion warnings and re-routing.

I know the devil is in the details, but this sounds like a great idea. Maybe we can get the Google boys involved, too.

TheRedneck



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join