10 ms·

The goal is to find government waste and to trim the fat. The goal is to make the US government lean, efficient, and effective at improving the lives of America

by novia 2y ago

The goal is to find government waste and to trim the fat. The goal is to make the US government lean, efficient, and effective at improving the lives of Americans while not prioritizing improving the lives of citizens of other nations. The view is that the government of those other nations should be responsible for taking care of their own citizens. The goal is to uncover fraudulent payouts, stop more from going out in the future, and to bring the fraudsters to justice. Overall, the goal is to do a thorough accounting of where exactly US tax dollars are going to, and to use that information to decide if they should keep going to those recipients in the future, to put it to a vote using congress to decide. [Political bias report: I'm a liberal who has read Rand and who does not agree with The Republican Party's views in the vast majority of cases. I have been listening to Musk and Ramaswamy talking about DOGE on X. I also follow conservative meme sites to keep up to date with the way they are thinking about things.]

avs733 2y ago
>The goal is to find government waste and to trim the fat. The goal is to make the US government lean, efficient, and effective at improving the lives of Americans while not prioritizing improving the lives of citizens of other nations. Lets be clear, that is not the goal - that is what they say the goal is and reality shows it is not. The goal is grift and theft adn destruction. Properly naming things is going to continue to matter more and more. Because no matter your bias or perspective, repeating propaganda is an act of propaganda.
- novia 2y ago
  The question I was answering was > Maybe what goal do they think they're pursuing? and I was answering that to the best of my ability. I'm not just repeating propaganda, I'm distilling down the intent of the actors to the best of my understanding. No one can ever know someone's true intent, but I've done the best I can with the information I have.
  - giraffe_lady 2y ago
    You are repeating propaganda though. You're describing the stated intentions of this group, on their terms, as they have defined them. There's no particular reason to presume those statements are sincere, and in fact there have been other, previous statements that directly contradict them.
  - Trasmatta 2y ago
    > I'm not just repeating propaganda You literally are, though
  - sanderjd 2y ago
    With all due respect, I don't think you have done the best you can with the information you have. The only source of information your answer reflects is the stated intention of the people in question. But you don't seem to have made an effort to use information about the behavior of those people in order to evaluate whether to take their stated intentions at face value. You need to do that part to have done your best here. It's fine if you don't want to do this, you're under no obligations here, but I just don't think "I've done the best I can with the information I have" is accurate.
    - dmix 2y ago
      The rest of this thread is based on about 1-2 weeks and people making wild projections based on it, that’s not much better. For example multiple people here are making broad claims like Consumer Protections is completely shutting down, when all that’s been announced is a temporary freeze on operations as the new lead takes over (which happened in multiple agencies). Likewise the stated plan for USAID is to trim down foreign grants and merge the rest with the state department, so we don’t know what functions will continue there or if the Executive branch even has the authority to do that. Courts have already blocked last week’s freeze on federal grants and a few other things. The Mexican tariffs are already paused too and Canada probably isn’t far behind given the large risk to US markets and prices. As dumb as plenty of this stuff is, it’s easier to get worked up and believe every dire headline you read than maintain a sober look at what tangible things have actually changed or can change that fast.
- chinathrow 2y ago
  Right, I can't wait for the announcement that they cut down x in spending and will use some percentage of the "savings" to do y (Mars via Elons proxy Jared Isaacman, AI infrastructure via Oracle/FAANGs) and then claim it will benefit the whole world.
watwut 2y ago
I don't believe Musk or Trum cares about "improving the lives of Americans". They would try to protect Americans if that was their goal. Their first targets are consumer protection, environmental protection and such. they don't care about fraud either. Both are fraudsters themselves, both will enrich themselves and their families. They both surround themselves with fraudsters. What I give to Musk is that the staggering nepotism you see with Trump is not there as much.
- novia 2y ago
  They are currently in the process of tearing down USAID, which provides money to other countries to help with things like disease eradication. https://apnews.com/article/trump-musk-usaid-c0c7799be0b2fa7cad4c806565985fe2 https://apnews.com/article/trump-musk-usaid-c0c7799be0b2fa7c...
  - watwut 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - 9dev 2y ago
    Which sounds kind of useful, considering these diseases a) carry over to the USA, b) diminish the buying power of those the USA exports goods to, and c) helps these countries to improve their economies, leading to a bigger market for American products. Does the Republican Party have any humans with brains left, or is it all slime molds now??
  - bitsage 2y ago
