What the hell does "efficiencies" mean, when Palin say "looking for efficiencies" in agencies?

Windy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:26 PM
Original message

What the hell does "efficiencies" mean, when Palin say "looking for efficiencies" in agencies?

I just don't get the reference!

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=5783816

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

polichick

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:27 PM
Response to Original message

1. She doesn't know either - just a talking point Rove told her to mention.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

TransitJohn

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:27 PM
Response to Original message

2. It's code

for cutting entitlements, privatizing SS, etc....you know, the usual.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

annabanana

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #2

5. yuppers. . They think businesses are, above all else, efficient.. . . .n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Patsy Stone

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:28 PM
Response to Original message

3. Smaller government/less programs

It's a code word.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

BlueIdaho

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:29 PM
Response to Original message

4. Totally meaningless - it just sounds good in a sound bite. nt.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dbonds

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:30 PM
Response to Original message

6. Efficiencies many times means people working harder and longer for less money.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

cliffordu

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #6

12. DING DING DING, We have a winner!!!!

And they'll gut the other regulatory agencies so we can have more lead painted toys, and tainted meat.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

TheCentepedeShoes

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:30 PM
Response to Original message

7. Move each agency

into a one-room apartment? Who knows, I don't understand much of what she says.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Windy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:31 PM
Response to Original message

8. Is it just me, or does that sound like a made up term

Thowing out a fake big word to make people think that she knows what she's talking about....

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Zuiderelle

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:32 PM
Response to Original message

9. Layoffs

Just what this country needs. More unemployed Americans.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

JerseygirlCT

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:34 PM
Response to Original message

10. Just what you think: absolutely nothing

It's gobbledyguck - filler so she can sounds like she means something.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

CitizenPatriot

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:38 PM
Response to Original message

11. it's republicese

"Efficiencies": Smug statement implying thrift, small govt, competence to the base; also code word to party movers: (no more) efficiencies for us.

Translates to: more pay for higher ups, more underlings to do actual work, more paperwork, less competence, cronyism, outrageous spending habits with no budget, debt, debt, debt, lack of responsibility, per diem charges for living in own home, average hard working americans now homeless, largest unemployment in history, corporations making record profits, no health insurance, no benefits for vets, lying about earmarks, rampant sex and drug parties with oil reps, largest deficit in history....

GOPPER LEGACY OF EFFICIENCIES

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

dailykoff

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:42 PM
Response to Original message

13. Gutting regulatory agencies further, privatizing military contracting and intel,

and generally gutting the Treasury.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

grantcart

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:46 PM
Response to Original message

14. it means that we have a governor of one of the states that doesn't understand

what an "entitlement" program is.

It means that they have put somebody on the national ticket of one of the major parties that doesn't understand what an entitlement programs is.

It means that there are tens of millions of Americans that want entitlements but don't understand them and don't want to pay for them but want to get paid out of "looking for efficiencies".

It also means that she thinks that during the last 8 years Palin believes that Bush was not looking for such efficiencies.

It means that you have given me a fucking headache thinking about how completely brain dead half of the electorate has become by asking sensible questions.

Please stop it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PufPuf23

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:48 PM
Response to Original message

15. Interpretation of Neocon Talking Point

Edited on Sat Sep-13-08 12:50 PM by PufPuf23

1. Layoff career employees particularly in effective programs.
2. Reduce oversight / checks and balances.
3. Contract to corporate cronies functions and as much management as feasible.
4. Pack agency management with individuals that pass political and ideological litmus tests.
5. Privatize assets (such as real estate; note that the federal governement is the largest owner of real estate in most western states and Alaska.

I would bet that in the case of Alaska, Palin is in favor of privatizing or turning to state control federal lands.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

donco6

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:49 PM
Response to Original message

16. Making people stop doing things Repugs don't like.

Like a government agency actually HELPING people, rather than just being a compliance monitoring organization (ala Dept. of Educ.)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

undeterred

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 12:51 PM
Response to Original message

17. It's like when Bush made FEMA more "efficient" by letting people die.

You know, hiring your friends and relatives is more "efficient" than hiring competent people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

SOS

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 01:00 PM
Response to Original message

18. A guess...

Billions in no-bid contracts for Halliburton and $220 million in wasted taxpayer money for Alaska?
The Republican version of efficiency.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

quakerboy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 01:21 PM
Response to Original message

19. Anything that might help people

Who didn't donate to the McP campaign are inefficiencies. Efficiencies would then be eliminating those.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

PCIntern

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 01:32 PM
Response to Original message

20. Small apartments wherein you can have sex with lobbyists...and quickly!

tha'ts what we mean by 'efficiencies".

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Windy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 01:54 PM
Response to Original message

21. Actually, I think she is using a "big word" inappropriately and doesnt know it... limited vocabulary

Edited on Sat Sep-13-08 02:27 PM by Windy

She's trying to appear intelligent and versed on the issue when she doesn't really know anything...

Again, Highschooler attempting to BS her way through a final.

I have to tell you that that line of discussion made me cringe

I'm sure that she was "instructed" to use the word "inefficiencies" and is too illiterate to realize that she used the wrong word...over and over and over!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

yurbud

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 01:55 PM
Response to Original message

22. Rove meant cut or privatize, so they more efficiently transfer tax dollars into cronies pockets

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

JustAnotherGen

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-13-08 02:05 PM
Response to Original message

23. In the context of Government - I didn't understand it

From a management perspective - I did. But business methods and procedures/simplification 'efficiencies' could never be used in the US Government.

Going paperless? Sure.
Streamlining systems. Probably.

But after that - no can do. All other ideas requires smaller groups of people with one common objective. That could never translate over to 300 Million people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Tue Apr 30th 2024, 02:39 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.