You've hit upon something similar to something I have said for awhile, usually in response to the refrain, government should be run more like a business. Of course we want government operations to be efficient in the sense that we want tax dollars spent wisely and costs to achieve whatever desired service the government is providing whether it be national defense, healthcare, retirement, air traffic control etc. but at the end of the day, government is judged on its effectiveness not its efficiency. Case in point, our air traffic control system has a near perfect track record in recent years. Has there been any discussion in Washington about how much this costs? If, heaven forbid, there was a major aircraft accident attributed to poor air traffic control personnel or equipment, and the response from the FAA was, well yes we cut back but we saved a bunch of money, would anyone care? There is much strum und drang now over Covid relief being delivered somewhat inefficiently. There was apparently significant fraud and people like Tom Brady got million dollar loans that have now been forgiven. Of course that shouldn't be the case, but the priority was get money out the door as fast as possible and save the American economy, and in that it proved largely effective. Had efficiency been the priority, effectiveness might have been sacrificed. National Defense, arguably the most important of all federal government responsibilities, is something that will never be delivered if optimized for efficiency. Simply put, if we lose a conflict, but save a bunch of money in the process, the American people won't care. There is going to be waste, fraud, abuse, inefficiency, excess inventory, failed programs, guesses wrong about what capabilities are needed, etc. Of course we should seek to minimize these things but, at the end of the day, we have to accept that to some degree this comes with the territory and an effective national defense enterprise will by its nature, be rather inefficient.
Well said, Bryan. I will share this important perspective.
An interesting comparison is 1943, when we built 16 aircraft carriers...in addition to the 10s of thousands of aircraft, tanks, etc, and all the munitions and parts to support. I wonder how long it would take us to recreate that capability today....
President Roosevelt - a prior ASN - correctly 'used' (funded & supported) the shipbuilding industry in the late 30s to reconstitute / renovate the Navy while concurrently employing people (Depression!) and developing needed National Infrastructure - defense and technology investments. Defense is the ultimate backstop / insurance policy of any/every nation. Deming & Kaizen is good. But Effectiveness trumps efficiencies. Everytime.
You've hit upon something similar to something I have said for awhile, usually in response to the refrain, government should be run more like a business. Of course we want government operations to be efficient in the sense that we want tax dollars spent wisely and costs to achieve whatever desired service the government is providing whether it be national defense, healthcare, retirement, air traffic control etc. but at the end of the day, government is judged on its effectiveness not its efficiency. Case in point, our air traffic control system has a near perfect track record in recent years. Has there been any discussion in Washington about how much this costs? If, heaven forbid, there was a major aircraft accident attributed to poor air traffic control personnel or equipment, and the response from the FAA was, well yes we cut back but we saved a bunch of money, would anyone care? There is much strum und drang now over Covid relief being delivered somewhat inefficiently. There was apparently significant fraud and people like Tom Brady got million dollar loans that have now been forgiven. Of course that shouldn't be the case, but the priority was get money out the door as fast as possible and save the American economy, and in that it proved largely effective. Had efficiency been the priority, effectiveness might have been sacrificed. National Defense, arguably the most important of all federal government responsibilities, is something that will never be delivered if optimized for efficiency. Simply put, if we lose a conflict, but save a bunch of money in the process, the American people won't care. There is going to be waste, fraud, abuse, inefficiency, excess inventory, failed programs, guesses wrong about what capabilities are needed, etc. Of course we should seek to minimize these things but, at the end of the day, we have to accept that to some degree this comes with the territory and an effective national defense enterprise will by its nature, be rather inefficient.
Well put.
Very insightful. You make a good case, sir.
Here, here. The Peace Dividend is looking more expensive every decade.
Well said, Bryan. I will share this important perspective.
An interesting comparison is 1943, when we built 16 aircraft carriers...in addition to the 10s of thousands of aircraft, tanks, etc, and all the munitions and parts to support. I wonder how long it would take us to recreate that capability today....
President Roosevelt - a prior ASN - correctly 'used' (funded & supported) the shipbuilding industry in the late 30s to reconstitute / renovate the Navy while concurrently employing people (Depression!) and developing needed National Infrastructure - defense and technology investments. Defense is the ultimate backstop / insurance policy of any/every nation. Deming & Kaizen is good. But Effectiveness trumps efficiencies. Everytime.
Mando read. So well done.
Very kind, thanks.