Dept. of Government Efficiency - Elon/Vivek leading DOGE

[yoshi121374]

Instead of just looking for ways to cut, we are looking for ways to streamline so that the same mistakes are not made in the future. Design a system or negotiate contracts so that we do not have excess. That is all we are asking for. If someone was paying attention, we would never have thousands of extra subscriptions that are not being used. You, correctly, point out that there are some valid reasons for overlap, but the person in charge it's their job to streamline that. Why hasn't it been done? I think that is where people are frustrated.

You being in the private business world know that every $ counts. Competition is tough. When we see government dollars wasted like that we think of how many hours it would take for us to make that kind of money. We think of it as bloat. That doesn't mean your observations are incorrect. We are just demanding better performance. We want accountability in government equal to, or greater than, the scrutiny we face in the private world.

Put the government expenses on the blockchain for the world to see. That would be a good start. Let us see what we are spending our money on. Who sponsored the bill and who voted for / against it. Let that be searchable on the blockchain for the world to see. If we have accountability, it will be harder for things to get out of hand. I don't think much of the public knew what our money was being spent on.

Again, I don't know many people who would argue with that.

My biggest issue is how it's being presented as if there is willfully fraud, when sometimes it's poor management. Most of this stuff is being presented as if it's some nefarious thing happening, which excited the base, but makes it hard to take it seriously.

 

[fatpiggy]

Again, I don't know many people who would argue with that.

My biggest issue is how it's being presented as if there is willfully fraud, when sometimes it's poor management. Most of this stuff is being presented as if it's some nefarious thing happening, which excited the base, but makes it hard to take it seriously.

I agree, and have stated previously, that much of what is being touted is spending republicans simply disagree with instead of outright fraud.

But i lived in Chicago long enough to know there is outright fraud. If I see a little fraud with my own two eyes, imagine how much goes on in the grand scheme of things. How much and what percentage is it of total spending? I won't pretend to know. But I am certain it is there. Absolutely, 100% certain it's there just by the law of averages.

I do think it is worth pointing out the spending we disagree with, and advertising it too. I think a lot of democrats would disagree with it too, they just didn't know we were spending that money in those places. So, sunshine is the best disinfectant, and we certainly had a spending infection. If one does not admit that we had a spending problem they are not arguing in good faith.

I understand and somewhat agree with your viewpoint that the information could be presented in a better manner. However, there were people like Thomas Massie, Ron Paul, and a couple democrats too, that have been screaming at the rooftops about spending and no one seems to listen. Now that its hitting everyone's pocket via inflation, people want results. Results only come through difficult cuts. But they have to be done if we want inflation to subside. Everyone, republicans and democrats, were pissed at inflation. It was either the first or second biggest issue in the election (immigration being the other).

So, while i see your point about presenting the information in a better manner, that did not seem to work previously and thus here we are.

 

[dpic73]

"Misinformation spreads fast—sharing to set the record straight."

 

[yoshi121374]

I agree, and have stated previously, that much of what is being touted is spending republicans simply disagree with instead of outright fraud.

But i lived in Chicago long enough to know there is outright fraud. If I see a little fraud with my own two eyes, imagine how much goes on in the grand scheme of things. How much and what percentage is it of total spending? I won't pretend to know. But I am certain it is there. Absolutely, 100% certain it's there just by the law of averages.

I do think it is worth pointing out the spending we disagree with, and advertising it too. I think a lot of democrats would disagree with it too, they just didn't know we were spending that money in those places. So, sunshine is the best disinfectant, and we certainly had a spending infection. If one does not admit that we had a spending problem they are not arguing in good faith.

I understand and somewhat agree with your viewpoint that the information could be presented in a better manner. However, there were people like Thomas Massie, Ron Paul, and a couple democrats too, that have been screaming at the rooftops about spending and no one seems to listen. Now that its hitting everyone's pocket via inflation, people want results. Results only come through difficult cuts. But they have to be done if we want inflation to subside. Everyone, republicans and democrats, were pissed at inflation. It was either the first or second biggest issue in the election (immigration being the other).

So, while i see your point about presenting the information in a better manner, that did not seem to work previously and thus here we are.

It's also fairly disingenuous to claim the point is to cut the deficit, while immediately saying that you are going to send the savings back as a refund instead of paying down debt.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

I agree, and have stated previously, that much of what is being touted is spending republicans simply disagree with instead of outright fraud.

