Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:WTH - "$3 million for “girl-centered climate action” in Brazil."
As a taxpayer, I don’t have a problem with this even without knowing the details.
+1. What I do have a problem with is this poorly designed survey. I don’t want to cut EPA, the FBI, HUD, Dept of State-why isn’t that an option? Why use misleading descriptions of govt funded projects? Why not ask people if they agree with the funding of 30bn$ in govt grants for SpaceX rather than 3 mn$ for climate action.
Anonymous wrote:I am sad that Federal employees have to face flak for some of these outrageous spending decisions by the previous administration.
Reading some of these spending choices would make any American blood boil. What were they thinking approving these kinds of grants?
But this should not be a reflection on the Fed employees who are merely implementing these things rather than making policy decisions.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can I suggest asking Feds which offices they’d like to cut in their own agencies? I know of several purely administrative, policy offices that are hated by thousands. They solely exist to give us busy work and to fight with our amazing senior managers. Administrative functions need to be cut before you cut the peons doing the actual work.
If we wanna save money, why doesn’t the government mandate very very very very very low prices for Microsoft, Cisco, AWS, Oracle, etc
Cut all IT costs by 70% price fixing everything IT.
Because IT costs are a drop in the bucket and lots of important government functions run on noncommercial software ... but it's concerning that you think government should "mandate" the prices of commercial products.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:WTH - "$3 million for “girl-centered climate action” in Brazil."
As a taxpayer, I don’t have a problem with this even without knowing the details.
Anonymous wrote:WTH - "$3 million for “girl-centered climate action” in Brazil."
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:WTH - "$3 million for “girl-centered climate action” in Brazil."
A simple Google would tell you it's entrepreneurship and leadership training for young women so they can be economically successful. Don't be misled by the inflammatory wording.
Example: https://hivos.org/program/global-girls-creating-change-g2c2/
And it’s incredibly unpopular by low-information voters footing the bill.
Anonymous wrote:I am outraged that the Heritage Foundation is superseding the role of Congress by asking which agencies should be cut.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can I suggest asking Feds which offices they’d like to cut in their own agencies? I know of several purely administrative, policy offices that are hated by thousands. They solely exist to give us busy work and to fight with our amazing senior managers. Administrative functions need to be cut before you cut the peons doing the actual work.
If we wanna save money, why doesn’t the government mandate very very very very very low prices for Microsoft, Cisco, AWS, Oracle, etc
Cut all IT costs by 70% price fixing everything IT.
Because IT costs are a drop in the bucket and lots of important government functions run on noncommercial software ... but it's concerning that you think government should "mandate" the prices of commercial products.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Can I suggest asking Feds which offices they’d like to cut in their own agencies? I know of several purely administrative, policy offices that are hated by thousands. They solely exist to give us busy work and to fight with our amazing senior managers. Administrative functions need to be cut before you cut the peons doing the actual work.
If we wanna save money, why doesn’t the government mandate very very very very very low prices for Microsoft, Cisco, AWS, Oracle, etc
Cut all IT costs by 70% price fixing everything IT.
Anonymous wrote:Can I suggest asking Feds which offices they’d like to cut in their own agencies? I know of several purely administrative, policy offices that are hated by thousands. They solely exist to give us busy work and to fight with our amazing senior managers. Administrative functions need to be cut before you cut the peons doing the actual work.
Anonymous wrote:Can I suggest asking Feds which offices they’d like to cut in their own agencies? I know of several purely administrative, policy offices that are hated by thousands. They solely exist to give us busy work and to fight with our amazing senior managers. Administrative functions need to be cut before you cut the peons doing the actual work.