8 ms·

Using this military metaphor to describe operations against America's own government is absolutely wild to me. It's legitimately shocking to me how extreme peop

Using this military metaphor to describe operations against America's own government is absolutely wild to me. It's legitimately shocking to me how extreme people have become over the past ten years. The size of the federal workforce has not grown in 50 years. These cuts will make no impact on the federal debt. DOGE is breaking every federal records law there is with no oversight. Elon Musk has clear, undeniable conflicts of interest at play here. But people are celebrating because the federal government is .. slow, relies on the interpretation of complex law and procedure, and I guess is nice to women and minorities.

rayiner 2y ago
Executive branch employees coined the term “Resistance” to declare their opposition to the democratically elected president’s agenda in 2017. So the war metaphor seems quite fitting. The shock and awe will stop when the public can be confident that civil servants will work just as hard to implement the agenda of the president regardless of which party wins the election. That is fundamental to our system of democracy. And the unelected government isn’t nice to us “minorities.” it’s full of ideologues who categorize us into meaningless groups like “Hispanic” and “Asian,” fund random NGOs that we have never heard of that purport to speak for us, and want to implement a system of racial preferences in gerrymandering. I’d love to see how many grants went to “Asian” organizations that promote the idea that “AAPI hate” is more of a problem than rising crime or affirmative action.
- apawloski 2y ago
  What I'm reading then is that it's not about actually about workforce spending or federal debt at all. That's sort of what I expected. Curious if you have thoughts on Elon Musk's conflicts of interest? Both as a large federal contractor, and as someone with business dependence on China. Also the breaking of federal records laws (e.g. using signal and not retaining any other records).
  - rayiner 2y ago
    It is about spending and trust over spending. I was skeptical Elon was going to find meaningful cuts. But the again I thought USAID was spending $50 billion on things like vaccines for kids in Bangladesh. Then I find out that it’s funding anti-Trump groups like Kristol’s (https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1886647920566636637 https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1886647920566636637) and left-wing government destabilization abroad. So now I want Elon’s nerds to trace every payment and find out how much USAID money went to “democracy” NGOs to do stuff like encourage the recent overthrow of the government in Bangladesh. The narrative emerging here is that the same permanent-government gremlins that we always knew bankrolled efforts to destabilize the rest of the world are perfectly okay with turning those same tactics inward if the wrong candidate wins the election. If we can put these people out of business and find even $25 billion a year in the process it will be worth it. I don’t care about Elon’s conflicts. Worst thing from that is we get a giant EV credit next year. I’m much more worried about the conflict from federal employees who overwhelmingly support one party funneling federal money to aligned NGOs.
    - apawloski 2y ago
      This is the part that I'm so surprised about. It turns out that people don't actually care about the law when it's inconvenient. And it turns out that people are willing to accept and support crazy things: conflicted/unqualified leaders, the sacrifice of American influence and stability, the alienation of our allies, the purposeful cost-raising for American consumers. What matters most apparently is the culture war. It's clear that we'll have to agree to disagree and leave it here -- so you're welcome to the final word if you want it -- but I think the feeling that resonates with me in these conversations is "I don't care about the law or other consequences as long as I get my way." That feels bad to me. And when people making those points disagree with me on it -- this week it's justification to kill USAID and give treasury control to Musk, next week it will be the destruction of the department of education, soon it will be ignoring the 14th amendment of the constitution -- it's hard to tell if they aren't being honest with me or if they aren't being honest with themselves.
