The Feds - as dysfunctional an organization as has ever existed!

[The 12th Commandment]

Would you not think in this era of immigration/border problems, TWOT and all the money being thrown at Homeland Security that the federal government would lose a little bit of bureaucracy? Just a little mind you I know miracles are not a given.

I just got done making a map for the Border Patrol Las Cruces Section Office. Their current facility, meant to house 75, now houses 250 so they're gonna move. They come in to see me yesterday about looking for a new site. There needs are relatively straight forward: 25 or more acres, not too close to residential properties and 1 mile at most from an interstate on ramp. They want to have an outdoor shooting range and a heliport so can't be too close to town.

Simple enough, I think to myself, there's ohhhhh roughly 300,000 acres of Federal Land in the vicinity. Most of it perfect for a use like they're proposing.

Our meeting starts and after getting the criteria they needed that's what I suggested. The BP representative rolled his eyes at me and said we don't to pursue the BLM option we'd prefer to buy from an individual. That threw me so I asked why that would when the federal government already owns a massive surplus of perfect land.

His reply, "We can't wait the TWO years it will take to get it transferred from Interior to HSD". Wow. That's just criminal. They're gonna spend a half million dollars of taxpayer money because Interior can't process a land transfer to another branch of the federal government any faster than two years. Shameful, maybe you guys living in the midst of it have come to accept this sort of foolishness but it's a shock to me that we're even still a viable country when we can't do any better than that.

/rant

[Mark The Homer]

I really don't like reading this stuff. I just pisses me off.

I suppose in the long run the land won't lose much value though. So that's something, I guess.

[Sarge]

ANd people want these clowns to run health care:rolleyes:

[Koolblue13]

Super, let's give them more to do.

[MDRedskinsFan]

ANd people want these clowns to run health care:rolleyes:

:applause:I agree. As expensive as it is to pay for private healthcare, it is worth the extra money for the efficiency. Whatever the private sector fails at, the government will fail worse at.

[ChocolateCitySkin]

I jsut don't even get how that is possible... I mean how many possible hoops could they set up for something like that?

[chomerics]

ANd people want these clowns to run health care:rolleyes:

Or like you, want them to run a war

[Mass_SkinsFan]

BLM is a very bureaucratic group. I see their people at several large horse events each year where they're promoting their mustang and burro adoption programs. Of course they don't tell you the nightmares of paperwork, bueaucracy, inspections, etc... that you have to go through if you actually want to adopt one of their animals.

I can't believe they're any LESS bureaucratic anywhere else in their business.

[Koolblue13]

Or like you, want them to run a war

Not even close to the same thing.

[chomerics]

:applause:I agree. As expensive as it is to pay for private healthcare, it is worth the extra money for the efficiency. Whatever the private sector fails at, the government will fail worse at.

EFFICIENCY??? Our health care system is one of the most INEFFICIENT systems there is!!!

how would you measure efficiency? Would cost to results measure efficiency? Well, if you use that as a simple barometer, we are the most inefficient first world nation in regards to health care. Putting government into health care would actually make it more efficient and cheaper. just read any of the health care threads for the actual numbers, and how inefficient we actually are

[chomerics]

Not even close to the same thing.

OHHH, so a government can't be trusted to run one thing that you disagree with, but they can be trusted to run something you agree with. gotcha!!! that's really thinking outside the box :thumbsup:

[Koolblue13]

OHHH, so a government can't be trusted to run one thing that you disagree with, but they can be trusted to run something you agree with. gotcha!!! that's really thinking outside the box :thumbsup:

And who would you have run this war or the military in general?

Should the entire armed forces just be like the CIA and sell drugs and arms to fund themselves?

[Sarge]

OHHH, so a government can't be trusted to run one thing that you disagree with, but they can be trusted to run something you agree with. gotcha!!! that's really thinking outside the box :thumbsup:

Name one thing the government runs well

[Koolblue13]

EFFICIENCY??? Our health care system is one of the most INEFFICIENT systems there is!!!

how would you measure efficiency? Would cost to results measure efficiency? Well, if you use that as a simple barometer, we are the most inefficient first world nation in regards to health care. Putting government into health care would actually make it more efficient and cheaper. just read any of the health care threads for the actual numbers, and how inefficient we actually are

I believe the amount of gov't involvment in health care, is why it's so screwed up now.

