Post #36766 by Dope1 on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy ❤

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (72)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 2

Because the entire way they tried to go about doing this was a fustercluck. There's no way to accurately describe which of the federal programs you want frozen, and differentiate them from the programs you don't want frozen, in a paragraph or three. If you want to freeze a bunch of programs that you think conflict with your EO's in a way that only catches those programs without confusing the hell out of everyone, the only real way to do it is to come up with a list of the things you want frozen. Not leave it to everyone else to figure out what you actually want to happen.

This I'll agree with. They wanted to blanketly get rid of a lot pork and bad spending, but didn't think through the level of resistance they'd get.

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (72)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.