Dept. of Government Efficiency - Elon/Vivek leading DOGE

[dpic73]

Yeah there is a personal cost to downsizing government, or any business, for sure.

Yeah there is a great human cost to ensure Elon gets his tax cut. These cuts will negatively impact every area of our lives and we won't be able to re-constitute these services in the future because all revenue will need to go to the debt, and of course we will have less revenue which will make it even tougher. Thank you for doing your patriotic duty to make Elon a trillionaire. Hope it's worth it.

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[Rahskie]

Yeah there is a great human cost to ensure Elon gets his tax cut. These cuts will negatively impact every area of our lives and we won't be able to re-constitute these services in the future because all revenue will need to go to the debt, and of course we will have less revenue which will make it even tougher. Thank you for doing your patriotic duty to make Elon a trillionaire. Hope it's worth it.

Dude, the last time the government was really downsized was with Clinton in 1993. At some point you have to just acknowledge that there is bloat. The company I work for went from 330,000 employees to 140,000 over the last 5 years. It was painful for many, very painful, but necessary. Many of the cuts were due to inefficient and costly parts of the organization.

Biden spent like a drunken sailor with no cuts, no reduction in any way and drove up the deficit. So did Trump in his first term, so did Obama. I am sure you considered all spending by Democrats as necessary and all by Republicans as enriching themselves, but regardless of which side of the aisle you are on, 36T in debt just can’t be ignored.

I also know you think it is just to fund tax cuts……well if it is, at least Trump is trying to cut spending to pay for his policy choices. Remind me again how Biden financed his policy initiatives? Deficit spending is the answer and that answer sucks, but he didn’t care. Neither did any other president other than Clinton, so at least give Trump credit for trying to spend taxpayer money in a responsible way….even if you don’t like what it is being spent on.

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[dpic73]

Dude, the last time the government was really downsized was with Clinton in 1993. At some point you have to just acknowledge that there is bloat. The company I work for went from 330,000 employees to 140,000 over the last 5 years. It was painful for many, very painful, but necessary. Many of the cuts were due to inefficient and costly parts of the organization.

Biden spent like a drunken sailor with no cuts, no reduction in any way and drove up the deficit. So did Trump in his first term, so did Obama. I am sure you considered all spending by Democrats as necessary and all by Republicans as enriching themselves, but regardless of which side of the aisle you are on, 36T in debt just can’t be ignored.

I also know you think it is just to fund tax cuts……well if it is, at least Trump is trying to cut spending to pay for his policy choices. Remind me again how Biden financed his policy initiatives? Deficit spending is the answer and that answer sucks, but he didn’t care. Neither did any other president other than Clinton, so at least give Trump credit for trying to spend taxpayer money in a responsible way….even if you don’t like what it is being spent on.

We've already covered a lot of this so I don't know how to say it any clearer. If they are serious about a 36 trillion dollar debt, the last thing you want to do is add 4.5 trillion on top of it. The cuts are like reaching into your bucket of debt and pulling out a grain of sand, only to add Mt Everest back into it. And besides the the Helter Skelter way they're doing it and the cruel way they're celebrating it, everything they're doing is at the expense of the common man. It's a complete abdication of fiscal responsibility in order to enrich the 1%.

 

[TigerRagRob]

Elon Musk is lying to you but there's no way to fact-check him because he fired everyone who understood the system, so instead of asking anyone to explain it, he decided to act like a corrupt toddler and blast this out to the world. And look who's helping him - the owner of LibsofTikTok lol. Damn, we have fallen so far as a country.

you lie to us every single day multiple times a day...

 

[dpic73]

you lie to us every single day multiple times a day...

And you've never proven it once so......find something else to do.

 

[TigerRagRob]

And you've never proven it once so......find something else to do.

Wow yet another lie lol. You need help go see Dr. Phil little bro...

 

[scotchtiger]

We've already covered a lot of this so I don't know how to say it any clearer. If they are serious about a 36 trillion dollar debt, the last thing you want to do is add 4.5 trillion on top of it. The cuts are like reaching into your bucket of debt and pulling out a grain of sand, only to add Mt Everest back into it. And besides the the Helter Skelter way they're doing it and the cruel way they're celebrating it, everything they're doing is at the expense of the common man. It's a complete abdication of fiscal responsibility in order to enrich the 1%.

