Hello:

Do you notice a pattern in the Bush presidency?? First it was Katrina... Then we found out that the FDA let brain damaged cows into your grocery market... then we found out some mine inspectors weren't doing their jobs... then we found out the government didn't inspect some toys made in China... then we found out some drugs were killing us that the FDA said were fine...

Now, we find out that the FAA didn't do their job's either...

I know you righty's think government IS the problem - not poison cows - so you're probably happy with the way Bush is doing things... But, I'll bet even YOU think twice before you get on an airplane inspected by your FAA.

Yup, the Dems'll fix it.

excon

I would consider your take on it if was a fact that the FDA had never blown a drug approval before 2001 . You know that is not true .

Or that no tainted meat ever made it to market before 2001

Or that the Chinese just decided in this century to sell us lead tainted toys.

How will the Dems fix it... by expanding the government some more ? Bwaa haa haa haa! Let me tell you ;in the height of the Democrat power during the Clintoid reign the FDA was taking bribes from the generic industry to allow a fast track for ANDA approvals . I hate to say it but watch Michael Moore's "Sicko " expose about the whole health care industry and pay particular attention to the relationship between the doctors and the Pharmaceutical "detail people " . This has been an ongoing relationship of corruption that has gone on through numerous congresses and administrations of both parties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

How will the Dems fix it ...by expanding the government some more ? Bwaa haa haa haa !!

---

Hello again, tom:

If the FAA doesn't have enough inspectors to make sure that the airplanes my children fly on AREN'T safe, then YES, the government should EXPAND the department??

I know you think they should let the airlines do it themselves, (Bwa, ha ha ha). But, I also know, that if they did, you wouldn't let YOUR children ride in them.

You sure like to talk the right wing talk.

excon

Really ; what big crash happened that I'm not aware of ? Yes ;self regulation has served the industry and the passengers well to this point. The industry never really recovered after 9-11 and now they have the combined problems of aging infrastructure (very high capital costs);fuel costs due in no small part to grotesque fuel taxes, and unionized work forces... Add the cost of additional regulation that go to the point of absurd into the mix then you will solve the problem by bankrupting the airline services. Better to put the money into new infrastructure if you ask me rather than padding the Federal payroll .

Btw ;here is the big flaw in your account. The FAA ordered these airlines to make maintanance upgrades on the MD-80 aircraft and these orders were in some cases ignored by the airline . So that is why they are now grounded. It was not lack of regulation but rather a lack of compliance.

I expect the "why isn't the government doing more" mantra from a liberal. It never ceases to surprise me when a libertarian says it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

So that is why they are now grounded. It was not lack of regulation but rather a lack of compliance.

I expect the "why isn't the government doing more" mantra from a liberal. It never ceases to suprise me when a libertarian says it.

---

Hello again, tom.

Lack of compliance?? LACK OF COMPLAINCE?? What? Are you saying, that with the jillions we're spending on Homeland Security, the FAA cops can't seem to get the airlines to comply?? Really? They can bust your local crack dealer but they can't make the airlines comply??

Gosh sakes, tom. I think it's more that they WON'T make the airlines comply.. I don't think they lost their balls. They lost their direction. It was lack of enforcement. Period, end of story.

excon

PS> I'm a libertarian - not an anarchist. Sure, most industries/people self regulate. But, I want the government to play backup. Or, do you think the only role government should play is busting drug dealers and throwing illegal aliens out?

Aloha Airlines, ATA, Skybus all bankrupt last week . Soon to be joined by Champion Air . The skys will be real safe when no one is flying I guess.

But again show me this big urgency to ground a whole fleet of planes over some arbitrary ruling on wiring in MD-80s that American had failed to follow to the absolute letter. There have been zero major incidents over the wiring in the 28 year history of the craft. The FAA is the 1st to admit that. But we are to believe that the airlines ;who have everything to lose if one of these planes goes down with passengers aboard are callously ignoring the safety of their fleet and that adding onto "undermanned and underfunded "regulatory agencies will improve a near flawless safety record.