But i lived in Chicago long enough to know there is outright fraud. If I see a little fraud with my own two eyes, imagine how much goes on in the grand scheme of things. How much and what percentage is it of total spending? I won't pretend to know. But I am certain it is there. Absolutely, 100% certain it's there just by the law of averages.

I do think it is worth pointing out the spending we disagree with, and advertising it too. I think a lot of democrats would disagree with it too, they just didn't know we were spending that money in those places. So, sunshine is the best disinfectant, and we certainly had a spending infection. If one does not admit that we had a spending problem they are not arguing in good faith.

I understand and somewhat agree with your viewpoint that the information could be presented in a better manner. However, there were people like Thomas Massie, Ron Paul, and a couple democrats too, that have been screaming at the rooftops about spending and no one seems to listen. Now that its hitting everyone's pocket via inflation, people want results. Results only come through difficult cuts. But they have to be done if we want inflation to subside. Everyone, republicans and democrats, were pissed at inflation. It was either the first or second biggest issue in the election (immigration being the other).

So, while i see your point about presenting the information in a better manner, that did not seem to work previously and thus here we are.

Not really buying the argument of "calmly presenting facts, cleaning up actual fraud, etc" didn't work so now we have to...checks notes...completely make up a nefarious bad guy and say they are causing massive fraud and its a conspiracy/money laundering/HUGE kickbacks/etc, to get traction on these various fraud or poor management issues. You know that's ridiculous, but you support what they're doing and its not your side being lied about so you're fine with it. It is what it is.

There is definitely fraud, and a lot of it actually is caught and is prosecuted every single day. Just like there is tax fraud. And why putting a little money into a department like DOGE would actually save money in the whole. Same reason I think its good to have departments like the IG doing audits and investigations into every department. You could have DOGE implanted in every department looking for inefficiencies, ways to reduce fraud, etc. I could get behind that. Was why I supported additional IRS agents. The right went crazy with conspiracy theories, but honestly, more IRS agents auditing the largest companies, wealthiest, etc would likely save us money in the long run (and a lot of the # were going to be customer service agents I believe, which is a huge need as unfortunately our tax code is confusing, but helping people up front would help lower tax fraud as well as it is sometimes innocent mistakes).

 

[fatpiggy]

It's also fairly disingenuous to claim the point is to cut the deficit, while immediately saying that you are going to send the savings back as a refund instead of paying down debt.

Let's be fully transparent.

They threw out the idea of 20% of the savings being returned to the taxpayers.

Some liked the idea, some did not. I can see arguments for both sides.

 

[fatpiggy]

Not really buying the argument of "calmly presenting facts, cleaning up actual fraud, etc" didn't work so now we have to...checks notes...completely make up a nefarious bad guy and say they are causing massive fraud and its a conspiracy/money laundering/HUGE kickbacks/etc, to get traction on these various fraud or poor management issues. You know that's ridiculous, but you support what they're doing and its not your side being lied about so you're fine with it. It is what it is.

There is definitely fraud, and a lot of it actually is caught and is prosecuted every single day. Just like there is tax fraud. And why putting a little money into a department like DOGE would actually save money in the whole. Same reason I think its good to have departments like the IG doing audits and investigations into every department. You could have DOGE implanted in every department looking for inefficiencies, ways to reduce fraud, etc. I could get behind that. Was why I supported additional IRS agents. The right went crazy with conspiracy theories, but honestly, more IRS agents auditing the largest companies, wealthiest, etc would likely save us money in the long run (and a lot of the # were going to be customer service agents I believe, which is a huge need as unfortunately our tax code is confusing, but helping people up front would help lower tax fraud as well as it is sometimes innocent mistakes).

Instead of hiring 80,000 IRS agents, I would much rather, 100 times over, make the tax code less complex. That would be a much more efficient solution.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Instead of hiring 80,000 IRS agents, I would much rather, 100 times over, make the tax code less complex. That would be a much more efficient solution.

I have no issues with that either. Was more just an example, and me saying I'm not against the idea of efficiencies, better management, etc.

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[dpic73]

@fatpiggy thoughts?

 

[clempzenbill]

Instead of hiring 80,000 IRS agents, I would much rather, 100 times over, make the tax code less complex. That would be a much more efficient solution.