You keep saying this about the tax cuts, but it’s mostly just extending what’s in place today. And those cuts benefited lots of taxpayers. The larger standard deduction helped. Reduction of rates begins at like $23k (15% to 12%). These weren’t just for the rich.

But yea, the raw dollars saved skews to the upper earners. They are the ones paying most of the taxes after all.

 

[dpic73]

You keep saying this about the tax cuts, but it’s mostly just extending what’s in place today. And those cuts benefited lots of taxpayers. The larger standard deduction helped. Reduction of rates begins at like $23k (15% to 12%). These weren’t just for the rich.

But yea, the raw dollars saved skews to the upper earners. They are the ones paying most of the taxes after all.

The people who need it the least will benefit the most and do you understand we have a 36T deficit to address?

Top 5% of taxpayers would get nearly half the benefit if Trump tax cuts are extended​

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/08/politics/trump-tax-cuts-tcja-wealthy-benefit/index.html

"If the law’s provisions are made permanent, households making at least around $450,000 – roughly the top 5% – would be the biggest winners, the analysis found. They would see their after-tax income increase by 3.2%."

For those in the top 1%, who make at least $1 million, that equates to a tax cut of about $70,000, on average, in 2027. The top 0.1%, who make at least $5 million, would pocket a tax cut of nearly $280,000, on average, or about 3% of their after-tax income.

Middle-income households earning between roughly $65,000 and $116,000, on the other hand, would receive a tax cut of about $1,000, or 1.3% of their income.

Overall, extending the 2017 tax law would reduce taxes for about three-quarters of households, but hike them for about 10%, according to the analysis."

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In the meantime, hundreds of thoudsands of decent hard-working people are undergoing real pain to pay for them. A realative of mine just posted this about a friend of hers today:

"In the name of "government efficiency," I will be losing my job, effective April 2nd. I am lucky. So many of my peers were laid off already with far less warning. The job market is flooded and so many fields, including mine, are entirely decimated.

I am a Senior Researcher at an education nonprofit. The work we do that was determined to be fraud, waste, and abuse, directly helped your kids. We address critical teacher shortages in states across the country, provide technical assistance to educators in Region 8 (primarily red states) and in the Pacific (where we have SO MANY military bases), provide curriculum development and coaching, evaluate program effectiveness so that school districts understand what strategies work, and conduct innovative research to better understand student experiences and interventions (for example, diagnosing and intervening for students with dyscalculia).

Our crime? Using language that was specifically requested during contract procurement.

These DOGE cuts are not just an illegal power grab. They are inhumane. What I just described is just a small fraction of what they have taken from you.

I did everything "right." I bootstrapped my way through college with three jobs, spent a year as a public servant through AmeriCorps, went to graduate school for five years (where I also supported myself with two additional jobs the whole way through), spent a year as an apprentice in my postdoc, and entered the professional world to give back to my community and my fellow citizens. It doesn't matter.

Hard working Americans across the country who only seek to give back and make the US a better place are losing their jobs, and you and your kids will suffer the loss."

 

[TigerGrowls]

WOW 🚨 To Elon Musk and the DOGE team looking at Medicare:

Pharmacist says

- This medication is Pirfenidone
- Medicare filled it 85,000 times in 2022 at an average cost of $8,000 per prescription
- Normal cost without insurance ONLY $200 TO FILL
- They spent $680 million on that one drug in just one year

“However, at my pharmacy, which is a cost plus pharmacy, meaning we don't take insurance, that same prescription would only cost $200”

“If we filled all 85,000 prescriptions, it would cost $17 million total. That means Medicare is overpaying by $663 million every year.”

Good find @RedPilledGirly

 

[Clemsonu90]

This isn’t about making the government smaller. If that was really the goal, agencies would have been told “cut this % of staff” and it would have been done in a measured thought out method ensuring needed skill set were kept using lawful methods. Instead this is surgery by sledgehammer; the end result may well be the death of the patient. As Russell Vought, the author of the “plan” said, the intent is to “traumatize the federal employees”. Of course the real intent is to pad the pockets of musk and company but who is counting.