Yeah you are smoking something good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

But we are to believe that the airlines ;who have everything to lose if one of these planes goes down with passengers aboard are callously ignoring the safety of their fleet......

yeah you are smoking something good.

---

Hello again, tom:

I absolutely believe that...

Just like I believe that Enron executives, "who had everything to lose", callously ignored the safety of their customers, their employees, and their shareholders.

If you think executives who run airlines have more integrity than those who run energy companies, then your stuff IS better than mine.

excon

PS> (edited) Wasn't it your guy who said, "trust, but verify"?

Bottom line is that this is an in-service modification that does not justify grounding thousands of aircraft . There was no urgency. To do so is irresponisble and a disservice to the passengers who's travel was disrupted.

Ex, seems all presidencies have a pattern. Clinton's was one of investigations, memory lapses, shady deals, wagging the dog, policy by poll numbers and a lot of doing nothing.

Another pattern - regardless of who's in charge - is government clearly seems to get less efficient and effective as it expands. So let's add more into the mix of what they already can't handle, right?

From what I understand Mad cow was a problem since 2003.

The FDA has not been regulating meds properly since at least 2000.

The government sent billions of dollars to New Orleans and the flood victims and it got wasted.

The airports have been going after old grandma's and 'Dave Smiths' since 9/11 because it would be racist to pat down someone in a jihab.

We are still in Bosnia (Clinton's silent war)

I don't think FDA, FAA or most anybody else has been doing their job in at least 9 years because they
Don't care about quality.
Want to do things as cheaply as possible.
Liberals tie their hands with beauracy and PC rules...

That's an old sales trick that the Republicans want regulation and less government involvement. Soon as it's convenient for them or necessary they work the system, i.e. stimulus package. The aging infrastructure of our own country has been neglected, yet the expansion of government under the Bush admin can no longer be contained to just one country. Strange how they regulate Iraq as much as possible, yet proclaim deregulation in our own backyard. If Dubya could be elected another term the Iraqis would have to fill out 1040A's by April 15th of every year. :)

PS. Ex, I'm doing my part by trying to break the pattern. You have my promise. I will not vote for John McCain.

Quote:

---

The FDA has not been regulating meds properly since at least 2000.

---

Actually Thalidomide was prescribed during the late 1950s .Before its release, inadequate tests were performed to assess the drug's safety . The FDA has been a screw up organization for a long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

actually Thalidomide was prescribed during the late 1950s .Before its release, inadequate tests were performed to assess the drug's safety . The FDA has been a screw up organization for a long time.

---

Fenfluramine (Fen-phen) - recalled in 1997 after 24 years on the market
Pemoline (Cylert) - recalled in 2005 after 30 years on the market
Seldane - recalled in 1998 after 13 years on the market
Etretinate - recalled in 1998 after 13 years on the market
Hismanal - recalled in 1999 after 11 years on the market
Permax - recalled in 2007 after 19 years on the market
Levomethadyl - recalled in 2003 after 10 years on the market

Hello again,

So, it's your contention that the effectiveness of the federal government has nothing to do with the chief executive or who he puts in charge of those departments??

I don't think that's true. I don't think YOU think it's true. I think you just got to sing the right wing tune.

This was much more fun when I had somebody to argue with. Who can argue with - "Well, it's broken. Always has been and ain't gonna get any better"?

excon

PS> Could I hazard a guess as to whether you'll be saying the same thing when Barak is in charge?? I could, and you won't!

Ex as you know I have been a frequent critic of the Fed Government's performance during the Bush Presidency of ;the State Dept ;the CIA , the FDA , the Dept of Agriculture and more if you give me time to think. I have seen this all my life . Perhaps you can tell me when these agencies were doing their jobs efficiently let alone effectively . I don't think you can.

WE spent a lot of time on one thread examining just the education infrastructure in the country . Do you think that education is the exception ? I think anything managed by the government is inherently inadequate and inefficient.Red tape is procedure status quo.