We don’t need a tax code for citizens. The government would collect far more, including the cash economy with a national sales tax. They don’t want this as people would see the tax on every purchase that applied to it, and they wouldn’t be able to use the tax to control the population. They could also simplify the corporate code but then they’d get less money from them for their ridiculous campaigns of wall to wall lying TV ads.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

We don’t need a tax code for citizens. The government would collect far more, including the cash economy with a national sales tax. They don’t want this as people would see the tax on every purchase that applied to it, and they wouldn’t be able to use the tax to control the population. They could also simplify the corporate code but then they’d get less money from them for their ridiculous campaigns of wall to wall lying TV ads.

Sales tax also hurts lower tax brackets significantly more.

 

[dpic73]

 

[TigerGrowls]

🎯 I've said it again, I'll say it again. Taxpayer-funded NGOs function as a parallel government.

Even worse, many sitting members of Congress are directly involved in them. They see themselves as the real government, prioritizing debates with other bureaucrats on the global stage over serving the people they represent.

This is why critical issues like healthcare, education, and help for Helene victims are consistently neglected.

 

[fatpiggy]

@fatpiggy thoughts?

View embedded media

The government shouldn’t be subsidizing industries. I’d err on the side of cutting. If EV’s are a good enough product they will stand on their own.

(EV’s are a better product and will be the future)

For those that drive EV’s these charger chargers arent really needed. Superchargers get the trick done.

Tesla is about to introduce V4 chargers that charge at 500 kWh which is twice as fast as the current rate. Combined with home charging, it’s just not an issue.

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[actigerman]

It's also fairly disingenuous to claim the point is to cut the deficit, while immediately saying that you are going to send the savings back as a refund instead of paying down debt.

They have proposed sending a $5,000 refund to all taxpayers as a rebate IF DOGE meets its goals. This would be only a small fraction of the savings and the rest would be used to pay down debt. This generous offer goes in the face of Democrats' weak, erroneous, and old argument that DOGE is just another republican effort to provide tax cuts to the rich.

The facts are that the top 50% of the US highest income earners pay 97% of all the taxes in the US. The lower 50% only contribute 3% of the nation's tax bill. So the proposed rebate is a redistribution of wealth from the top 50% wage earners to the bottom 50%. Again, this flies in the face of Democrats' old, tired and farcical argument of Republicans cutting taxes on the wealthiest at the expense of the poorest.

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[yoshi121374]

They have proposed sending a $5,000 refund to all taxpayers as a rebate IF DOGE meets its goals. This would be only a small fraction of the savings and the rest would be used to pay down debt. This generous offer goes in the face of Democrats' weak, erroneous, and old argument that DOGE is just another republican effort to provide tax cuts to the rich.

The facts are that the top 50% of the US highest income earners pay 97% of all the taxes in the US. The lower 50% only contribute 3% of the nation's tax bill. So the proposed rebate is a redistribution of wealth from the top 50% wage earners to the bottom 50%. Again, this flies in the face of Democrats' old, tired and farcical argument of Republicans cutting taxes on the wealthiest at the expense of the poorest.

So gullible.

 

[scotchtiger]

They have proposed sending a $5,000 refund to all taxpayers as a rebate IF DOGE meets its goals. This would be only a small fraction of the savings and the rest would be used to pay down debt. This generous offer goes in the face of Democrats' weak, erroneous, and old argument that DOGE is just another republican effort to provide tax cuts to the rich.

The facts are that the top 50% of the US highest income earners pay 97% of all the taxes in the US. The lower 50% only contribute 3% of the nation's tax bill. So the proposed rebate is a redistribution of wealth from the top 50% wage earners to the bottom 50%. Again, this flies in the face of Democrats' old, tired and farcical argument of Republicans cutting taxes on the wealthiest at the expense of the poorest.

Meh. I don’t agree with the refund in general, but if they do it, the amount should be based on actual taxes paid.

 

[dpic73]

Unbelievable, they are destroying these high-paying jobs in the chip industry in red-state Ohio. SMH

 

[fatpiggy]

Yang was pretty much an independent / left leaning candidate if i remember correctly. Most of his audience approves of what Trump and DOGE are doing. This is what i meant yesterday when i said that democrats loudly complaining run the risk of coming off as ingrates.

 

[fatpiggy]

Did you have the same opinion when Trump subsidized farmers to the tune of tens of billions of dollars during his first term?

Are you suggesting food and cars are the same thing?

If you don't subsidize the farmers then the people in NYC, CHICAGO, LA, SFO, etc will all starve. The cities will starve first, is that what you want?