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[scotchtiger]

The people who need it the least will benefit the most and do you understand we have a 36T deficit to address?

Top 5% of taxpayers would get nearly half the benefit if Trump tax cuts are extended​

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/08/politics/trump-tax-cuts-tcja-wealthy-benefit/index.html

"If the law’s provisions are made permanent, households making at least around $450,000 – roughly the top 5% – would be the biggest winners, the analysis found. They would see their after-tax income increase by 3.2%."

For those in the top 1%, who make at least $1 million, that equates to a tax cut of about $70,000, on average, in 2027. The top 0.1%, who make at least $5 million, would pocket a tax cut of nearly $280,000, on average, or about 3% of their after-tax income.

Middle-income households earning between roughly $65,000 and $116,000, on the other hand, would receive a tax cut of about $1,000, or 1.3% of their income.

Overall, extending the 2017 tax law would reduce taxes for about three-quarters of households, but hike them for about 10%, according to the analysis."

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In the meantime, hundreds of thoudsands of decent hard-working people are undergoing real pain to pay for them. A realative of mine just posted this about a friend of hers today:

"In the name of "government efficiency," I will be losing my job, effective April 2nd. I am lucky. So many of my peers were laid off already with far less warning. The job market is flooded and so many fields, including mine, are entirely decimated.

I am a Senior Researcher at an education nonprofit. The work we do that was determined to be fraud, waste, and abuse, directly helped your kids. We address critical teacher shortages in states across the country, provide technical assistance to educators in Region 8 (primarily red states) and in the Pacific (where we have SO MANY military bases), provide curriculum development and coaching, evaluate program effectiveness so that school districts understand what strategies work, and conduct innovative research to better understand student experiences and interventions (for example, diagnosing and intervening for students with dyscalculia).

Our crime? Using language that was specifically requested during contract procurement.

These DOGE cuts are not just an illegal power grab. They are inhumane. What I just described is just a small fraction of what they have taken from you.

I did everything "right." I bootstrapped my way through college with three jobs, spent a year as a public servant through AmeriCorps, went to graduate school for five years (where I also supported myself with two additional jobs the whole way through), spent a year as an apprentice in my postdoc, and entered the professional world to give back to my community and my fellow citizens. It doesn't matter.

Hard working Americans across the country who only seek to give back and make the US a better place are losing their jobs, and you and your kids will suffer the loss."

This should just be thought of as the new tax rates to be honest. The “cuts” that result in me “only” paying 30%+ just in federal income taxes simply made the tax code a bit more reasonable. The government is still taking too much money from my family, but I’m willing to stand pat until we reduce spending.

You can complain about the billionaires and Elon and whatever, totally fine. But before the election, you agreed with me that my taxes probably shouldn’t increase. That means extending the Trump tax rates. There is no logical argument that can be made that I don’t pay my fair share under those rates.

 

[fatpiggy]

The people who need it the least will benefit the most and do you understand we have a 36T deficit to address?

Top 5% of taxpayers would get nearly half the benefit if Trump tax cuts are extended​

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/08/politics/trump-tax-cuts-tcja-wealthy-benefit/index.html

"If the law’s provisions are made permanent, households making at least around $450,000 – roughly the top 5% – would be the biggest winners, the analysis found. They would see their after-tax income increase by 3.2%."

For those in the top 1%, who make at least $1 million, that equates to a tax cut of about $70,000, on average, in 2027. The top 0.1%, who make at least $5 million, would pocket a tax cut of nearly $280,000, on average, or about 3% of their after-tax income.

Middle-income households earning between roughly $65,000 and $116,000, on the other hand, would receive a tax cut of about $1,000, or 1.3% of their income.

Overall, extending the 2017 tax law would reduce taxes for about three-quarters of households, but hike them for about 10%, according to the analysis."

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In the meantime, hundreds of thoudsands of decent hard-working people are undergoing real pain to pay for them. A realative of mine just posted this about a friend of hers today:

"In the name of "government efficiency," I will be losing my job, effective April 2nd. I am lucky. So many of my peers were laid off already with far less warning. The job market is flooded and so many fields, including mine, are entirely decimated.

