Hacker News Reader

Comment by theultdev | Hacker News Reader

It just happened. You have no idea what the evaluations were, they haven't been released and you weren't in the discussions. I hope they will be though.

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?

View on HN

>You have no idea what the evaluations were

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.

You're assuming good faith of these committees. Comes down to who you trust.

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.

Trust shouldn't even be a factor.

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.

If they were made in good faith, then surely we have some documentation for it in order to learn from those original mistakes. Or some way for people to evaluate that choice... It was a transparent decision not some random populist move... Right?...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com