6 ms·

What's wrong with DOGE? How is eliminating bureaucracy/spending a bad thing? This has been done about 100 years ago, research on what happened after. It feels l

What's wrong with DOGE? How is eliminating bureaucracy/spending a bad thing? This has been done about 100 years ago, research on what happened after. It feels like people that scream the loudest are the ones leaching from the system.

pton_xd 2y ago
There's nothing wrong with it. Our current deficit is increasing something like 1 trillion every 3 months. Getting creative to reduce government spending seems necessary at this point. All the hysteria over this is just partisan politics as usual.
- JackYoustra 2y ago
  Doge disrupts everything except for spending: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/02/12/elon-musk-is-failing-to-cut-american-spending https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/02/12/e... stop falling for branding and actually concentrate on the numbers: spending is going up, not down, and only touching entitlement programs, the military, or offsetting monetary loosening (via debt interest) will change that.
JackYoustra 2y ago
We have a mechanism for that: it's called congress. DOGE is an executive abuse of power that's resulting in national security critical roles being fired and then attempted to be rehired because they're so incompetent.
- Empact 2y ago
  What happens when Congress is asleep at the wheel or in on the take?
  - JackYoustra 2y ago
    You campaign for other congresspeople and try and get them thrown out. Congressional representatives are very receptive to constituent calls. I mean, we could also do your plan and just hand off essentially dictatorial power over spending to the richest man in the country.
    - tmpz22 2y ago
      Seriously the number of people willing to burn down the whole government over grievances that often haven’t even impacted them is incredibly scary. You do not throw out the baby with the bath water.
      - Empact 2y ago
        Everyone in the United States is impacted by government insolvency and the economic collapse it will inevitably lead to if unchecked. Everyone is impacted by the fact that money-printer-fueled government spending crowds out private spending / investment / growth.
        JackYoustra 2y ago
        and your solution is empowering a dictator and... hoping it goes well?
    - Empact 2y ago
      Article 2 says “the executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” That means the power to “enforce laws, manage national affairs, and oversee government agencies.” It’s Congress’s role to allocate funds to certain purposes, and the President’s to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” including overseeing the bureaucracy that implements them. The President already has dictatorial power over the bureaucracy, as per the Constitution.
      - JackYoustra 2y ago
        Not over spending, which Elon's seizure of payments infrastructure has made. Unless you extend it to that, in which case why have courts? Its not like they have enforcement power and the president can stretch discretion to the limit.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
NicoJuicy 2y ago
Well. Only announce things your opponents do or even lie about it and spread the hate. I'm 100% sure he won't direct the subsidies during COVID-19 for the hospitality sector, which Trump was quite happy about during his reign. Or the expensive hotel stays for his security at trump hotels :)
tene80i 2y ago
Eliminating waste is a great idea. But it’s unclear that that’s all he’s doing, it’s unclear how or how well it’s being done, he’s brought in people without security review (which means they, and the systems they are opening up and creating, can be more easily compromised by our enemies), and he has enormous conflicts of interest.
wklauss 2y ago
I don't think that's what DOGE is doing. Seems extremely vindictive and ideological in the way it's acting and time will tell but I would not be surprised if it ends costing the taxpayers more in the long run.
- cryptoegorophy 2y ago
  Wouldn't Argentina be a good example of what is DOGE doing now? Financially it has been a good experiment for Argentina. What are the cons?
  - wklauss 2y ago
    Argentina and US are very different countries, starting these cuts with very different economic realities. For example, 55% of all registered workers are employed by the government in Argentina. Although not a directly comparable metric (since in the US you also need to account for state and local civil workers), the US federal government employs around 3 million people. That's just 1.87% of the entire civilian workforce. Again, DOGE operates from the premise that the federal government is bloated. Although this is a very popular message, I'd love to see some more objective data to support this and I doubt that CDC or USAID are the agencies where the bloat is. Like I said, their actions seem vindictive and careless. Also, likely to result in legal cases that will drag for years and end up costing taxpayer more than the supposed savings. The main con is that once you fire the workers that you thought you didn't need (but that you did indeed need) hiring them back becomes more expensive and a lengthy process. Some of the firings are already causing chaos in vital teams among several agencies and have forced DOGE to try to reverse course (bird flu monitoring, nuclear response...). And that's not to mention the dire situation you put the people you are firing in. Laying off people from their jobs is never "an experiment" unless you are willing to suspend every trace of empathy.
moolcool 2y ago
What's wrong? Let me count the ways. - Much of the spending they're eliminating is good and important (E.g. USAID). - The way they're cutting is reckless (They accidentally fired nuclear safety workers). - Many of the workers are Musk sycophants, who were hired from Twitter/Tesla/SpaceX. - There's a tremendous conflict of interest in this agency being run by a massive government contractor (NASA and the military are both avid SpaceX customers). - The workers are not experienced with the data they're working with, and misinterpret it constantly in public before verifying it. - Despite claims of "transparency", Musk asserted that it was illegal to publish the names of his employees. - Their one product, their government spending portal, is a worse version of a spending portal which already exists, and they didn't even secure their database. - They say they "use AI" for their decisions. Which AI? Where is confidential data going? - Do the staff have security clearance?
- b59831 2y ago
  First two points are pretty much the same and ignore all nuance. Third point is opinion, at best. Forth point; couldn't this be said about any politician? Fifth point; So you're saying that no outside group is capable of auditing. I'll stop there. You've drank the koolaid.
  - moolcool 2y ago
    The world’s richest man is gutting the regulatory bodies which were designed to keep him in check, and you’re defending it. I’d say you’ve drank the Kool-aid.
    - cryptoegorophy 2y ago
      No, seems like you are defending cost cutting and it doesn't make sense why are you so against it? USA is democracy, if after 4 years things go south you can always vote different and get everything back the way it was. Most probable outcome here is financial situation in USA will get better, you make it sound like USA would collapse to stone age era, it wont.
- tonymet 2y ago
nonrandomstring 2y ago
US Americans seem quite green, have never had this done to them before on such a scale and so haven't seen the trick before. The art of the hostile takeover. [0] Curtis documents it well, but at tedious length unless you're British, on the Slater, Goldsmith and Rowland gang. "Efficiency" is an entry point, a common bullshit word that's a perfect cover for hostile takeover, because nobody argues with it - it's a "STFU and agree" word [1]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mayfair_Set https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mayfair_Set [1] https://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/efficiency/ https://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/efficiency/
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ben_w 2y ago
Eliminating superfluous bureaucracy is fine. Note that DOGE fired, and is struggling to rehire, the team whose job was to mainain America's nuclear arsenal. Also note that the stated goal of DOGE, $2T, exceeds the entire discretionary budget of the federal government, even though half the discretionary budget is your entire active military. Even treating $2T as a stretch goal, eliminating literally everything but the military from the discretionary budget doesn't reach the lower $1T that Musk says he has a "good shot" at. Cuts on this scale directly, all by themselves, even aside from all the other economic diasters that America expressly chose to vote for as a package deal with this, will shrink the US economy about 6%.