I am a Senior Researcher at an education nonprofit. The work we do that was determined to be fraud, waste, and abuse, directly helped your kids. We address critical teacher shortages in states across the country, provide technical assistance to educators in Region 8 (primarily red states) and in the Pacific (where we have SO MANY military bases), provide curriculum development and coaching, evaluate program effectiveness so that school districts understand what strategies work, and conduct innovative research to better understand student experiences and interventions (for example, diagnosing and intervening for students with dyscalculia).

Our crime? Using language that was specifically requested during contract procurement.

These DOGE cuts are not just an illegal power grab. They are inhumane. What I just described is just a small fraction of what they have taken from you.

I did everything "right." I bootstrapped my way through college with three jobs, spent a year as a public servant through AmeriCorps, went to graduate school for five years (where I also supported myself with two additional jobs the whole way through), spent a year as an apprentice in my postdoc, and entered the professional world to give back to my community and my fellow citizens. It doesn't matter.

Hard working Americans across the country who only seek to give back and make the US a better place are losing their jobs, and you and your kids will suffer the loss."

I disagree that they will benefit the most.

I see it like this.

Jeff Bezos having an extra billion dollars will not move the needle for him. He can fart that much and not change anything about his lifestyle. I just don't see a lot of added benefit there.

On the other hand, Bezos, will probably take that money and make another great product that benefits millions, if not billions, of people. Think of how Jeff Bezos has changed people's lives for the better.

While i agree the billionaires need the tax cut the least, i disagree that they will benefit more. I think society will benefit more than the individual billionaire.

You would rather punish the masses than the to see the success of a deserving individual. Cut off your nose in spite of your face. A very selfish outlook, in my opinion of course.

 

[fatpiggy]

This isn’t about making the government smaller. If that was really the goal, agencies would have been told “cut this % of staff” and it would have been done in a measured thought out method ensuring needed skill set were kept using lawful methods. Instead this is surgery by sledgehammer; the end result may well be the death of the patient. As Russell Vought, the author of the “plan” said, the intent is to “traumatize the federal employees”. Of course the real intent is to pad the pockets of musk and company but who is counting.

Yeah, Musk needs that extra money. He is of course working for free and advocating for the removal of subsidies for his product.

What a bad take. Dislike the man, but at least dislike him for honest reasons.

 

[dpic73]

This should just be thought of as the new tax rates to be honest. The “cuts” that result in me “only” paying 30%+ just in federal income taxes simply made the tax code a bit more reasonable. The government is still taking too much money from my family, but I’m willing to stand pat until we reduce spending.

You can complain about the billionaires and Elon and whatever, totally fine. But before the election, you agreed with me that my taxes probably shouldn’t increase. That means extending the Trump tax rates. There is no logical argument that can be made that I don’t pay my fair share under those rates.

• The tax cuts were expensive and didn't live up to their promise as they added 2 trillion to the deficit by eroding the revenue base
• The bottom 60% saw a tax cut of less than $500
• I think you have me confused with NYtiger when you say I agreed. The tax cuts as they stand are harmful and need to be adjusted
  • I would happily pay more if it meant starving children would still get aid and government employees wouldn't get fired for taking a "required" DEI course, because I care about other people too.
• There is nothing logical about extending these tax cuts if they destroy our revenue base - nothing will be made up by the amount they are cutting but hundreds of thousands of citizens and services will be badly harmed.
• Tariffs will only make it worse, not better.

 

[scotchtiger]

I disagree that they will benefit the most.

I see it like this.

Jeff Bezos having an extra billion dollars will not move the needle for him. He can fart that much and not change anything about his lifestyle. I just don't see a lot of added benefit there.

On the other hand, Bezos, will probably take that money and make another great product that benefits millions, if not billions, of people. Think of how Jeff Bezos has changed people's lives for the better.

While i agree the billionaires need the tax cut the least, i disagree that they will benefit more. I think society will benefit more than the individual billionaire.

You would rather punish the masses than the to see the success of a deserving individual. Cut off your nose in spite of your face. A very selfish outlook, in my opinion of course.

