....how many times do I have to explain to you....
....You can shut down speeding in a hurry by putting a whole bunch of cops on the road and giving them awards for the ones who write the most tickets. The question is: Is it a good allocation of resources? How big do you want government to be? Same story chasing little fish who send money to support terrorism while thinking they're supporting widows and orphans. You catch the big fish, try "walking back the cat" on everyone who sent him money . . . but how many FBI counterterrorism agents would it take to make solid cases? And that's what the FBI is all about. They want proof that will stand up in court. And all you've got is proof that the little fish wrote a check to a charity. You don't have proof that the little fish knew the charity was a scam, covering up where the money was really going. HUGE waste of resources....
You created a ridiculous scenario about making me boss of something or another, and I accepted it as fun. But, my citations idea seems to have hit on the correct strategy.
There are many examples of policy creating obscene numbers of little fish. Take the southern border, doesn't that prove that a revolving door processing policy has indeed come out of the endless strategy meetings? Based on those who use electronic payments, why not just send them all a computer generated letter saying they are subject to being investigated in a case related to big fish, so and so?
I can understand your speeding example, though. I had wondered why the entire nation had stopped issuing speeding tickets, such a waste of resources. Now that every big fish US car maker and importer has been shut down, has a vacuum been created for new big fish to swoop in? Speaking of quotas, are investigation and prosecution decisions made for safety or use or lose it or tic marks? Whoa Larry, I'm kidding, just wondering why policy never ever changes with the agendas of different admins.
