Federal Agencies that should be completely eliminated

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
Originally posted by: bamacre
Worthless to talk about cutting the size of government when this country just elected another big government president. Americans don't want a smaller government, right?
There you go using logic. It has no place here. :)
 

compuwiz1

Admin Emeritus Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
27,111
926
126
The Eye Are Ess. ;)

If we could come up with a simple cut and dried taxation system for personal income taxes it could be so automated that there would be no reason to have that bloated agency that is the IRS.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Dissipate
Originally posted by: palehorse
LOL... nevermind! I didn't realize that you were a fucking nutcase...

Trillions of dollars lost in an accounting black hole, thousands dead, hundreds of thousands displaced, and I'm the nutcase, gotcha.
Well, if you seriously just suggested that we do away with our entire military, then yes, you certainly qualify as a nutcase.

Is that not what you were suggesting?
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: compuwiz1
The Eye Are Ess. ;)

If we could come up with a simple cut and dried taxation system for personal income taxes it could be so automated that there would be no reason to have that bloated agency that is the IRS.

:thumbsup:
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,586
50,771
136
Originally posted by: Evan
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Evan
Originally posted by: eskimospy

After the conclusion of major involvment in Afghanistan on our part I would cut the DoD budget anywhere from 33-50%.

That would be monumentally stupid.

No it wouldn't. Feel free to explain why you think so though.

Because that large of a cut doesn't justify the risk of losing tens of thousands of perfectly worthwhile government defense jobs with expanding global security concerns. I might reduce troop levels, but that hardly would account for the 33-50% reduction you just proposed. The DoD is far more than just troops.

Guy, I've been in the DoD. I know what it involves.

The creation of government jobs does not justify government spending. Those same jobs could be used to build roads, dams, colleges, blah blah, whatever. Our global security concerns are certainly lower than they were during the cold war, and yet we are spending at cold war rates. This is simply a poor use of our funds.
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: umbrella39
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: umbrella39
#1 DEA - kill
#2 FCC - reorganize
#3 NSA - kill
#4 DHS
#5 TSA
For each:
Reduce, consolidate, or eliminate? Also, please be sure to break DHS down into all its parts when responding. After all, "eliminating" the Coast Guard is a bit ridiculous...

Eliminating organizations does not nor should it imply that their specific parts should be eliminated, I just honestly didn't feel like typing out a couple pages of text. But to answer your specific question, the Coast guard can go back to the DOT, for example. Semper Paratus.
Would you ever consider placing the Coast Guard under DoD control? If not, why not?

And you'd honestly "kill" the entire NSA, thus destroying most of the U.S.' SIGINT capabilities?! Wow... that's a scary thought!

I edited my post, too late I see; I was going to change that to reorganize but submitted my post too early and never did get to the DHS and TSA parts.
Anyhow, to answer your DoD question, I don't see why that move would be necessary considering they already have authority over the Coast Guard during times of declared war, correct? Then if not mistaken they fall under control of the Navy. I guess their budget would be big enough to absorb the Coast Guard. What do you think? What was wrong with the Coast Guard when they were DOT controlled?
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: palehorse
And you'd honestly "kill" the entire NSA, thus destroying most of the U.S.' SIGINT capabilities?! Wow... that's a scary thought!
The question about the NSA is whether it's able to produce useful information proportionate to the cost in light of developing technologies blocking its ability to intercept.

We can spend many billions for not getting much.

The challenges are detailed well by James Bamford in 'Body of Secrets'.
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: compuwiz1
The Eye Are Ess. ;)

If we could come up with a simple cut and dried taxation system for personal income taxes it could be so automated that there would be no reason to have that bloated agency that is the IRS.

:thumbsup:

It's easy to slam the IRS (believe me, I've had my moments with them) but they function at a rather high rate of efficiency for what they have to do.

I agree that s simplified tax code would be better for us all - and make it easier to catch the 'cheats'
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: umbrella39
I edited my post, too late I see; I was going to change that to reorganize but submitted my post too early and never did get to the DHS and TSA parts.
Anyhow, to answer your DoD question, I don't see why that move would be necessary considering they already have authority over the Coast Guard during times of declared war, correct? Then if not mistaken they fall under control of the Navy. I guess their budget would be big enough to absorb the Coast Guard. What do you think? What was wrong with the Coast Guard when they were DOT controlled?

I never really had a problem with the USCG being under DoT control, but it just seems pointless to separate them from the other uniformed services. Given the fact that yes, the Navy would control them in time of war, why not streamline the process and bring them into the DoD at all other times as well? I've just always viewed their mission as much more related to Defense than Transportation.

