4 ms·

Once operationalized DOGE should start their prune exercise with the Pentagon.

boredatoms 2y ago
Doge wont go anywhere without members of congress agreeing to spend less money in their states - so its pretty far fetched
thawab 2y ago
Pentagon has 23k employees, DOGE need more than 4 years for something like this. My assumptions is that they will focus elsewhere for quick wins.
- Timber-6539 2y ago
  Key word here being employees. There is no historical precedent for what DOGE has set out to accomplish assuming DJT was actually being serious. Though I would be curious to know where you see them grabbing those said quick wins.
  - thawab 2y ago
    Based on DJT first term, my guesses are: - Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - State Department - Science and Public Health Offices - Civil Rights Offices DOGE doesn't have to do something new or significant, all they have to do is to promote it better even if it's the same actions by any republican reaching office.
riffraff 2y ago
I bet you a beer Musk and Vivek will not be able to prune anything significant in 4 years, because a) neither has an understanding of how the money is spent b) actual cuts need to be approved by the same people who introduced the expenses in the first place c) they might not even stick around for 4 years.
- Timber-6539 2y ago
  a) Accounting is not that hard. Also you can't be seriously making the argument that one of the richest man in this world does not know how federal funds are spent... b) I don't think that's true. And even if were to suppose that it were true then your accounting problem would be so easy to solve. c) Agreed. That outcome is more likely.
  - riffraff 2y ago
    > a) Accounting is not that hard. Also you can't be seriously making the argument that one of the richest man in this world does not know how federal funds are spent... Politics is hard. Government spending is death by a thousand cuts, so the easy things to do are two: remove whole departments (remove all of the education, veterans, and defence, that will net you 1.5T) or ask the heads of each department to do the cuts. But then each one will face the same issue, and the deeper you go, the more you encounter people who want a specific spending e.g. reps who got elected supporting veteran support or education spending or a specific factory in Springfield, Illinois. People favor spending cuts the way they favor tax breaks: don’t cut you, con’t cut me, cut that fellow behind the tree.[0] everyone's is for them in the abstract as long as they don't touch them. And yes, I think the richest man in this world does not know how federal funds are being spent, based on the fact that he thinks he can cut "at least 2T" out 6.5T. To save 2T you'd have to erase the Department of Health[1]. If you cut 50% of Social Security, Health and Defence, you'll not get that, and people will riot. Also, I point you to X, where Musk managed to save money by firing 70% of the workforce and <checks notes> losing 80% of the company value. The fact SpaceX and Tesla are successful[2] does not automatically translate in Musk being good at everything. [0] https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/04/04/tax-tree/ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/04/04/tax-tree/ [1] https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/ https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/feder... [2] both, let me point out, with massive help from government expenditures
    - Timber-6539 2y ago
      > Politics is hard. Government spending is death by a thousand cuts ... If the solution is not to cut excessive and unchecked spending, you tell us your solution for the dealing with the problem? > remove whole departments (remove all of the education, veterans, and defence, that will net you 1.5T) AFAIK DOGE or rather Elon hasn't specified how they are going to cut $2T from the annual budget so all this is speculation and we don't actually know which sectors might receive the cuts. For all we know it could be a goal setting figure. Even if they don't reach this target, the endeavour is still worthwhile. They have 4 years to sell their plans to Congress after all. In summary you fail to make a good case for why DOGE is a bad idea other than Elon bad. I challenge you to remove this bias from your thinking, it alone just may help you avoid missing the forest for the trees on the issue of government overspend and the relation to uncontrollable public debt.
mmooss 2y ago
I think they'll cut what is in their interest to cut. Also, where is the evidence of all this excess, or that any particular thing they cut is excess?

Doge wont go anywhere without members of congress agreeing to spend less money in their states - so its pretty far fetched

thawab 2y ago

Pentagon has 23k employees, DOGE need more than 4 years for something like this. My assumptions is that they will focus elsewhere for quick wins.

Timber-6539 2y ago
Key word here being employees. There is no historical precedent for what DOGE has set out to accomplish assuming DJT was actually being serious. Though I would be curious to know where you see them grabbing those said quick wins.
- thawab 2y ago
  Based on DJT first term, my guesses are: - Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - State Department - Science and Public Health Offices - Civil Rights Offices DOGE doesn't have to do something new or significant, all they have to do is to promote it better even if it's the same actions by any republican reaching office.

riffraff 2y ago

I bet you a beer Musk and Vivek will not be able to prune anything significant in 4 years, because a) neither has an understanding of how the money is spent b) actual cuts need to be approved by the same people who introduced the expenses in the first place c) they might not even stick around for 4 years.

Timber-6539 2y ago
a) Accounting is not that hard. Also you can't be seriously making the argument that one of the richest man in this world does not know how federal funds are spent... b) I don't think that's true. And even if were to suppose that it were true then your accounting problem would be so easy to solve. c) Agreed. That outcome is more likely.
- riffraff 2y ago
  > a) Accounting is not that hard. Also you can't be seriously making the argument that one of the richest man in this world does not know how federal funds are spent... Politics is hard. Government spending is death by a thousand cuts, so the easy things to do are two: remove whole departments (remove all of the education, veterans, and defence, that will net you 1.5T) or ask the heads of each department to do the cuts. But then each one will face the same issue, and the deeper you go, the more you encounter people who want a specific spending e.g. reps who got elected supporting veteran support or education spending or a specific factory in Springfield, Illinois. People favor spending cuts the way they favor tax breaks: don’t cut you, con’t cut me, cut that fellow behind the tree.[0] everyone's is for them in the abstract as long as they don't touch them. And yes, I think the richest man in this world does not know how federal funds are being spent, based on the fact that he thinks he can cut "at least 2T" out 6.5T. To save 2T you'd have to erase the Department of Health[1]. If you cut 50% of Social Security, Health and Defence, you'll not get that, and people will riot. Also, I point you to X, where Musk managed to save money by firing 70% of the workforce and <checks notes> losing 80% of the company value. The fact SpaceX and Tesla are successful[2] does not automatically translate in Musk being good at everything. [0] https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/04/04/tax-tree/ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2014/04/04/tax-tree/ [1] https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/ https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/feder... [2] both, let me point out, with massive help from government expenditures
  - Timber-6539 2y ago
    > Politics is hard. Government spending is death by a thousand cuts ... If the solution is not to cut excessive and unchecked spending, you tell us your solution for the dealing with the problem? > remove whole departments (remove all of the education, veterans, and defence, that will net you 1.5T) AFAIK DOGE or rather Elon hasn't specified how they are going to cut $2T from the annual budget so all this is speculation and we don't actually know which sectors might receive the cuts. For all we know it could be a goal setting figure. Even if they don't reach this target, the endeavour is still worthwhile. They have 4 years to sell their plans to Congress after all. In summary you fail to make a good case for why DOGE is a bad idea other than Elon bad. I challenge you to remove this bias from your thinking, it alone just may help you avoid missing the forest for the trees on the issue of government overspend and the relation to uncontrollable public debt.

mmooss 2y ago

I think they'll cut what is in their interest to cut. Also, where is the evidence of all this excess, or that any particular thing they cut is excess?