Quote:
Originally Posted by Redbugdave
Somehow the proposal went from around 700 billion to 810 billion. That's no way to be fiscally responsible.
|
I spent 20 years in industry. If I had ever proposed a solution to a problem even remotely similar to the Paulson approach, I would have been fired on the spot. The problem is not that the Paulson approach is necessarily wrong, it's just that the analysis to justify that it's the best approach doesn't seem to have been done. No competent senior manager in industry would ever authorize the release of funds for a proposal so utterly lacking justification. Instead, she would demand a detailed, high-quality trade study be performed, comparing the Paulson proposal with the numerous other plausible approaches that have been suggested by professionals just as knowledgeable as Paulson. I'm having trouble locating the taxpayers'
competent senior manager in this whole Bailout Bill drafting/debate/approval process.
This whole Bailout Bill debate has been a real eye-opener for me. I had no idea that the decision-making processes in the U.S. government's legislative branch are so incredibly primitive, and that the standards for acceptable results are so incredibly low. It appears that we desperately need a 'government modernization program' along with all of the other systemic changes that may be required to get our society back on track.
OK, I admit that whining is easy. The hard part is actually getting anything done.