[DCSaints_fan]

I wouldn't be suprised if it was some Bush/Cheney/Texas congressman crony who's getting an inflated land sale.

[Shilsu]

Name one thing the government runs well

The IRS.... Haha.

[The 12th Commandment]

I wouldn't be suprised if it was some Bush/Cheney/Texas congressman crony who's getting an inflated land sale.

They could be going through the motions, though I doubt it, they were in the office to look at a map of sites that fit their criteria. I don't think it's crooked at the local level the guy seemed solid and a bit exasperated about the situation too. There may be the occasional bad agent but it's not endemic like it is at the top.

[Larry]

1) OK, I may be bringing a scapegoat into the conversation, but is it possible that it's intentionally difficult for the feds to acquire land for the purpose of conservation, and then after they've got it, use the land for a different purpose?

2) "Federal Government inefficient" is news?

I keep remembering a bumper sticker:

Thank God we don't get all the government we pay for.

[The 12th Commandment]

1) OK, I may be bringing a scapegoat into the conversation, but is it possible that it's intentionally difficult for the feds to acquire land for the purpose of conservation, and then after they've got it, use the land for a different purpose?

2) "Federal Government inefficient" is news?

I keep remembering a bumper sticker:

Thank God we don't get all the government we pay for.

1. Undoubtedly it is, trying to dispose of land in a wilderness area or national forest would get them a lot of publicity they wouldn't like. BLM though, is the agency that manages plain old public land, in addition to wilderness, recreation areas and subsurface rights.

Their primary duties locally are to manage the leases of public land to ranchers. For pennies on the dollar IMO, which is a somewhat unpublicized form of a subsidy (It takes 80 acres to feed a cow/calf for a year out here). Critics call them welfare ranchers. So in fact a good part of their mission is quite the opposite of conservation.

We acquired the BLM land here, that I am referencing, in the Gadsden Purchase from Mexico. It's been in the family a while.

2. Yeah, I know. But sometimes the magnitude of it still surprises me.

"We're from the Government and we're here to help"

[MurrayH81]

Name one thing the government runs well

The one thing the government runs well is --- holding onto and expanding power & control.

[MDRedskinsFan]

EFFICIENCY??? Our health care system is one of the most INEFFICIENT systems there is!!!

how would you measure efficiency? Would cost to results measure efficiency? Well, if you use that as a simple barometer, we are the most inefficient first world nation in regards to health care. Putting government into health care would actually make it more efficient and cheaper. just read any of the health care threads for the actual numbers, and how inefficient we actually are

I believe in the saying, "you get what you pay for." Cheaper isn't always better, and I would NEVER trust some government agency telling me what doctors I have to go to. This country was built on the principles of choice and free enterprise, not a powerful, oversized federal government. By the government taking over the entire healthcare system, it takes away any choice consumers like you and I have in how we spend our money.

Suppose I am well-off financially, and don't get sick that often, so I choose not to spend as much of my income on healthcare coverage as most people. Instead, I choose to spend that money in other sectors of the economy. If the government overtakes the healthcare industry, it will most certainly be to spread out the cost of healthcare to all citizens, a "one size fits all" plan, where the cost to each citizen is based on taxable income. By forcing me to pay for the healthcare of other citizens, the government will be taking away my ability to choose how I spend my money. Not to mention I'll have less disposable income to spend on durable goods I might want.

Multiply this by thousands, and it has a negative effect on the economy. By starting government takeovers with this sector, we are setting a bad precedent for the future. This is the United States of America, not the Nationalist Socialistic Republic of America. The USA was built so that we give each and every citizen the OPPORTUNITY to achieve their goals and provide for their needs, not GUARANTEE that their needs will be fulfilled. This is a fundamental difference in views between the right and left. Those who argue that it isn't about this, and that times were different when the USA was founded are fooling themselves. This country has existed without an enormous change in its fundamental beliefs for over 200 years, so why the urgent need to change now? George Washington would be rolling over in his grave right now if he knew where this country is heading.

[Mark The Homer]

I heard the Canadians are horrified we might take medicine social because then they won't know where to go for real life-threatening medical problems.