3 ms·

> I don't think DOGE is about saving money. It's about some kind of ideological purge, intimidation, and possibly gathering data You are not alone in this assu

> I don't think DOGE is about saving money. It's about some kind of ideological purge, intimidation, and possibly gathering data You are not alone in this assumption, they've made it clear from the outset via Project 2025. They want to dismantle the government and sell it off to their friends. It's a pity too, in that we should be continuously trying to make government more cost effective. It's one of the countless missteps of the Dems to not do this themselves (but in the right way: provide valuable services while trimming waste). Another misstep is in not educating the public on the value the public gets from the tax dollars spent.

no_wizard 2y ago
>provide valuable services while trimming waste I'm going to zero in on the issue with this. The way unions exist in the US is not conductive to smart reforms. We have structured labor relations in the US to be as hostile as possible which makes them as hard as possible. This was deliberate, going back to the Pinkerton era. Since certain standards were enacted that prevented violent strikebreaking, business owners needed an enemy, and by making these negotiations as fraught as possible, they are able to go to the public and thereby politicians, and plead their case about how damaging unions are to the economy, even though businesses themselves have conducted themselves in such a manner and supported legislation that makes it this way Thereby, any attempts at reform - which will likely mean eliminating or retraining positions - typically only comes when all austerity measures come, which by then is too late or useful to be meaningful, and often due to reactionary and hurried processes of enactment, are not well thought out, trimming too much or too little and not much in between. If we had a sane labor relations paradigm we could do more here and it would benefit everyone - the tax payer and the workers - without inducing undue harm. This stretches into private industry as well. Labor relations are incredibly adversarial there too. I do want to also point out, that the reason its this way is due to businesses (and by proxy, pro business politicians) being unwilling to compromise and fighting labor tooth and nail, even in 2025, which has set the historical tone for these situations. Had businesses been more reasonable during the Pinkerton era organized labor would be healthier than it is now for both sides. If we had things like sectorial bargaining and a better overall organized labor system, I think the US wouldn't have such tension in achieving smart reforms
intermerda 2y ago
> It's one of the countless missteps of the Dems to not do this themselves (but in the right way: provide valuable services while trimming waste). Another misstep is in not educating the public on the value the public gets from the tax dollars spent. Murc’s law in action.

no_wizard 2y ago

>provide valuable services while trimming waste I'm going to zero in on the issue with this. The way unions exist in the US is not conductive to smart reforms. We have structured labor relations in the US to be as hostile as possible which makes them as hard as possible. This was deliberate, going back to the Pinkerton era. Since certain standards were enacted that prevented violent strikebreaking, business owners needed an enemy, and by making these negotiations as fraught as possible, they are able to go to the public and thereby politicians, and plead their case about how damaging unions are to the economy, even though businesses themselves have conducted themselves in such a manner and supported legislation that makes it this way Thereby, any attempts at reform - which will likely mean eliminating or retraining positions - typically only comes when all austerity measures come, which by then is too late or useful to be meaningful, and often due to reactionary and hurried processes of enactment, are not well thought out, trimming too much or too little and not much in between. If we had a sane labor relations paradigm we could do more here and it would benefit everyone - the tax payer and the workers - without inducing undue harm. This stretches into private industry as well. Labor relations are incredibly adversarial there too. I do want to also point out, that the reason its this way is due to businesses (and by proxy, pro business politicians) being unwilling to compromise and fighting labor tooth and nail, even in 2025, which has set the historical tone for these situations. Had businesses been more reasonable during the Pinkerton era organized labor would be healthier than it is now for both sides. If we had things like sectorial bargaining and a better overall organized labor system, I think the US wouldn't have such tension in achieving smart reforms

intermerda 2y ago

> It's one of the countless missteps of the Dems to not do this themselves (but in the right way: provide valuable services while trimming waste). Another misstep is in not educating the public on the value the public gets from the tax dollars spent. Murc’s law in action.