Some 20 different agencies are represented in the center. Lots of the work handled involves services for businesses, such as registration and approvals for establishing a new business, and various approvals related to construction. The center also provides a number of citizen services, such as applications for passports and work permits, and various transactions related to health insurance. Many, though not all, of the forms can be completed online. The in-person services are designed for people -- often the older and less-educated -- with questions or who need in-person assistance actually filling out a form.Back in the 90's I had this sort of thing in the back of my mind. InfoShare had that dream, and the Osage County office in Kansas was a step along the way. I was ambivalent about the projects: moving to PC's and the Internet in county offices could only be justified by cost savings--good, which inevitably meant personnel cuts, but that meant a further decline in rural area jobs--not good. One faint possibility would be a true consolidation of USDA services, where things like Skype (CU-SeeMe back then) could enable one employee to tap the expertise of others located in distant offices but then adding other services. Problem was, government doesn't have that heavy of an impact on daily lives, particularly in rural areas. Suppose the service center could handle social security--how many visits do the 2 or 3,000 residents of a rural county make to a distant social security office in a year? And given the difficulty in getting USDA agencies working together, any further expansion at that time was a pipe dream.
Blogging on bureaucracy, organizations, USDA, agriculture programs, American history, the food movement, and other interests. Often contrarian, usually optimistic, sometimes didactic, occasionally funny, rarely wrong, always a nitpicker.
Wednesday, December 07, 2016
One Stop Shopping for Government Services
FCW has Steve Kelman's piece on a one-stop shop in China:
Tuesday, December 06, 2016
Changes in DC
There's a piece in the Washingtonian on how the Obama administration changed Washington, DC.
Perhaps the single most telling stat on changes in DC during the past years is contained in this Post article on the stagnation in high school graduations. There's a table with the data on VA, MD, and DC, showing a graph of rates from 2000 to 2031-2. While white rates in both states are flat, the graph for white rates in DC soars above all others, reaching 500+ percent over 2000-1 by the end of the period. (I'm guessing that the rate is already 200 percent of 2000-1, an increase paralleling the Hispanic increase, but the Hispanic rate levels off and then drops in the 2020's.)
Perhaps the Obama administration symbolized the demographic changes in DC, without actually causing them.
Perhaps the single most telling stat on changes in DC during the past years is contained in this Post article on the stagnation in high school graduations. There's a table with the data on VA, MD, and DC, showing a graph of rates from 2000 to 2031-2. While white rates in both states are flat, the graph for white rates in DC soars above all others, reaching 500+ percent over 2000-1 by the end of the period. (I'm guessing that the rate is already 200 percent of 2000-1, an increase paralleling the Hispanic increase, but the Hispanic rate levels off and then drops in the 2020's.)
Perhaps the Obama administration symbolized the demographic changes in DC, without actually causing them.
Monday, December 05, 2016
Waning Enthusiasm for Pro Football
I don't know about the rest of the world but I'm gradually seeing my enthusiasm for pro football wane. A decade or more ago I would watch every play of every game on Sunday, particularly the Redskins. And I would be very much into the game, yelling at great plays, rapid heartbeat, etc.
But over time it's become easier for me to miss parts of games, or even the whole game. Yes, when I'm watching and the team is doing good, I really enjoy it. And I still read the Post articles and check the stats. But...
Why is it? 20 years ago or more, actually more, the Redskins were a good team. Since then they haven't been--don't think they've won a playoff game the few times they've actually made the playoffs. So there's that. There's also the consciousness of injuries, particularly concussions. And the game is slower, what with replays and challenges and more ads. Used to be a 1 o'clock game would end before 4, but no longer.
There's also age--my supply of interest seems to be shrinking generally. I no longer read every story in the newspaper, for example.
Age might be the determining factor.
But over time it's become easier for me to miss parts of games, or even the whole game. Yes, when I'm watching and the team is doing good, I really enjoy it. And I still read the Post articles and check the stats. But...
Why is it? 20 years ago or more, actually more, the Redskins were a good team. Since then they haven't been--don't think they've won a playoff game the few times they've actually made the playoffs. So there's that. There's also the consciousness of injuries, particularly concussions. And the game is slower, what with replays and challenges and more ads. Used to be a 1 o'clock game would end before 4, but no longer.
There's also age--my supply of interest seems to be shrinking generally. I no longer read every story in the newspaper, for example.
Age might be the determining factor.
Sunday, December 04, 2016
Trump and Nondisclosure
Trump is famous for requiring his employees to sign nondisclosure agreements. Apparently also when his lawsuits are settled, there's a no-publicity clause in the agreement. So I posed a
question on this Post piece: could Trump issue an executive order requiring all Presidential appointees to sign a nondisclosure agreement modeled after the ones he requires employees of his businesses? Don't know the answer.
I do know that the Supreme Court back in the 70's limited the right of the executive branch to restrict employees' contact with Congress.
question on this Post piece: could Trump issue an executive order requiring all Presidential appointees to sign a nondisclosure agreement modeled after the ones he requires employees of his businesses? Don't know the answer.
I do know that the Supreme Court back in the 70's limited the right of the executive branch to restrict employees' contact with Congress.