    Emergency and humanitarian aid will remain. I’m sure all the political and cultural funding is gone though. For instance, Pepfar is still running. https://www.state.gov/emergency-humanitarian-waiver-to-foreign-assistance-pause/ https://www.state.gov/emergency-humanitarian-waiver-to-forei...
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - nomdep 2y ago
kelnos 2y ago
If that actually was the goal, and if this function were being executed by a legally formed executive branch agency, with non-partisan career employees that have been properly vetted, hired, and granted security clearances, I might be behind this effort. But that's not what's happening. It's clear to me their goal is to dismantle as many "leftist" agencies as possible, like environmental protection, labor rights protection, securities laws enforcement, humanitarian aid, etc., and replace them with people who will enrich their friends and families and allow corporations to run roughshod over the rights of regular people. It is bizarre to me that anyone could lack the critical thinking skills such that they'd accept DOGE's stated goals at face value.
- bende511 2y ago
  [flagged]
- stainablesteel 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - robinei 2y ago
    Calling some of those leftist is quite a condemnation of the right.
  - anon7000 2y ago
    Consumer rights, labor rights, and protecting our shared environment should match conservative principles. I agree with improving these agencies and making them work better for people. But it’s absurd think that the representative government shouldn’t be involved in protecting citizens from companies. Fact: most companies have only one incentive. To make more profit. Everything else is secondary. Companies have a very, very, very strong incentive to cut costs and hurt people if it helps their short-term bottom line. In fact, making more money is their only incentive. And there are thousands of examples of abuse, from tech getting shittier, to energy companies massively polluting certain regions, to poor safety records, to ballooning health care costs. That’s a non-partisan fact — abuse from companies hurts everyone. Your opinion is, apparently, that the free market and these companies themselves are better equipped to protect people. Even though there is absolutely ZERO incentive in capitalism for them to do anything that would protect people if it costs money and doesn’t help their bottom line.
lm28469 2y ago
Some people are about to learn about soft power, how important it is, how fast it's lost, how quickly alternatives fill the gaps
Trasmatta 2y ago
None of that is the goal. That's the propaganda.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
sanderjd 2y ago
Those may be the stated goals but I don't see any reason to believe those are the goals. Trust is earned.
disqard 2y ago
If that is the goal, then what happened to "profile before you optimize"? As an analogy, what's happening feels like this: * Somebody (let's call them "X") has embarked upon a mission to de-bloat the ancient-but-working family desktop PC. * X's first actions appear to be to desolder various things from the motherboard, while the computer is on. * Anyone who sees what X is doing, is somewhere on a spectrum between "scratching their head" <----> "wow, they're trying their best to destroy the PC". To those defending this particular way of "fixing" things, would you yourself replace a large, working legacy software system in this manner?
- brigandish 2y ago
  Certainly, one might test the software by removing access to external systems to see what happens, whether things break, whether it complains… and certainly, that’s what’s happening. Something I didn’t expect from this was to see the main complainers scramble to define what’s really important to them, thus implicitly justifying many of the cuts made.
  - disqard 2y ago
    You're right, as long as software is concerned, and customers being left without service is a non-issue. Though if you do that with hardware, you might irreversibly break/short a component -- so you unplug, then figure out you actually needed that part, but plugging it back in now won't get the system working again. I think "running a country" has more hardware-like characteristics than a pure software system.
- tonymet 2y ago
  Trump understands the "shock and awe" PR strategy. His opponents were caught on their back foot, and he's moving fast while they are in disarray. Military thinking might be more effective than software engineering for this moment.
insane_dreamer 2y ago
Those are the stated goals. I’m not sure they are the actual goals.
maxerickson 2y ago
You may want to consider whether you are overly credulous.
rat87 2y ago
The goal is to enable cronyism and corruption as well as undermine resistance to legally and morally dubious acts.
adastra22 2y ago
I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.
matthewmacleod 2y ago
If that were the goal, I think we'd see some evidence of it. You do not "do a thorough accounting" by deciding in advance what programs and operations to terminate based on specific ideological viewpoints. I don't doubt for a second that this is "the way they are thinking about things" – but it's hopelessly, irredeemably naive to think that's what's being done.
croes 2y ago
> effective at improving the lives of Americans while not prioritizing improving the lives of citizens of other nations. A bold claim. Can I get a list of these nations? Because last time I checked, if in doubt the US backed who is better for them not for the people of that nation. And what’s waste is highly political. In the long run the US will lose lots of its influence in other countries.