I think there are legitimate criticisms of the corporate tax cuts in the original bill. It was good to cut the rates, but protections should have been put in place to protect against using those profits for stock buy-backs, etc.

Other than that, I’m not sure what the complaints are. Increasing the standard deduction ( benefits lower tiers the most ), lowering tax rates across nearly every tier - beginning at the time with $18k of income, increasing family tax credits, etc etc. All great things.

And as those relate to billionaires, most of their money isn’t ordinary income. So those provisions don’t benefit them in some massively out-sized way. Corp tax changes did, however.

 

[Clemson Goat]

How much should 756 billionaire's pay annually in taxes ?

 

[scotchtiger]

• The tax cuts were expensive and didn't live up to their promise as they added 2 trillion to the deficit by eroding the revenue base
• The bottom 60% saw a tax cut of less than $500
• I think you have me confused with NYtiger when you say I agreed. The tax cuts as they stand are harmful and need to be adjusted
  • I would happily pay more if it meant starving children would still get aid and government employees wouldn't get fired for taking a "required" DEI course, because I care about other people too.
• There is nothing logical about extending these tax cuts if they destroy our revenue base - nothing will be made up by the amount they are cutting but hundreds of thousands of citizens and services will be badly harmed.
• Tariffs will only make it worse, not better.

See my post above for where we may find common ground.

We will not find common ground on my family paying even more in federal income taxes. The $400k+ I paid last year is more than enough. To suggest otherwise is absurd in my view.

 

[dpic73]

See my post above for where we may find common ground.

We will not find common ground on my family paying even more in federal income taxes. The $400k+ I paid last year is more than enough. To suggest otherwise is absurd in my view.

Wait, that was your tax bill? 😶 Can I be nosy and ask how you make 7 figures?

 

[WapPride]

How much should 756 billionaire's pay annually in taxes ?

91%, like the top .1% paid back during America's Golden Age when the economy was booming and the middle class was skyrocketing.

And before someone starts freaking out about those poor billionaires, the effective tax rate of that .1% was around 42%

Taxes on the Rich Were Not That Much Higher in the 1950s

Despite high marginal income tax rates, the top 1% of taxpayers in the 1950s only paid about 42% of their income in taxes. See more about taxes on the rich.

taxfoundation.org

 

[fatpiggy]

See my post above for where we may find common ground.

We will not find common ground on my family paying even more in federal income taxes. The $400k+ I paid last year is more than enough. To suggest otherwise is absurd in my view.

You better be thanking your lucky stars Haley didn't win. The deep state would have your taxes going up another 10% 😂 😂 😂

 

[scotchtiger]

Wait, that was your tax bill? 😶 Can I be nosy and ask how you make 7 figures?

Rivals recruiting analyst. I’m responsible for all measurements “in socks.” Kind of a big deal tbh.

 

[dpic73]

Rivals recruiting analyst. I’m responsible for all measurements “in socks.” Kind of a big deal tbh.

Sounds like a dirty business

 

[TigerRagRob]

See my post above for where we may find common ground.

We will not find common ground on my family paying even more in federal income taxes. The $400k+ I paid last year is more than enough. To suggest otherwise is absurd in my view.

He cant afford to be seen agreeing with anything on the right. If Trump found a cure for cancer he would oppose it. Thats how it is with the left. Remember they hated the vax when Trump was POTUS. The moment Biden got in they loved it and wanted to put people in concentration camp that didnt want to take it. They opposed war when Bush was prez but loved war when Obama took office. All those anti-war protest just disappeared overnight...

 

[WapPride]

He cant afford to be seen agreeing with anything on the right. If Trump found a cure for cancer he would oppose it. Thats how it is with the left. Remember they hated the vax when Trump was POTUS. The moment Biden got in they loved it and wanted to put people in concentration camp that didnt want to take it. They opposed war when Bush was prez but loved war when Obama took office. All those anti-war protest just disappeared overnight...

You should donate your brain to science when you undoubtedly die from something stupid you take thanks to a Charlie Kirk recommendation.

