Shock: Audit Finds Government Agency “Dysfunctional” As Costs Explode
show comments
  • Kenny

    Can’t any government agency do anything right?????

  • Mrs. Davis

    DOD. But it’s very expensive.

  • Toni

    “strangles itself in red tape” while running up massive debt to be repaid with interest by taxes on the rest of us, and on our grandchildren.

    Chris Christie pulled NJ out of a hugely expensive NY-NJ project. Chris Christie for President! 2016, if Obama gets four more years, alas. We need hard-headed, plain-speaking leaders at the national level who can get things done even in the face of fierce Blue opposition.

  • WigWag

    I agree with much of what Professor Mead says here about the Port Authority but it is too bad the Professor can’t get over his habit of exaggerating. Gilding the lilly as he is apt to do makes his argument weaker not stronger.

    Professor Mead complains about the region’s transportation system being mismanaged, poorly financed and terribly maintained. He is right that there are problems, but the New York metropolitan area that the Port Authority serves, has by far the most diverse and successful system of public transportation in the United States.

    If he can name a better one, he should tell us where it is.

  • Eurydice

    Yes, indeed. All those lazy, corrupt and thievish people, wanting their Porsches without having to work for them. How dare they expect the Germans to bail them out! Oh, wait…

  • Is bureaucratic inefficiency part of the blue social model?

    Take welfare for example. Right now we have a hodge podge of means tested social benefit programs. They all add up (according to the Heritage Foundation) to something like $700 billion a year, and no doubt there is plenty of waste.

    OTH the Social Security Administration is a fairly efficient bureaucracy in so far as the collection and distribution of retirement benefits is concerned. Payroll taxes are automatically deducted and benefits are calculated on the basis of past earnings and age.

    Doesn’t this suggest that government is better at transferring income than in administering means-tested benefits? An across-the-board wage subsidy for all hourly wage workers might be the better option.

    Suppose, for example, that for every dollar earned the government would add an additional 25% or 30% right out of the treasury and onto the paycheck. Reverse withholding as it were. That would preserve the link between effort and reward — a key consideration for the working poor — and would be a lot simpler to administer.

    In principle we could restore real hourly take-home pay to what it would have been in the absence of our current trade and immigration policies, but that’s a bigger issue.

  • Or maybe just a vast expansion of EITC, since that’s a program we already know.

  • Gary L

    Who shall doubt the secret hid
    Under Cheops’ pyramid
    Was that the contractor did
    Cheops out of several millions?
    Or that Joseph’s sudden rise
    To Comptroller of Supplies
    Was a fraud of monstrous size
    On King Pharoah’s swart civilians?

    – Rudyard Kipling, A General Summary

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2017 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to and affiliated sites.