Saturday, December 03, 2016
Knowing What You Don't Know; a Corollary
I may have blogged in the distant past about a time I discovered the importance of knowing what you don't know. Briefly, I took a call from the Arkansas program specialist. I hadn't been in my position too long, the specialist pressed for an answer on an issue, while clearly indicating which way he thought the answer should go. I don't like conflict (might be an understatement) so I went along with him.
Some months later OIG filed a report challenging the rule the Arkansas office had applied, reporting that they had had approval from Washington for this dubious action. Big embarrassment when I had to admit to my boss, a very nice guy, I was the one who had screwed up. After that learning experience I tried to remember the lesson and to teach it to my employees when I moved back into management.
Long story short: Evan Osnos, a very good writer in the New Yorker, has this paragraph on Trump's phone call with the president of Taiwan:
[The ability to spell diminishes with age, at least in my case. Misspelled "correllary"]
Some months later OIG filed a report challenging the rule the Arkansas office had applied, reporting that they had had approval from Washington for this dubious action. Big embarrassment when I had to admit to my boss, a very nice guy, I was the one who had screwed up. After that learning experience I tried to remember the lesson and to teach it to my employees when I moved back into management.
Long story short: Evan Osnos, a very good writer in the New Yorker, has this paragraph on Trump's phone call with the president of Taiwan:
"For a piece I published in September, about what Trump’s first term could look like, I spoke to a former Republican White House official whom Trump has consulted, who told me, “Honestly, the problem with Donald is he doesn’t know what he doesn’t know.” It turns out that is half of the problem; the other half is that he has surrounded himself with people who know how much he doesn’t know."
[The ability to spell diminishes with age, at least in my case. Misspelled "correllary"]
Friday, December 02, 2016
Farm Bill Debates
A Think Progress post here farm bill issues: specifically will the Republican dominance lead to an attack on food stamps or on environmental regulations.
Illinois extension here has a discussion of the baseline for the farm bill's farm programs--perhaps $10 billion a year. I believe that's higher than the current bill's baseline was. ("Baseline" is, if I understand, the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of future costs, over 10 years, if all Congress did was to extend current farm bill provisions with no change.)
Illinois extension here has a discussion of the baseline for the farm bill's farm programs--perhaps $10 billion a year. I believe that's higher than the current bill's baseline was. ("Baseline" is, if I understand, the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of future costs, over 10 years, if all Congress did was to extend current farm bill provisions with no change.)
Wednesday, November 30, 2016
Would You Buy Stock in a Trump IPO?
Not I. Too afraid that any anyone anti-US would attack the hotels, damage the golf courses, whatever.
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Hikikimori
A Japanese phenomenon, young men who don't work and don't play with others, instead withdrawing from social contact. Hat tip: Marginal Revolution.
I've some sympathy with them--I wasn't that extreme but I also used to withdraw, at least outside work.
It strikes me that it's something which can exist only in a wealthy society, where people have enough to support unproductive members of the society. As such it's a bit related to the US decline in labor force participation by men in the prime working ages. Whether it's society's safety nets or the informal workforce, it's a measure of how far we've changed from a rural agrarian society.
I've some sympathy with them--I wasn't that extreme but I also used to withdraw, at least outside work.
It strikes me that it's something which can exist only in a wealthy society, where people have enough to support unproductive members of the society. As such it's a bit related to the US decline in labor force participation by men in the prime working ages. Whether it's society's safety nets or the informal workforce, it's a measure of how far we've changed from a rural agrarian society.
Monday, November 28, 2016
Where You Stand Affects Your Opinion
Because you see different things: Ran across this instance this morning:
Every set I’ve been on has had an ethnically diverse crew. I see how directors might not clue in to the lack of diversity of their work because they look out onto an inclusive set. The principal actors onscreen are only a small percentage of the entire body of employees. What they forget is that the rest of the world only sees who is put in front of the camera, and they are hoping to look into a mirror.This sort of thing occurs with race more generally, dating back to antebellum days: Most blacks lived on large plantations with large numbers of other blacks and small numbers of whites; most white slave owners lived with small numbers of slaves; most whites weren't slave owners.
From a Vox post by a Chinese-American actress.
Sunday, November 27, 2016
The Trump Administration: Drama
Since I failed to predict Trump's win, why not predict what I expect from the administration? Basically, I'm relying quite a bit on the Reagan history here:
- Drama. We'll go from "no drama, Obama" to the drama king himself. Lots of t.oing and froing, changes of direction, suspense over decisions. I expect this because Trump himself doesn't seem to have firm beliefs in a lot of areas, because he's new to government, and because likely many of his appointees will be new. Compare this to Obama, whose big four appointees (State, DOD, Justice, and Treasury) were all old hands, with Clinton being the only one new to her responsibilities.
- Scandal. Despite the Republicans best efforts, Obama didn't have significant scandals. Trump is likely to. Think of Reagan: Interior, HUD, and Iran-contra spring to mind very readily. That's partly the same factors as for drama, but it's also appointing true believers who are more likely to follow their beliefs across the lines of ethics and legality.
- Economy growth or inflation. I can go a couple ways here: I believe Trump is inheriting a good economy, one which likely would continue to improve. So maybe he gets really lucky and has four solid years of growth despite himself (i.e., he doesn't carry out his promises). Alternatively, he carries out promises which results in inflation and rocky economics by disrupting trade, increasing inflationary pressures, promoting inefficiencies in the economy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)