5 ms·

> At the level of a company, this can bring great efficiencies, and make reusable self-driving cancer-free nuclear-fusion based rockets. Or crypto scams. This

> At the level of a company, this can bring great efficiencies, and make reusable self-driving cancer-free nuclear-fusion based rockets. Or crypto scams. This is questionable. There are many times when bureaucracy exists for bureaucracy sake. But many, many times they exist for a reason. Get any sufficiently large company and try to understand its complexity. Simply slashing it is a recipe for disaster. > Unfortunately, at the level of a Federal Government, it will bring lower taxes, but some of the 10% will end with coffins. And crypto scams. This is highly questionable, especially the "lower taxes" part. Governments are not very keen on reducing revenue, more likely they will only direct the surplus by cutting off services to other things - in the case of US, I wouldn't be surprised if they just increase spending in military, for example. Those sleasy and juicy defence contracts need funding, you know.

D13Fd 2y ago
There is essentially no relation to taxes. Everything they are cutting falls into the “Other” category in this chart: https://www.crews.bank/charts/taxes-and-spending https://www.crews.bank/charts/taxes-and-spending Even if they cut 100% of government functions other than entitlements, healthcare, and defense, it would not solve the deficit.
- Ajedi32 2y ago
  Is DHS "other", or "defense"? Regardless, I think the primary costs created by regulation aren't directly to the government budget, but rather knock-on effects of compliance incurred by the entire nation's economy.
  - selectodude 2y ago
    DHS would fall under “other”.
kristianbrigman 2y ago
At least officially, the stated goal is to eliminate the deficit, which at least Elon has been warning about lately. If that holds up (and who knows if it will) I wouldn’t expect any taxes to be cut until the budget is close to balanced.
- surgical_fire 2y ago
  I wonder if I would be happier if I was as naive as a this.
  - kristianbrigman 2y ago
    Maybe, but it’s not like it hasn’t happened before… Clinton (yes, a democrat!) campaigned on balancing the budget, and iirc it actually was for a few years. In his case I don’t think taxes changed much either direction.
    - surgical_fire 2y ago
      Oh I was talking specifically about tax cuts because of a more efficient government. Budgets can be balanced, of course. In some contexts it may be harder to do.
    - ianburrell 2y ago
      Clinton made tax increase in 1993 with 39.3% top tax rate. It was a big part of the budget balancing that resulted in surplus.
- pjc50 2y ago
  I expect a lot of noise about it, then an expansion of the deficit for tax cuts, followed by more noise about how evil the deficit is.
  - avgDev 2y ago
    If we look historically since Nixon, Biden had the smallest deficit growth of 17%. Trump had 34%. https://www.investopedia.com/us-debt-by-president-dollar-and-percentage-7371225 https://www.investopedia.com/us-debt-by-president-dollar-and... Republicans do not bring up deficit when they are in power.
    - kristianbrigman 2y ago

D13Fd 2y ago

There is essentially no relation to taxes. Everything they are cutting falls into the “Other” category in this chart: https://www.crews.bank/charts/taxes-and-spending https://www.crews.bank/charts/taxes-and-spending Even if they cut 100% of government functions other than entitlements, healthcare, and defense, it would not solve the deficit.

Ajedi32 2y ago
Is DHS "other", or "defense"? Regardless, I think the primary costs created by regulation aren't directly to the government budget, but rather knock-on effects of compliance incurred by the entire nation's economy.
- selectodude 2y ago
  DHS would fall under “other”.

kristianbrigman 2y ago

At least officially, the stated goal is to eliminate the deficit, which at least Elon has been warning about lately. If that holds up (and who knows if it will) I wouldn’t expect any taxes to be cut until the budget is close to balanced.

surgical_fire 2y ago
I wonder if I would be happier if I was as naive as a this.
- kristianbrigman 2y ago
  Maybe, but it’s not like it hasn’t happened before… Clinton (yes, a democrat!) campaigned on balancing the budget, and iirc it actually was for a few years. In his case I don’t think taxes changed much either direction.
  - surgical_fire 2y ago
    Oh I was talking specifically about tax cuts because of a more efficient government. Budgets can be balanced, of course. In some contexts it may be harder to do.
  - ianburrell 2y ago
    Clinton made tax increase in 1993 with 39.3% top tax rate. It was a big part of the budget balancing that resulted in surplus.
pjc50 2y ago
I expect a lot of noise about it, then an expansion of the deficit for tax cuts, followed by more noise about how evil the deficit is.
- avgDev 2y ago
  If we look historically since Nixon, Biden had the smallest deficit growth of 17%. Trump had 34%. https://www.investopedia.com/us-debt-by-president-dollar-and-percentage-7371225 https://www.investopedia.com/us-debt-by-president-dollar-and... Republicans do not bring up deficit when they are in power.
  - kristianbrigman 2y ago