And yes ;I do not think the Executive has as much leverage over the career bureaucracy as you think. Too often the careerists out last administrations . Often a President has to deal with an agency that has been staffed by his political opposition for years . Mass firings would lead to even more disruption of their services.
Under conservative and libertarian doctrine the cure is to reduce government ;not to grow it and make it more powerful .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Under conservative and libertarian doctrine the cure is to reduce government ;not to grow it and make it more powerful .

---

Hello again, tom:

You hit the right wing nail on the head. That IS the philosophy of the present managers who are running things. In their zeal to make sure the government DOESN'T grow and get more POWER, they reduce its EFFECTIVENESS.

Doing that, doesn't make the political point they want to make. All it does is hurt people.

You and I don't disagree about whether there SHOULD be these agencies or not. We DO disagree about how to deal with the reality that there ARE these agencies.

In my view, as long as there are such agencies, they should be run the best way they can. In other words, if an agency's goal, for example FEMA, is to manage emergencies, it should actually manage emergencies. And, it should do it the best it can.

The manager should not REFUSE to manage because the whole idea of the agency doesn't fit his, or the dufus who appointed him, political viewpoint.

I believe there is a concerted effort by "loyal Bushies" to destroy the very agencies they have been appointed to run.

You rightly point out, of course, that it ain't going to happen. That doesn't mean they ain't trying.

excon

Quote:

---

So, the question arises: Why are bureaucracies inefficient? The answer rests with the nature of complex organizations.

• Responsibility: At the top of the list is the assignment of responsibility to those working in a bureaucracy. In a complex organization, whether public or private, individuals can avoid personal responsibility for their actions. They can blame the rules. They can blame others.
• Management: As the size and complexity of an organization increases, the ability to exert control decreases. The "head" of a one-person organization has complete control over that "one person." The "one person" carries out the dictates of the "head" without error. However, the head of a one-thousand person organization cannot exert the same degree of control over all members.
  
• Information: Part of the management problems arise due to imperfect information. As the dictates of the head are passed down through the organizational structure, the information is bound to be misunderstood. The head might want 5 copies of a 100 page report and end up with 500 boxes of paper clips.

Once again, these problems are most pronounced with public sector bureaucracies, but also arise in private sector bureaucracies. While inefficiency is less pronounced in the private sector to the degree that individual responsibility can be assigned and enforced, it does not disappear entirely.

---

AmosWEB is Economics: Encyclonomic WEB*pedia

Now imagine a tiered bureaucracy with 10s of thousands of employees. The only organization that works even close to efficient in these circumstance is the military because individuals willingly surrender all to the doctrine and discipline.

Quote:

---

That IS the philosophy of the present managers who are running things.

---

Not quite accurate . Both Condi Rice and Michael Hayden have busted their butts trying to get their agencies to reform . The resistance and inertia by the careerists have prevented the transitions. Also President Bush has tried to consolidate and centralize command and control in various agencies and that has not helped reduce inefficiency. Again ;please tell me a time that any of these agencies weren't inherently dysfunctional .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

please tell me a time that any of these agencies weren't inherently dysfunctional .

---

Hello again, tom:

I'm a pilot. There was a time when I believed the FAA was on the job. I'm an eater. There was a time when I believed the FDA was checking on my meat. I'm a citizen. There was a time when I believed the cops actually looked out for me.

That's not so anymore. Is it due to management? Or is it due to the inherent inability of any bureaucracy to function?

Or maybe they never ran right, and I just imagined it. That's entirely possible.

excon

You mean the USDA or the FDA?? Or perhaps the FTC since they are supposed to proterct consumers .Their responsibilities overlap you know which inevidibly means gaps because neither knows who is responsible for what. Same thing with many other agencies .


Yup there was a time when my parents thought that sending their children to school would at least teach them to read. The kids they sent to private school came out literate. The ones that went to public school did not receive the same quality .That was 25-30 years ago. Do you think expanding the Education Dept and initiating NCLB has helped ? Nope. All it does is create complex formulas for allocation of funding and manipulation of the stats at the grass roots.

The sad thing is there is no divide . We both think the system is inherently broken . I'm just surprised that you would think the answer is bigger stronger more of the same.