I promised a mailbag before the end of the year, and here it is. I’ll try to get one more out before the calendar officially turns to 2026.

Enjoy this one, and I’ll see you again on Monday with a fresh Rude edition.

The Swamp

Hi Sean,

You are absolutely correct. The real problem is that the swamp exists because the government is huge (too many laws, regulations, and people) and spends so much money. Capitalism at work, i.e., come up with a creative way to get some of that money. The swamp goes when gov't is pared down to what it should be and what it was in, say, 1783-ish. The second problem is that Trump is not a small government guy. He doesn't viscerally believe that small government is the answer. He thinks better government is the answer. Sure, he wants to have fewer anti-Americans in government, and that may result in fewer people. But it doesn't mean fewer people for the sake of fewer people.

Spending also makes the government huge. And Trump, for whatever reason (maybe he knows that forcing less spending is impossible and prefers to increase income, but whatever), doesn't force less spending (at least his efforts have been fruitless). So, while the money keeps getting spent, the swamp will keep feeding. Trump does believe in fewer regulations, but that is not easy. There are hundreds of thousands of them, and there are interest groups fighting them every inch of the way using the courts. This is a hard slough. If I were in Congress, I would work to write a bill with the goal of starting from scratch. The first line would be: "All laws, regulations, civil and common, are hereby rescinded as having never existed and will be replaced by the following . . ." There is just no way to fix it otherwise; until it is, the swamp will always be there and thrive, adapting to each administration and ruling party. Oh, and don't get me started on the stupidest and most insane export from England: common law.

Jim S.

Jim, thanks for writing in. Love the idea! I wish it would happen.

Pushing Brains Into Industry

Sean,

I enjoyed your article today, but in my experience, there is often an overlap, especially with engineering professors. My uncle was a professor at Colorado School of Mines for nearly 30 years, and he told me of various consulting jobs he took with companies that needed an expert for a special problem. I have no idea what fraction of his income may have come from such work, but I believe it was significant. And I went back to Utah State University to get a master's degree in environmental engineering a little over 40 years ago, and at that time the engineering professors were only paid three months' salary by the university. They had to get the remainder of their salary by bringing in research projects/funding to the university. This funding not only paid their salaries, but also funds to support graduate students (me!) who wound up doing most of the grunt work under the direction of the professor. They also needed to publish, but their papers nearly all grew out of the research funding they brought in. I cannot speak to how things worked in other colleges, except I did hear one of my profs gripe about his neighbor, an English professor who was paid nine months' salary by the university, who usually was able to head home for the day by 2:30 p.m. or so, and had his summers off. I suspect that industry funding for other fields is less, but I simply don't know.

Gordon F.

Hello Sean,

I agree with your views on the many advantages of Pushing Brains into Industry. From knowing technical experts who worked in the former U.S.S.R., I saw the profound benefits of how they educated and employed brilliant, creative people. I excelled at solving complex problems with unusual, effective designs. That was the result of my developing the artist-cum-engineer personality that I was born with. But by the time I was 50, I had been fired from five jobs. The common thread was that many managers didn't just tell me what they wanted BUT told me how to do it. That was a problem for me. I then began working at a large engineering company alongside a young engineer with exceptional management talent. He quickly became my manager and progressed to office manager and division manager. Having worked alongside me, he had great respect for my gifts, and he tripled my salary. I worked there for 25 years and created many outstanding designs for our clients. My point is that creative people sometimes have personalities that are not compatible with the usual American top-down control. Bringing people out of academia successfully will require flexible management.

Best wishes to you and your beautiful family.

Gary H. 

Thank you both for writing in. Gordon, I’m sure you’re correct. The problem isn’t engineers, it’s the English majors running the country! Gary, that’s a great story. It’s so true: finding the right manager is key to success. Interestingly, depending on which survey you look at, roughly 50% of workers resign because of their direct line manager. Management is both an art and a science. All the best to you and yours, as well!

The Great Game

Hi Sean,

Today's column is one of your very best! As a history buff who enjoys reading and learning about all eras, I was disappointed when today's ended. I could have kept reading all day...I intend to start the 'Flashman Papers' series, and can't thank you enough for the heads up on it. In that spirit, I would like to recommend 'Conquistador' by Buddy Levy, about Cortez and Montezuma and the end of the Aztecs. 

Fascinating stuff! Regarding India and China's relationship, the Ladakh region is a continuous flashpoint, and it will be tough to resolve. However, your analysis of the coming BRICS bloc is spot on. Thanks for the knowledge!

Best,

Brian H.

Thank you, Brian! You’ll love old Flashy. And I’ve just bought Conquistador. Many thanks for the recommendation!

Wrap Up

I’ll have one more mailbag issue before the end of the year. I’m sorry I haven’t gotten to your email yet, but I'll get to it soon!