80% are oxygen thieves.
32 minutes ago
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Proactively “From the Sea”; an agent of change leveraging the littoral best practices for a paradigm breaking six-sigma best business case to synergize a consistent design in the global commons, rightsizing the core values supporting our mission statement via the 5-vector model through cultural diversity.
Listen to Midrats
Message Boards
Books of 2022
What is Sal drinking?
I'm going to be spending some quality time with the list of Southern cocktails from Garden & Gun through the new year.
I&W
-
-
1 hour ago
-
2 hours ago
-
2 days ago
-
4 days ago
-
4 days ago
-
4 days ago
-
5 weeks ago
-
1 month ago
-
3 months ago
-
6 months ago
-
11 months ago
-
1 year ago
-
1 year ago
-
1 year ago
-
2 years ago
-
2 years ago
-
2 years ago
-
2 years ago
-
3 years ago
-
3 years ago
-
3 years ago
-
4 years ago
-
4 years ago
-
5 years ago
-
5 years ago
-
5 years ago
-
10 years ago
-
12 years ago
-
14 years ago
-
-
-
-
-
-
Blog Archive
-
▼
2011
(703)
-
▼
September
(64)
- Oh hai Anwar!
- Fullbore Friday
- Diversity Thursday II: Electric Boogaloo
- Stretching the 3-inch
- Diversity Thursday
- Oh, so that's why history education is so screwed ...
- Find Super SWO!
- I am changing my political party
- Other Peoples Money in the N4 Shop ... and Priorities
- CNO’s Sailing Directions
- Reading the Boards
- Why careerists are never happy
- Sunday Funnies
- Pacific Air in WWII, on Midrats
- Libya, France, & the Hard Truth on UAS
- Post-modern International Order
- Fullbore Friday
- The Strange Goodbye to Annapolis
- The Left - in full flower .....
- 1120s Polishing MK-48s Brighter Today
- Diversity Thursday
- Maybe sending Lucien to NATO was a bad idea
- If you like GOFO bloat ....
- It takes a Canadian
- From Ganjgal to Befehlstaktik
- China, Taiwan, 2049 and All That; on Midrats
- Sunday Funnies
- Chris for Congress!
- Fullbore Friday
- On Ideas, Methods and Ethics
- Ahhh, the smell of the Clinton Administration in t...
- Sen. Webb, Rick - look to SES next
- Diversity Thursday
- Why smart Sailors take orders to Europe
- Sympathy for the President
- Fighting from HQ ISAF, literally
- Colton goes Salamander on ZUMWALT ...
- Gardasil: From Farrah to Rick to Michelle
- The new, new Egypt
- All Staff Weenies Get an Immediate Migraine
- Captain McCain, the floor is yours
- I join Skippy in OUTRAGE!!!!!
- Now for something completely different
- First person; spoken word
- Look at our young Yeoman all grow'd up and such ...
- North Korean Gifts
- The 911 Decade, on Midrats
- Fullbore Friday
- Review of the President's Speech
- This is not the Fire Scout you are looking for ....
- Diversity Thursday
- Why civilians shouldn't read EVALS ...
- OK, but the Belgian Beer Festival is still a go, r...
- Is tomorrow already going to be Thursday?
- Dick Cheney's reading list
- How do you say "Sea Apache" in Russian?
- I forgot what a beautiful day it was
- China: what me worry?
- LCS WTF of the Week
- Sunday Funnies
- Heading to the PROA's with Skippy-san
- Fullbore Friday
- Best J-20 comment this month
- Diversity Thursday
-
▼
September
(64)
19 comments:
I agree with you about the bloat, but one thing this figure does not take into account is direct contractor support. While the number of "government civilian aka civil service" personnel contracted, the number of contractor support, until very recently, exploded and then has flatlined while DoD determines their next move.
80 percent is too low.
Highly overpaid oxygen thieves. And accompanied by perks and staffs that are further bloat.
I recommend a 25% cut in SES number every year for the next four years.
<span> </span>Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the Nation
January 17, 1961
All SES are unnecessary. We had how many in March 1945?
Interesting. Now substitute "military industrial complex" for "green econ nazis" or "nanny-state" and you can see the depth and bredth of 'undue influence' upon all facets of our lifestyle /liberties. The one thing that Eisenhower did not forecast was how academia / the educational establishment contributes to the national mentality regarding these influences, and how its infiltration by issue groups / folks with specific agendas can destroy a country.