 

[dpic73]

He cant afford to be seen agreeing with anything on the right. If Trump found a cure for cancer he would oppose it. Thats how it is with the left. Remember they hated the vax when Trump was POTUS. The moment Biden got in they loved it and wanted to put people in concentration camp that didnt want to take it. They opposed war when Bush was prez but loved war when Obama took office. All those anti-war protest just disappeared overnight...

No I don't remember any of those things that you believe due to your immersion in the dark side of social media. And LOL that we hated the vax when Trump was POTUS. My older relatives were desperate to get it in December 2020 and drove hundreds of miles to get it since the distribution was so pathetic before Biden came into office. Concentration camps LOLOL. What war did Obama start that we loved? LOLOL

As many people tried to tell you yesterday, you're messed up and you need help. Xchan has destroyed your ability to have rational thoughts.

 

[scotchtiger]

91%, like the top .1% paid back during America's Golden Age when the economy was booming and the middle class was skyrocketing.

And before someone starts freaking out about those poor billionaires, the effective tax rate of that .1% was around 42%

Taxes on the Rich Were Not That Much Higher in the 1950s

Despite high marginal income tax rates, the top 1% of taxpayers in the 1950s only paid about 42% of their income in taxes. See more about taxes on the rich.

taxfoundation.org

You can’t possibly think that only keeping 9 cents out of each incremental dollar you earn is reasonable tax policy.

And a 42% effective rate is too high for anyone.

 

[TigerRagRob]

No I don't remember any of those things that you believe due to your immersion in the dark side of social media. And LOL that we hated the vax when Trump was POTUS. My older relatives were desperate to get it in December 2020 and drove hundreds of miles to get it since the distribution was so pathetic before Biden came into office. Concentration camps LOLOL. What war did Obama start that we loved? LOLOL

As many people tried to tell you yesterday, you're messed up and you need help. Xchan has destroyed your ability to have rational thoughts.

You act like i care about what leftist partisans think. Keep posting your BlueAnon crap and telling your thousands of lies. So do you get paid per lie told?

 

[TigerRagRob]

 

[dpic73]

View embedded media

👆Things like this is why you're radicalized. You only dwell in the trash.

 

[WapPride]

You can’t possibly think that only keeping 9 cents out of each incremental dollar you earn is reasonable tax policy.

And a 42% effective rate is too high for anyone.

Considering it's only income tax that was billed at 91%, and most billionaires aren't solely relying on big salaries, yes I don't see the problem. It worked in the US for decades, that just happen to coincide with the strongest economic and middle class growth in our history. I'm not going to weep over guys worth 10 figures having an effective tax rate of 42%.

 

[scotchtiger]

Considering it's only income tax that was billed at 91%, and most billionaires aren't solely relying on big salaries, yes I don't see the problem. It worked in the US for decades, that just happen to coincide with the strongest economic and middle class growth in our history. I'm not going to weep over guys worth 10 figures having an effective tax rate of 42%.

It’s an absurd concept that someone should keep so little of a dollar they earn. Completely absurd.

If you want to go back in time, let’s just go back to before there were income taxes at all.

 

[WapPride]

It’s an absurd concept that someone should keep so little of a dollar they earn. Completely absurd.

If you want to go back in time, let’s just go back to before there were income taxes at all.

I'm sorry, I thought we were trying to Make America Great Again? Is that not a call to return to times past? The period in US history when the middle class was strongest, the period when the income needed to buy a family size home was 2-3x your salary vs 5+x your salary, and when the American Dream of upward mobility was at its easiest, just so happened to be during a time when the top .1% was taxed at a higher rate. Now, correlation != causation, but the wealth disparity between the masses and the top .1% just so happened to skyrocket at the same time that tax burden was lowered. As the wealth disparity grows, the masses get more restless and you end up with riots/strikes/violence/etc.

Is it fair? Eh, probably not, but i don't really care about the feelings of people who have a higher net worth than the GDPs of some countries.

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[TigerRagRob]

 

[Clemsonu90]

Yeah, Musk needs that extra money. He is of course working for free and advocating for the removal of subsidies for his product.

What a bad take. Dislike the man, but at least dislike him for honest reasons.

I GUARANTEE you that if you ask Musk if he wants more money he unequivocally does.

You are so blinded by the tree you fail to see the forest. My statement stands.

 

[CUTiger1977]