1)Committment - if the project, program, or whatever is not going to be funded, fully, for the length of time necessary, then do not fund it at all. Stop spreading "peanut butter" as nothing is really accomplished.
2) As a planner / manager / technologist, when I request X dollars, I need X dollars. I know that my budget request will be automatically cut in half - at least, so therefor I must request double what is really needed to receive what is actually needed. What kind of logic is this?
3) If at the end of the fiscal year I have left over budget - I executed the program for less dollars than anticipated, why am I penalized for returning the money? I am almost required to spend spend spend on often worthless garbage. I should be rewarded for coming in under budget.
4) Why do I need to hand hold a government sponsor - at great excess, often up to 1/3 of the budget - personal face time, or lose my budget in overnight sweeps to support a favorite pet project, or real emergency.
The idea is not to complain, but highlite common practices which must change as they cost this country many dollars, lost time, and departure of real talent.
Bring realism and integrity to the budget / planning process.
Comments (4)
What I think you are proposing is a government planning, programming, and budgeting system (PPBS) that is based on full access to all relevant information, transparent sound decision making processes, and no hidden costs.
Agree. See Open Source Agency for an implementing idea.
Reply to Robert David
Yes, in addition - I deal in what used to be research - it is now all located in China;
Invention usually does not happen on a schedule. I can account for most variables, and best guess, based on experience, the rest. I can have excellent weeks of progress, and terrible months overcoming technical problems. Real breakthroughs can, and do, pay large dividends. Virtually no program / project are fixed. Stuff happens - more so in research areas - no not tech spin such as directed energy.
In this context, the budget game, is, in my opinion, skewed to produce dubious results, waste on monumental scales, and penalizes those who would like to see better - efficient use of taxpayer funds.
SEE: CAFR1. Google it. That is something that can be done by us.
http://CAFR1.com and http://TaxRetirement.com