srv02

Sure, thanks for the explanation! I didn't mean to imply that this was intentionally misleading, just wanted to point out that a lot (most?) of people, including mainstream media, are using the term "government agency" with a meaning closer to your first definition. And with that in mind it's valid to say that the exec branch actually does have the power to create / disband agencies. And even if we stick to the latter definition of the "agency" - it feels like there's a certain asymmetry here. Perhaps EOs can't be used to create a new agency, because that requires new funding to be approved by another branch. But what about disbanding an existing agency? That doesn't require approving new funding, right? So what stopping an EO to disband an agency?

I was reading https://apnews.com/article/usaid-foreign-aid-freeze-trump-pe... this morning and that article noted that USAID was apparently established by JFK. Wikipedia confirms that ("... USAID was subsequently established by the executive order of President John F. Kennedy ..."), and although USAID website is down right now, https://web.archive.org/web/20241229151048/https://www.usaid... seems to confirm that too.

I asked ChatGPT and it said many other agencies were established by EOs (e.g. FEMA, NSA, NASA, EPA). Quote from ChatGPT: "Many agencies later received congressional authorization, but their initial formation or restructuring was often directed by executive orders." So it seems like the last paragraph is incorrect.

At 18-22 people are very young and, generally speaking, have very little life experience. They are looking for their place in life, so it's not surprising they are trading places easily. As they mature, they become more stable and better realize what they need/want in life (and job is a major part of life for most of us), so it's only natural they start sticking more to what they found.

Of course. Pie charts look natural and easy to comprehend when visualizing things like market share of certain products, for example browser market share (http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qpri...). In fact I'd argue that that's a much better representation than a bar chart, like http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php, because the former makes it easier to comprehend roughly what proportion of the total market each browser represents, which is not as straightforward to see in a bar chart (in bar chart it's only easy to see how different browser market shares compare to each other). So yes, pie charts may be appropriate at times, although I agree that it's a poor choice in this particular case, as the root comment explains.