      - 2y ago
- dctoedt 2y ago
  > the democratically elected president That doesn't trump (so to speak) all other considerations — Adolf Hitler was "democratically" chosen. (And yes, I'm going there.)
  - pcwalton 2y ago
    Easier is just to point out that polls show that all of this DOGE stuff is deeply unpopular [1] (as is Elon himself, incidentally). We don't have to speculate as to which of the president's agenda items have a popular mandate; we can just ask the electorate. [1]: https://today.yougov.com/topics/economy/survey-results/daily/2025/02/03/1210d/3 https://today.yougov.com/topics/economy/survey-results/daily...
    - rayiner 2y ago
      Racially discriminatory SBA loans and affirmative action in colleges also are deeply unpopular, but Democrats keep pursing those policies because they’re important to a portion of their coalition. Trump is the first Republican in memory that understands coalition politics (because he was a Democrat). Most republicans don’t like Gabbard and/or RFK Jr. But, like Musk, they were advertised as part of the package deal and Trump voters satisfied themselves they could live with it.
      - pcwalton 2y ago
        Gabbard's favorables are +43 among Republicans and RFK Jr.'s favorables are +71 among Republicans [1]. [1]: https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/econTabReport_eAYQKbY.pdf https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/econTabRepor...
  - rayiner 2y ago
    If civil servants invoke Hitler to justify declaring “Resistance” to the democratically elected President, and said President turns out not to be Hitler, then they invite the reaction that results. I was promised Muslim internment camps in 2017. There having been none, I’m cheering on the DOGE strike teams.
xvector 2y ago
I am thrilled that Elon is doing this. Our government doesn't get anything done. Taxes are a fucking scam with how much gets wasted. Finally someone with a "just ship it" mindset has entered the govt and is getting shit done for the first time in forever.
- apawloski 2y ago
  I brought this on myself for making a political comment on a forum, but I'm curious how much spending you think goes to this. Like of every $1 in taxes you pay - how much do you think goes to USAID (or the entire federal workforce)? When you see the answer you might question the honesty of the cost-savings argument here.
  - xvector 2y ago
    I'd ballpark USAID at maybe half a percent? It's an easy win. A few more of these and Elon will have made a meaningful dent in the wastage of my tax dollars. I'd consider even a 3% reduction in spend a massive success. The percentage of money being wasted is much higher, somewhere between 30% and 70% (estimates vary.) If you've ever worked for a government contractor you've seen the immense waste/scam firsthand.
    - loeg 2y ago
      > The percentage of money being wasted is much higher, somewhere between 30% and 70% (estimates vary.) Any cut of 30% or above involves cutting entitlement spending (social security, medicare, medicaid).
      - xvector 2y ago
        Yes, and military contracting as well. There is immense waste in all of these programs.
  - jalapenos 2y ago
    There's a great dishonesty in this argument, because it intentionally ignores the fact that this is only the opening couple of weeks in something that's going to continue for 4 years, Milei-style. So obviously it's not a matter of what percent savings comes from closing USAID specifically, but in what total savings the posture behind that is going to create over the next 4 years.