by novia 2y ago

avs733 2y ago

>The goal is to find government waste and to trim the fat. The goal is to make the US government lean, efficient, and effective at improving the lives of Americans while not prioritizing improving the lives of citizens of other nations. Lets be clear, that is not the goal - that is what they say the goal is and reality shows it is not. The goal is grift and theft adn destruction. Properly naming things is going to continue to matter more and more. Because no matter your bias or perspective, repeating propaganda is an act of propaganda.

novia 2y ago
The question I was answering was > Maybe what goal do they think they're pursuing? and I was answering that to the best of my ability. I'm not just repeating propaganda, I'm distilling down the intent of the actors to the best of my understanding. No one can ever know someone's true intent, but I've done the best I can with the information I have.
- giraffe_lady 2y ago
  You are repeating propaganda though. You're describing the stated intentions of this group, on their terms, as they have defined them. There's no particular reason to presume those statements are sincere, and in fact there have been other, previous statements that directly contradict them.
- Trasmatta 2y ago
  > I'm not just repeating propaganda You literally are, though
- sanderjd 2y ago
  With all due respect, I don't think you have done the best you can with the information you have. The only source of information your answer reflects is the stated intention of the people in question. But you don't seem to have made an effort to use information about the behavior of those people in order to evaluate whether to take their stated intentions at face value. You need to do that part to have done your best here. It's fine if you don't want to do this, you're under no obligations here, but I just don't think "I've done the best I can with the information I have" is accurate.
  - dmix 2y ago
    The rest of this thread is based on about 1-2 weeks and people making wild projections based on it, that’s not much better. For example multiple people here are making broad claims like Consumer Protections is completely shutting down, when all that’s been announced is a temporary freeze on operations as the new lead takes over (which happened in multiple agencies). Likewise the stated plan for USAID is to trim down foreign grants and merge the rest with the state department, so we don’t know what functions will continue there or if the Executive branch even has the authority to do that. Courts have already blocked last week’s freeze on federal grants and a few other things. The Mexican tariffs are already paused too and Canada probably isn’t far behind given the large risk to US markets and prices. As dumb as plenty of this stuff is, it’s easier to get worked up and believe every dire headline you read than maintain a sober look at what tangible things have actually changed or can change that fast.
chinathrow 2y ago
Right, I can't wait for the announcement that they cut down x in spending and will use some percentage of the "savings" to do y (Mars via Elons proxy Jared Isaacman, AI infrastructure via Oracle/FAANGs) and then claim it will benefit the whole world.

watwut 2y ago

I don't believe Musk or Trum cares about "improving the lives of Americans". They would try to protect Americans if that was their goal. Their first targets are consumer protection, environmental protection and such. they don't care about fraud either. Both are fraudsters themselves, both will enrich themselves and their families. They both surround themselves with fraudsters. What I give to Musk is that the staggering nepotism you see with Trump is not there as much.

novia 2y ago
They are currently in the process of tearing down USAID, which provides money to other countries to help with things like disease eradication. https://apnews.com/article/trump-musk-usaid-c0c7799be0b2fa7cad4c806565985fe2 https://apnews.com/article/trump-musk-usaid-c0c7799be0b2fa7c...
- watwut 2y ago
  [flagged]
- 9dev 2y ago
  Which sounds kind of useful, considering these diseases a) carry over to the USA, b) diminish the buying power of those the USA exports goods to, and c) helps these countries to improve their economies, leading to a bigger market for American products. Does the Republican Party have any humans with brains left, or is it all slime molds now??
- bitsage 2y ago
  Emergency and humanitarian aid will remain. I’m sure all the political and cultural funding is gone though. For instance, Pepfar is still running. https://www.state.gov/emergency-humanitarian-waiver-to-foreign-assistance-pause/ https://www.state.gov/emergency-humanitarian-waiver-to-forei...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- nomdep 2y ago

