Originally Posted by
DeadHead
The issue is that our federal government could occasionally attempt to reward or promote agency officials who are thrifty, meeting their organizations' objectives while still coming in under budget.
Our federal government lacks adequate fiscal oversight and responsibility. Most agencies aim to hit there budget or surpass it for fear of being handed out less funding in the year ahead.
Not trying to call you out USMC or take your comments out of context, but large, successful Fortune 500 companies pride themselves in their ability to maximize their profits while minimizing their productions costs/overhead. I think our Government could learn a thing or two from these types of companies.
You'll never tell me that our gov't has adequate oversight and hear an argument out of me! You are absolutely right about being thrifty and not being rewarded for it; but rather in danger of being shorted on the next year's budget! I've been guilty of turning gas into noise for no other reason than to make sure that said agency/organization met the required expenditure.
I don't take your comments as "calling me out" Deadhead. You'll notice that I haven't approved or disapproved of the said photo op. My comments were directed at the security issue and the issue of our actions being determined by past events - and I'm talking about everything here from photo ops, to taking liquids on an aircraft, or more than the 3-1-1 rule, or where a container ship can travel safely with/without security teams on board.
USMCFLYR