rayiner 2y ago

Executive branch employees coined the term “Resistance” to declare their opposition to the democratically elected president’s agenda in 2017. So the war metaphor seems quite fitting. The shock and awe will stop when the public can be confident that civil servants will work just as hard to implement the agenda of the president regardless of which party wins the election. That is fundamental to our system of democracy. And the unelected government isn’t nice to us “minorities.” it’s full of ideologues who categorize us into meaningless groups like “Hispanic” and “Asian,” fund random NGOs that we have never heard of that purport to speak for us, and want to implement a system of racial preferences in gerrymandering. I’d love to see how many grants went to “Asian” organizations that promote the idea that “AAPI hate” is more of a problem than rising crime or affirmative action.

apawloski 2y ago
What I'm reading then is that it's not about actually about workforce spending or federal debt at all. That's sort of what I expected. Curious if you have thoughts on Elon Musk's conflicts of interest? Both as a large federal contractor, and as someone with business dependence on China. Also the breaking of federal records laws (e.g. using signal and not retaining any other records).
- rayiner 2y ago
  It is about spending and trust over spending. I was skeptical Elon was going to find meaningful cuts. But the again I thought USAID was spending $50 billion on things like vaccines for kids in Bangladesh. Then I find out that it’s funding anti-Trump groups like Kristol’s (https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1886647920566636637 https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1886647920566636637) and left-wing government destabilization abroad. So now I want Elon’s nerds to trace every payment and find out how much USAID money went to “democracy” NGOs to do stuff like encourage the recent overthrow of the government in Bangladesh. The narrative emerging here is that the same permanent-government gremlins that we always knew bankrolled efforts to destabilize the rest of the world are perfectly okay with turning those same tactics inward if the wrong candidate wins the election. If we can put these people out of business and find even $25 billion a year in the process it will be worth it. I don’t care about Elon’s conflicts. Worst thing from that is we get a giant EV credit next year. I’m much more worried about the conflict from federal employees who overwhelmingly support one party funneling federal money to aligned NGOs.
  - apawloski 2y ago
    This is the part that I'm so surprised about. It turns out that people don't actually care about the law when it's inconvenient. And it turns out that people are willing to accept and support crazy things: conflicted/unqualified leaders, the sacrifice of American influence and stability, the alienation of our allies, the purposeful cost-raising for American consumers. What matters most apparently is the culture war. It's clear that we'll have to agree to disagree and leave it here -- so you're welcome to the final word if you want it -- but I think the feeling that resonates with me in these conversations is "I don't care about the law or other consequences as long as I get my way." That feels bad to me. And when people making those points disagree with me on it -- this week it's justification to kill USAID and give treasury control to Musk, next week it will be the destruction of the department of education, soon it will be ignoring the 14th amendment of the constitution -- it's hard to tell if they aren't being honest with me or if they aren't being honest with themselves.
    - 2y ago
dctoedt 2y ago
> the democratically elected president That doesn't trump (so to speak) all other considerations — Adolf Hitler was "democratically" chosen. (And yes, I'm going there.)
- pcwalton 2y ago
  Easier is just to point out that polls show that all of this DOGE stuff is deeply unpopular [1] (as is Elon himself, incidentally). We don't have to speculate as to which of the president's agenda items have a popular mandate; we can just ask the electorate. [1]: https://today.yougov.com/topics/economy/survey-results/daily/2025/02/03/1210d/3 https://today.yougov.com/topics/economy/survey-results/daily...
  - rayiner 2y ago
    Racially discriminatory SBA loans and affirmative action in colleges also are deeply unpopular, but Democrats keep pursing those policies because they’re important to a portion of their coalition. Trump is the first Republican in memory that understands coalition politics (because he was a Democrat). Most republicans don’t like Gabbard and/or RFK Jr. But, like Musk, they were advertised as part of the package deal and Trump voters satisfied themselves they could live with it.
    - pcwalton 2y ago
      Gabbard's favorables are +43 among Republicans and RFK Jr.'s favorables are +71 among Republicans [1]. [1]: https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/econTabReport_eAYQKbY.pdf https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/econTabRepor...
- rayiner 2y ago
  If civil servants invoke Hitler to justify declaring “Resistance” to the democratically elected President, and said President turns out not to be Hitler, then they invite the reaction that results. I was promised Muslim internment camps in 2017. There having been none, I’m cheering on the DOGE strike teams.

xvector 2y ago

I am thrilled that Elon is doing this. Our government doesn't get anything done. Taxes are a fucking scam with how much gets wasted. Finally someone with a "just ship it" mindset has entered the govt and is getting shit done for the first time in forever.

apawloski 2y ago
I brought this on myself for making a political comment on a forum, but I'm curious how much spending you think goes to this. Like of every $1 in taxes you pay - how much do you think goes to USAID (or the entire federal workforce)? When you see the answer you might question the honesty of the cost-savings argument here.
- xvector 2y ago
  I'd ballpark USAID at maybe half a percent? It's an easy win. A few more of these and Elon will have made a meaningful dent in the wastage of my tax dollars. I'd consider even a 3% reduction in spend a massive success. The percentage of money being wasted is much higher, somewhere between 30% and 70% (estimates vary.) If you've ever worked for a government contractor you've seen the immense waste/scam firsthand.
  - loeg 2y ago
    > The percentage of money being wasted is much higher, somewhere between 30% and 70% (estimates vary.) Any cut of 30% or above involves cutting entitlement spending (social security, medicare, medicaid).
    - xvector 2y ago
      Yes, and military contracting as well. There is immense waste in all of these programs.
- jalapenos 2y ago
  There's a great dishonesty in this argument, because it intentionally ignores the fact that this is only the opening couple of weeks in something that's going to continue for 4 years, Milei-style. So obviously it's not a matter of what percent savings comes from closing USAID specifically, but in what total savings the posture behind that is going to create over the next 4 years.