It's certainly an interesting conundrum given their ever-expanding mission...
 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
Originally posted by: MovingTarget
How about the DEA? If you want to end the drug war, that would be the way to go. Just have the FDA regulate the safety/purity of the supply just like any other drug. Let the various other agencies handle the taxation issues...

Defense should be cut as we need to scale back foreign operations. Remember that MIC that Eisenhower warned us about? You needen't look too far to find examples of the excessive influence that they have held the past few years. (that being said, we need to treat our own soldiers better in terms of care and pay)

More will come as I think of it.

Yep allow true freedom. Like it was in 1900. The Crime rate woulf cut by 75% so we could reduce police forces. Savings billions a year. They ain't stop drug trafficing anyway. Just causing more hardships because drugs cost more when there is RISK of jail.

Yep Drug stores should sell whatever. But drug stores only.

 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Craig234
Originally posted by: palehorse
And you'd honestly "kill" the entire NSA, thus destroying most of the U.S.' SIGINT capabilities?! Wow... that's a scary thought!
The question about the NSA is whether it's able to produce useful information proportionate to the cost in light of developing technologies blocking its ability to intercept.

We can spend many billions for not getting much.

The challenges are detailed well by James Bamford in 'Body of Secrets'.
Bamford's books, while decent, are somewhat outdated. The NSA remains quite effective at what they're tasked to do... but, I might agree to some downsizing and elimination of mission-creep that has made them a bit bloated over the years.
 

BoomerD

No Lifer
Feb 26, 2006
64,144
12,461
136
Originally posted by: boomerang
Originally posted by: Craig234
None come to mind. We should cut the defense budget 50% IMO. We'd still have the biggest military budget of any nation in the world.
Well, we'd have to quit defending the world which BTW I am very much in favor of.

Come to think of it...I don't remember seeing anything in the US Constitution that says the US has to be the world's fucking police force...

Shut the doors on ALL foreign aid, on ALL support of foreign militaries, stop sales of arms to foreign nations, (let them buy them elsewhere), and stop propping up these phony regimes...we SHOULD have learned SOMETHING from the Shah of Iran fiasco...
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: umbrella39
I edited my post, too late I see; I was going to change that to reorganize but submitted my post too early and never did get to the DHS and TSA parts.
Anyhow, to answer your DoD question, I don't see why that move would be necessary considering they already have authority over the Coast Guard during times of declared war, correct? Then if not mistaken they fall under control of the Navy. I guess their budget would be big enough to absorb the Coast Guard. What do you think? What was wrong with the Coast Guard when they were DOT controlled?

I never really had a problem with the CC being under DoT control, but it just seems pointless to separate them from the other uniformed services. Given the fact that yes, the Navy would control them in time of war, why not streamline the process and bring them into the DoD at all other times as well? I've just always viewed their mission as much more related to Defense than Transportation.

It's certainly an interesting conundrum given their ever-expanding mission...

I see your point; it does seem kind of counterproductive to have different authorities during wartime and peacetime. I guess if we are going to consider them one of the five armed services, we may as well make it official. The move seems as though it would potentially save a lot of red tape and money.
 
Dec 10, 2005
25,023
8,298
136
Originally posted by: BoomerD
Originally posted by: boomerang
Originally posted by: Craig234
None come to mind. We should cut the defense budget 50% IMO. We'd still have the biggest military budget of any nation in the world.
Well, we'd have to quit defending the world which BTW I am very much in favor of.

Come to think of it...I don't remember seeing anything in the US Constitution that says the US has to be the world's fucking police force...

Shut the doors on ALL foreign aid, on ALL support of foreign militaries, stop sales of arms to foreign nations, (let them buy them elsewhere), and stop propping up these phony regimes...we SHOULD have learned SOMETHING from the Shah of Iran fiasco...

Foreign military bases allow us to project power to various places in the world, protecting our interests in those regions or by just creating general stability, which is good for all (since stability can lead to economic growth, which is also good for all). Plus, if we weren't there, someone else would and push their ideology, which could conflict with what would be best for us. Foreign aide - some of it should be re-evaluated, but again, goes along with pushing stability in various regions and furthering development.
 

sonambulo

Diamond Member
Feb 22, 2004
4,777
1
0
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: Gand1
NEA provides Americans with a little something called culture. We waste plenty of money in many other areas that could be cut.
"Culture" is something that occurs naturally in every society.

Prove this statement.
 
Dec 10, 2005
25,023
8,298
136
It's funny how people bitch about the bureaucracy, but we created it. The layers are very ineffiecient at times and should be streamlined, but too much streamlining can cause problems in the future. Think of it like a strong, benevolent ruler - if he had absolute power, things could be great, but you could get the exact opposite with the next ruler - such as an idiot that strips people's rights and drives the country into the ground. The bureaucracy is there to balance things out.

