The Liberals have realized that talking about building things is a far more cost effective means of corruption than actually building things. All the money spent can go to PMC Liberal voters, clients and crooks. Building things involves payments to foreigners, small business owners, and blue collars, few of whom vote Liberal.
One of the elephants in the room (excellent overview BTW - and it doesn’t matter if AI is involved as long as the content makes sense to me) is the incentive for burrocrats and politicians to deliberately keep things vague and uncertain to ensure they get lucrative consulting, advisory, or finders fees (apologies for the Oxford comma -trying to prove I’m not AI) when they retire or form a small consulting operation as a side gig.
Regarding “publish the rules” as one way the government could shrink the habitat, sometimes I don’t believe our government starts off with any knowledge on what the rules are they should be publishing.
It’s much safer spending defence money letting consultants take educated guesses at what those rules might be. Then from a battery of hits and misses something publishable might emerge. If a sizeable chunk of that defence money disappears into the habitat hole without producing an actual deliverable, we can still show our NATO partners we’re doing our bit percentage-wise.
I don't care if AI was involved but, for the record, it doesn't signal AI to me. The article is well written, relevant, frank, based on engagement/skin-in-the-game experience. BZ
Has The Line published a policy on AI assisted articles? I have no doubt that this post reflects the views of its (human) author, but it reads as AI written.
Interesting piece. I appreciate the honesty in playing the game.
Some people love the process but dread the end game. Making decisions means taking action and ultimately responsibility. We are living with Trudeau’s legacy. He increased the amount paid to consultants and enlarged the public service. Chasing data and insight to avoid action is an action. His predecessors demonstrated the risks of taking action and he gleefully enjoyed criticizing them. Hindsight is always 20/20. Action is risky so instead he pursued perfect knowledge at a cost that Canadians will pay for generations to come.
The Liberals have realized that talking about building things is a far more cost effective means of corruption than actually building things. All the money spent can go to PMC Liberal voters, clients and crooks. Building things involves payments to foreigners, small business owners, and blue collars, few of whom vote Liberal.
One of the elephants in the room (excellent overview BTW - and it doesn’t matter if AI is involved as long as the content makes sense to me) is the incentive for burrocrats and politicians to deliberately keep things vague and uncertain to ensure they get lucrative consulting, advisory, or finders fees (apologies for the Oxford comma -trying to prove I’m not AI) when they retire or form a small consulting operation as a side gig.
Regarding “publish the rules” as one way the government could shrink the habitat, sometimes I don’t believe our government starts off with any knowledge on what the rules are they should be publishing.
It’s much safer spending defence money letting consultants take educated guesses at what those rules might be. Then from a battery of hits and misses something publishable might emerge. If a sizeable chunk of that defence money disappears into the habitat hole without producing an actual deliverable, we can still show our NATO partners we’re doing our bit percentage-wise.
I appreciated this column. It rings true to me.
I don't care if AI was involved but, for the record, it doesn't signal AI to me. The article is well written, relevant, frank, based on engagement/skin-in-the-game experience. BZ
Enjoyed the piece. AI assisted or otherwise.
Has The Line published a policy on AI assisted articles? I have no doubt that this post reflects the views of its (human) author, but it reads as AI written.
Interesting piece. I appreciate the honesty in playing the game.
Some people love the process but dread the end game. Making decisions means taking action and ultimately responsibility. We are living with Trudeau’s legacy. He increased the amount paid to consultants and enlarged the public service. Chasing data and insight to avoid action is an action. His predecessors demonstrated the risks of taking action and he gleefully enjoyed criticizing them. Hindsight is always 20/20. Action is risky so instead he pursued perfect knowledge at a cost that Canadians will pay for generations to come.