pton_xd 2y ago

There's nothing wrong with it. Our current deficit is increasing something like 1 trillion every 3 months. Getting creative to reduce government spending seems necessary at this point. All the hysteria over this is just partisan politics as usual.

JackYoustra 2y ago
Doge disrupts everything except for spending: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/02/12/elon-musk-is-failing-to-cut-american-spending https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/02/12/e... stop falling for branding and actually concentrate on the numbers: spending is going up, not down, and only touching entitlement programs, the military, or offsetting monetary loosening (via debt interest) will change that.

JackYoustra 2y ago

We have a mechanism for that: it's called congress. DOGE is an executive abuse of power that's resulting in national security critical roles being fired and then attempted to be rehired because they're so incompetent.

Empact 2y ago
What happens when Congress is asleep at the wheel or in on the take?
- JackYoustra 2y ago
  You campaign for other congresspeople and try and get them thrown out. Congressional representatives are very receptive to constituent calls. I mean, we could also do your plan and just hand off essentially dictatorial power over spending to the richest man in the country.
  - tmpz22 2y ago
    Seriously the number of people willing to burn down the whole government over grievances that often haven’t even impacted them is incredibly scary. You do not throw out the baby with the bath water.
    - Empact 2y ago
      Everyone in the United States is impacted by government insolvency and the economic collapse it will inevitably lead to if unchecked. Everyone is impacted by the fact that money-printer-fueled government spending crowds out private spending / investment / growth.
      - JackYoustra 2y ago
        and your solution is empowering a dictator and... hoping it goes well?
  - Empact 2y ago
    Article 2 says “the executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.” That means the power to “enforce laws, manage national affairs, and oversee government agencies.” It’s Congress’s role to allocate funds to certain purposes, and the President’s to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” including overseeing the bureaucracy that implements them. The President already has dictatorial power over the bureaucracy, as per the Constitution.
    - JackYoustra 2y ago
      Not over spending, which Elon's seizure of payments infrastructure has made. Unless you extend it to that, in which case why have courts? Its not like they have enforcement power and the president can stretch discretion to the limit.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