Just cutting positions and staff is foolish. You need to shed workload as well. Half of the administrative functions by the defense staffs can be CANX'd. Get back to basics. Demand more decision making capability at lower levels without years and years of expensive analyses that are long on "academic and analytical rigor" but short on actionable, affordable conclusions. Pull out of things like the Diversity Chirade, Green Energy and refocus on evolving current technologies and strategy development.
Grandpa, if we got rid of JCIDS, DOD 5000 (series), "acquisition reform", the current Joint Staff configuration of the OPNAV Staff, I guarantee that there would be a significantly smaller demand signal for the "institutional memory" resident in Civilian employers and therefore, less of a demand signal for the SES required to provide non-uniform oversight of them.
*employees
But, like lawyers at the bottom of the ocean, it's a good start :)
Bloat....
Wonder what this little bit of pseudo-scientific nonsense is costing us?
I'll offer this observation. The upside of SES and civilian institutional memory is that they provide a buffer from some of the more radical ideas of political appointees during turn-overs associated with Presidential elections. Based on my own observations this is why 4 year presidencies are far less able to implement sweeping change compared to 8 year presidencies.
The process works something like this:
1. It usually takes about 1 year to 1.5 years for a new (non-incumbant) President to get all of their political appointees in place and confirmed by the Senate.
2. After taking office, these Politicals need some time (say .5 to 1 years) to figure out which SES's support their agenda and move the ones that don't to other opportunities.
3. This leaves about 2 years (max) to implement their agenda with an SES cadre that is supporting their goals or at least not overtly or covertly opposing them via other levers of power in DC.
An eight year Presidency allows for 6 years of relatively unopposed implementation of political goals rather than the relatively short 2 years that a 4 year Presidency provides.
Now of course, I could be completely wrong about this, but if I'm correct that feature (or bug) depending on how you fall out in support for the new administration has a tendency to put a damper on radical shifts in how the services are run.
I think that if you eliminate the SES positions, you would see much more power reverting back to the Politicals, and I'm not entirely convinced that's a good thing. I'm prepared to be convinced otherwise, and I'm standing by for additional arguments that a more steady strain is worse than more wild swings in the execution of the insitutional functions of the executive branch.
Are there benefits as well as downsides to a longer standing institutional memory?
What? That does not make any sense. "Green econ nazis?" What do green econ nazis have to do with military staff bloat?
The point could be made, (hey, it just was) that the conditions <span>Eisenhower's speech addressed in 1961 lead to the bloat in staff and civ staff described in 2011, but the "nanny state" has nothing to do with the overlarge number of staff officers. </span>
More thinking, less buzzwords, dittoheads.
BW, if you don't challenge the current system then your thesis is sound; however, if you challenge the necessity and success of JCIDS, DOD 5000 and many of our other admin-intensive regulations, then the "institutional memory" becomes significantly less important, and the functions of the staff can be successfully carried out by action officers rotating on 2 and 3 year tours of duty without the expansive civilian/contractor cadre and the SES to oversee them. Recall, SES do not wield significant power (save for N2N6 SES who is a God in that shop, particularly because most of the folks come from the N2 side of the house and have NO IDEA IN HELL what the 6 does). Political apointees do, but SES are usually just chop chains.....they don't direct policy and they don't formulate it. They are implementers of policy.
Bubba, I meant to say "eco nazis" not econ. Obviously. Self licking ice cream cones exist in all sectors of government which are driven by sectors of industry with heavy lobbying capability.
I didn't say we didn't need long term civil servants. We don't need are uncivil "flag equivalent" (meaning admirals in their own mind) employees considering themselves masters of the universe and the Navy, without benefit of sea experience.
You need somebody really good for a really important job, but just a job. No need for all the ego trip and bureaucratic infighting, not to mention delay. Anybody really good in the top 3 ordinary civil servant grades can handle it.
Political appointees? How many did Frank Knox have below him?
<span><span><span>"but the "nanny state" has nothing to do with the overlarge number of staff officers. </span> "</span>
Yes, it does. The growth of non-combat and non-essential staff in the DOD has mirrored the same growth in the non-military sector of government employment. And that's because, on both sides of the fence, the answer to any problem is always more government spending and thus more government employees. </span>
No, no, no, SES are mission critical! And they'll work (or browbeat, threaten and cajole) with their consitituents to ensure it's so. Like roaches, you can whack 'em, but not defeat 'em. 80% reduction would be a good start though.
80%...a very kind assessment. Maybe in the field that number is a little high. At senior ASN and OSD levels that number increases into the 90's easily.
Post a Comment