Did they? What were the accident rates before and after? Why was the committee created? Do you think the people who axed these committees have an answer to the above questions? Or is it simply "government is bad"?
There's already OSHA, NIOSH, and NOAA that cover these things, so imo it's probably redundant at the least, harmful and wasteful at the worst.
That's kind of the point: they're doing no such thing.
All of the talk from Trump, Musk, the now-departed Ramaswamy, etc. hasn't been about sober analysis and careful evaluation, it's endless mockery and dumb jokes ("look at this agency name or person's title, what does that even mean LOL"), or "government bad" as the parent put it.
The pushback this gets isn't because people love bureaucracy or hate efficiency but because it's obvious this isn't an actual effort to improve anything, just mindlessly slashing things businesses/the powerful don't like and stunts to make the base clap.
From an outsider perspective this committee in particular seems redundant as there are other agencies that handle this scope.
If you want to boil it down to "government bad" sure, but I view it more as "over-regulation is bad".
Or do you view the government as a well oiled machine that couldn't have any bloat and we should never evaluate and cull feature creep in it?
Sure we do because, again, the people put in charge of these initiatives spend endless time just making jokes about agency names that they clearly (sometimes explicitly!) have no idea about or mindless promises to cut the government in half.
>Or do you view the government as a well oiled machine that couldn't have any bloat and we should never evaluate and cull feature creep in it?
Since you missed it the first time I'll copy the part of my comment that addresses exactly this again:
>The pushback this gets isn't because people love bureaucracy or hate efficiency but because it's obvious this isn't an actual effort to improve anything, just mindlessly slashing things businesses/the powerful don't like and stunts to make the base clap.
The problem is you're assuming good faith when there has been ample demonstration that there isn't any here.
I voted in Trump to do this and more, I trust the evaluations were made properly and I support the decision.
There's obvious bias in your tone (which is okay, which is why I stated my position) so it makes sense you don't like this move because you don't trust this administration.
We're similar in that regard in that I don't trust the government implicitly, which is why I support culling bloat.
Decisions should be made based on facts and numbers and your side (you, Trump and Elon included) have provided none of these.
It's pure ideology without basis in objectivity.