I am not on the side of NO government. But we have to cut somewhere! The government is bloated and unaccountale. We should cut too much and if we need to rehire that is fine too. But this has been a long time coming and we may not get the opportuniity again, so we should err on the side of over cutting. If you want to cut farmers, that is fine, but i think it's your constituents who would pay the price the most.

 

[dpic73]

Yang was pretty much an independent / left leaning candidate if i remember correctly. Most of his audience approves of what Trump and DOGE are doing. This is what i meant yesterday when i said that democrats loudly complaining run the risk of coming off as ingrates.

View embedded media

LOL. a survey on Twitter is the same as a survey done at a Trump rally.

 

[fatpiggy]

The farm industry is an industry. Subsidizing farmers because of a tariff war isn't economically efficient. It's closer to state planning and communism than it is conservatism.

Farm subsidies have been implemented since i was a kid in the 90's if not way earlier. Tariffs only started being used as a tool when Trump was in office (recent history). So saying the farm subsidies are due to the tariff war does not compute for me. You will need to provide evidence to that claim.

 

[dpic73]

This should scare you unless you think this makes America great.

"We swore to serve the American people and uphold our oath to the Constitution across presidential administrations," the 21 staffers wrote in a joint resignation letter. "However, it has become clear that we can no longer honor those commitments."

"We will not use our skills as technologists to compromise core government systems, jeopardize Americans’ sensitive data, or dismantle critical public services," staffers wrote. “We will not lend our expertise to carry out or legitimize DOGE’s actions."

According to the letter, the former staffers were called into a series of interviews the day after Trump's inauguration and questioned about their qualifications by people wearing White House visitors' badges who seemingly had limited technical understanding.

"Several of these interviewers refused to identify themselves, asked questions about political loyalty, attempted to pit colleagues against each other, and demonstrated limited technical ability," the staffers wrote in their letter. “This process created significant security risks."

21 DOGE employees quit, protest plans to 'dismantle critical public services'

More than 20 civil service employees with Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) are resigning after refeusing to "

wpde.com

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[fatpiggy]

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/14/donald-trump-coronavirus-farmer-bailouts-359932

Trump and his USDA were bragging about their support of farmers at the time. They even said it was because of retaliatory tariffs.

View embedded media

Btw China didn't pay the cost. You and I did; farmers benefited from our tax money in a kind of welfare. Good thing Elon is hard at work finding 10 million here and there under the couch cushions.

Tariffs are paid for by consumers. As an added bonus, American producers are also consumers of foreign goods. In what universe do you decrease cost by cutting supply? Less Canadian timber isn't gonna make it cheaper to build a home here. It's the state making an effort to inefficiently allocate goods based on political motivation. Sounds like communism to me.

Inflation under Trump = 1.9%

Inflation under democrats = 3.2%

We don’t need lectures. The proof is in the pudding.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Inflation under Trump = 1.9%

Inflation under democrats = 3.2%

We don’t need lectures. The proof is in the pudding.

Will it be less than 1.9% on average after the next 4 years?

 

[fatpiggy]

Will it be less than 1.9% on average after the next 4 years?

I’d say under 2.2% in year 3.


Doge is going to be massively deflationary. Will take time to work though. At least until mid terms

 

[TigerGrowls]

Are you suggesting food and cars are the same thing?

If you don't subsidize the farmers then the people in NYC, CHICAGO, LA, SFO, etc will all starve. The cities will starve first, is that what you want?

I am not on the side of NO government. But we have to cut somewhere! The government is bloated and unaccountale. We should cut too much and if we need to rehire that is fine too. But this has been a long time coming and we may not get the opportuniity again, so we should err on the side of over cutting. If you want to cut farmers, that is fine, but i think it's your constituents who would pay the price the most.

Truth!!!

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[CUTiger1977]

 

[WapPride]

How curious. Changing the award from $400k to $400m, if true, is laughably shady.

https://www.npr.org/2025/02/13/g-s1-48571/trump-administration-order-400-million-worth-of-armored-teslas

UPDATED: "Armored Tesla" (was) forecast to win $400 million State Department contract after Trump's election

The State Department’s procurement forecast, revised as of late December 2024, lists Tesla as the recipient of the largest expected contract, with Marco Rubio’s department planning to buy $400,000,000 worth of “Armored Tesla.”

www.dropsitenews.com

 

[fatpiggy]

Will it be less than 1.9% on average after the next 4 years?

I think you will see the 10y yield continue to trend lower and this will stimulate the economy. This is due to DOGE and the savings it is creating.