Things I think should be cut/reduced in size/combined:
DHS - get rid of it. Just a giant clusterfuck.
DEA - Combine with ATF. Stopping war on drugs will save additional money and allow further cuts
Medicare - Allow Medicare to use its size to bargain with drug companies. Also allow for it to get competitve bids for medical equipment. These two changes in policy will save billions.
I'm sure there are other changes that can be made, but that's all that comes to mind at this moment (and my knowledge of Federal agencies is rather limited).
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,237
6,338
126
The thing that killing the world and costing trillions is mental illness. The entire world is suffering from self hate. Self hate is the cause of every misery. It is the cause of war, of competition for resources, of crime, of murder of genocide, of hunger of homelessness, of despair, of government. But the world will not spend a dime to heal itself because all the fools alive are in denial. I don't hate myself, I just hate you. Hahahaha, so pay your taxes to clean up your shit. Your bed, lie in it.
 

evident

Lifer
Apr 5, 2005
12,014
626
126
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: hellod9
How about all the ones starting with the letter D?


Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
www.darpa.mil

Defense Information Systems Agency
www.disa.mil

Defense Intelligence Agency
www.dia.mil

Defense Logistics Agency
www.supply.dla.mil

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
www.dnfsb.gov

Defense Security Service
www.dss.mil

Defense Threat Reduction Agency
www.dtra.mil

Drug Enforcement Administration
www.usdoj.gov/dea

DARPA and DISA? Your ideas are mostly bad.

DARPA created the internets. defense spending just like nasa is great for tech advancement, but spendings needs to be reigned in.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: sonambulo
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: Gand1
NEA provides Americans with a little something called culture. We waste plenty of money in many other areas that could be cut.
"Culture" is something that occurs naturally in every society.

Prove this statement.
I'm not sure how one would "prove" the statement without first agreeing on a definition. But, I'll try...

Even the most primitive societies, such as native Indians and African tribes, have expressed themselves through art, song, and dance, for thousands of years.

Do you honestly believe that the arts, entertainment, or other "culture" industries in the U.S. would be drastically impacted if the NEA ceased to exist?!

Hell, we spend more private funds on those industries than the entire rest of the world combined!

Culture and artful expression are natural phenomenons that need no Federal funding to develop, thrive, or survive.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
9,002
115
106
How about reducing the Dept. of Education for x-12 education? Let them fund/direct research for higher ed, but leave the burden of K-12 to the states?
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: MovingTarget
How about reducing the Dept. of Education for x-12 education? Let them fund/direct research for higher ed, but leave the burden of K-12 to the states?
I like the sound of that too.
 

sonambulo

Diamond Member
Feb 22, 2004
4,777
1
0
Originally posted by: palehorse
I'm not sure how one would "prove" the statement without first agreeing on a definition. But, I'll try...

Even the most primitive societies, such as native Indians and African tribes, have expressed themselves through art, song, and dance, for thousands of years.

Do you honestly believe that the arts, entertainment, or other "culture" industries in the U.S. would be drastically impacted if the NEA ceased to exist?!

Hell, we spend more private funds on those industries than the entire rest of the world combined!

Culture and artful expression are natural phenomenons that need no Federal funding to develop, thrive, or survive.

For the purpose of discussing NEA endowments, arts and entertainment are separate. The arts, which receive NEA funding, include classical music performances, theater performances, educational (think NPR) tv and radio projects in addition to various arts education programs for youth. Entertainment covers tv and radio outside of NPR, hollywood and indie film, video games and modern publishing.

Naturally, the entertainment industries would not be affected in the short term if the NEA were eliminated. In the long run there would be a shortage of capable workers. Vast amounts of the talent currently employed in entertainment industries got their start working at in amateur level productions funded by the NEA. Furthermore, the NEA provides grants which oftentimes act as the 'big break' that gives many visual artists the funding to complete projects that vault said artists onto the world stage.

Interesting you used native tribes as an example. Guess where the funding for exhibitions of native arts comes from. What's also interesting is that native arts did not require the performance spaces, raw materials, or expensive equipment that many modern artistic disciplines need.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
36
91
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
DHS, first and foremost. They are no longer necessary.

Ah, so let anyone get on a plane or enter our ports?


Please run for some sort of public office, so you can be humiliated.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,174
28,827
136
DHS
DEA
Selective Service
APHIS
Every agency w/in the USDA that hands out handouts to farmers to do nothing.