kelnos 2y ago

If that actually was the goal, and if this function were being executed by a legally formed executive branch agency, with non-partisan career employees that have been properly vetted, hired, and granted security clearances, I might be behind this effort. But that's not what's happening. It's clear to me their goal is to dismantle as many "leftist" agencies as possible, like environmental protection, labor rights protection, securities laws enforcement, humanitarian aid, etc., and replace them with people who will enrich their friends and families and allow corporations to run roughshod over the rights of regular people. It is bizarre to me that anyone could lack the critical thinking skills such that they'd accept DOGE's stated goals at face value.

bende511 2y ago
[flagged]
stainablesteel 2y ago
[flagged]
- robinei 2y ago
  Calling some of those leftist is quite a condemnation of the right.
- anon7000 2y ago
  Consumer rights, labor rights, and protecting our shared environment should match conservative principles. I agree with improving these agencies and making them work better for people. But it’s absurd think that the representative government shouldn’t be involved in protecting citizens from companies. Fact: most companies have only one incentive. To make more profit. Everything else is secondary. Companies have a very, very, very strong incentive to cut costs and hurt people if it helps their short-term bottom line. In fact, making more money is their only incentive. And there are thousands of examples of abuse, from tech getting shittier, to energy companies massively polluting certain regions, to poor safety records, to ballooning health care costs. That’s a non-partisan fact — abuse from companies hurts everyone. Your opinion is, apparently, that the free market and these companies themselves are better equipped to protect people. Even though there is absolutely ZERO incentive in capitalism for them to do anything that would protect people if it costs money and doesn’t help their bottom line.

lm28469 2y ago

Some people are about to learn about soft power, how important it is, how fast it's lost, how quickly alternatives fill the gaps

Trasmatta 2y ago

None of that is the goal. That's the propaganda.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

sanderjd 2y ago

Those may be the stated goals but I don't see any reason to believe those are the goals. Trust is earned.

disqard 2y ago

If that is the goal, then what happened to "profile before you optimize"? As an analogy, what's happening feels like this: * Somebody (let's call them "X") has embarked upon a mission to de-bloat the ancient-but-working family desktop PC. * X's first actions appear to be to desolder various things from the motherboard, while the computer is on. * Anyone who sees what X is doing, is somewhere on a spectrum between "scratching their head" <----> "wow, they're trying their best to destroy the PC". To those defending this particular way of "fixing" things, would you yourself replace a large, working legacy software system in this manner?

brigandish 2y ago
Certainly, one might test the software by removing access to external systems to see what happens, whether things break, whether it complains… and certainly, that’s what’s happening. Something I didn’t expect from this was to see the main complainers scramble to define what’s really important to them, thus implicitly justifying many of the cuts made.
- disqard 2y ago
  You're right, as long as software is concerned, and customers being left without service is a non-issue. Though if you do that with hardware, you might irreversibly break/short a component -- so you unplug, then figure out you actually needed that part, but plugging it back in now won't get the system working again. I think "running a country" has more hardware-like characteristics than a pure software system.
tonymet 2y ago
Trump understands the "shock and awe" PR strategy. His opponents were caught on their back foot, and he's moving fast while they are in disarray. Military thinking might be more effective than software engineering for this moment.

insane_dreamer 2y ago

Those are the stated goals. I’m not sure they are the actual goals.

maxerickson 2y ago

You may want to consider whether you are overly credulous.

rat87 2y ago

The goal is to enable cronyism and corruption as well as undermine resistance to legally and morally dubious acts.

adastra22 2y ago

I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.

matthewmacleod 2y ago

If that were the goal, I think we'd see some evidence of it. You do not "do a thorough accounting" by deciding in advance what programs and operations to terminate based on specific ideological viewpoints. I don't doubt for a second that this is "the way they are thinking about things" – but it's hopelessly, irredeemably naive to think that's what's being done.

croes 2y ago

> effective at improving the lives of Americans while not prioritizing improving the lives of citizens of other nations. A bold claim. Can I get a list of these nations? Because last time I checked, if in doubt the US backed who is better for them not for the people of that nation. And what’s waste is highly political. In the long run the US will lose lots of its influence in other countries.