NicoJuicy 2y ago

Well. Only announce things your opponents do or even lie about it and spread the hate. I'm 100% sure he won't direct the subsidies during COVID-19 for the hospitality sector, which Trump was quite happy about during his reign. Or the expensive hotel stays for his security at trump hotels :)

tene80i 2y ago

Eliminating waste is a great idea. But it’s unclear that that’s all he’s doing, it’s unclear how or how well it’s being done, he’s brought in people without security review (which means they, and the systems they are opening up and creating, can be more easily compromised by our enemies), and he has enormous conflicts of interest.

wklauss 2y ago

I don't think that's what DOGE is doing. Seems extremely vindictive and ideological in the way it's acting and time will tell but I would not be surprised if it ends costing the taxpayers more in the long run.

cryptoegorophy 2y ago
Wouldn't Argentina be a good example of what is DOGE doing now? Financially it has been a good experiment for Argentina. What are the cons?
- wklauss 2y ago
  Argentina and US are very different countries, starting these cuts with very different economic realities. For example, 55% of all registered workers are employed by the government in Argentina. Although not a directly comparable metric (since in the US you also need to account for state and local civil workers), the US federal government employs around 3 million people. That's just 1.87% of the entire civilian workforce. Again, DOGE operates from the premise that the federal government is bloated. Although this is a very popular message, I'd love to see some more objective data to support this and I doubt that CDC or USAID are the agencies where the bloat is. Like I said, their actions seem vindictive and careless. Also, likely to result in legal cases that will drag for years and end up costing taxpayer more than the supposed savings. The main con is that once you fire the workers that you thought you didn't need (but that you did indeed need) hiring them back becomes more expensive and a lengthy process. Some of the firings are already causing chaos in vital teams among several agencies and have forced DOGE to try to reverse course (bird flu monitoring, nuclear response...). And that's not to mention the dire situation you put the people you are firing in. Laying off people from their jobs is never "an experiment" unless you are willing to suspend every trace of empathy.

moolcool 2y ago

What's wrong? Let me count the ways. - Much of the spending they're eliminating is good and important (E.g. USAID). - The way they're cutting is reckless (They accidentally fired nuclear safety workers). - Many of the workers are Musk sycophants, who were hired from Twitter/Tesla/SpaceX. - There's a tremendous conflict of interest in this agency being run by a massive government contractor (NASA and the military are both avid SpaceX customers). - The workers are not experienced with the data they're working with, and misinterpret it constantly in public before verifying it. - Despite claims of "transparency", Musk asserted that it was illegal to publish the names of his employees. - Their one product, their government spending portal, is a worse version of a spending portal which already exists, and they didn't even secure their database. - They say they "use AI" for their decisions. Which AI? Where is confidential data going? - Do the staff have security clearance?

b59831 2y ago
First two points are pretty much the same and ignore all nuance. Third point is opinion, at best. Forth point; couldn't this be said about any politician? Fifth point; So you're saying that no outside group is capable of auditing. I'll stop there. You've drank the koolaid.
- moolcool 2y ago
  The world’s richest man is gutting the regulatory bodies which were designed to keep him in check, and you’re defending it. I’d say you’ve drank the Kool-aid.
  - cryptoegorophy 2y ago
    No, seems like you are defending cost cutting and it doesn't make sense why are you so against it? USA is democracy, if after 4 years things go south you can always vote different and get everything back the way it was. Most probable outcome here is financial situation in USA will get better, you make it sound like USA would collapse to stone age era, it wont.
tonymet 2y ago

nonrandomstring 2y ago

US Americans seem quite green, have never had this done to them before on such a scale and so haven't seen the trick before. The art of the hostile takeover. [0] Curtis documents it well, but at tedious length unless you're British, on the Slater, Goldsmith and Rowland gang. "Efficiency" is an entry point, a common bullshit word that's a perfect cover for hostile takeover, because nobody argues with it - it's a "STFU and agree" word [1]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mayfair_Set https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mayfair_Set [1] https://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/efficiency/ https://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/efficiency/

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

ben_w 2y ago

Eliminating superfluous bureaucracy is fine. Note that DOGE fired, and is struggling to rehire, the team whose job was to mainain America's nuclear arsenal. Also note that the stated goal of DOGE, $2T, exceeds the entire discretionary budget of the federal government, even though half the discretionary budget is your entire active military. Even treating $2T as a stretch goal, eliminating literally everything but the military from the discretionary budget doesn't reach the lower $1T that Musk says he has a "good shot" at. Cuts on this scale directly, all by themselves, even aside from all the other economic diasters that America expressly chose to vote for as a package deal with this, will shrink the US economy about 6%.