3 ms·

what perspective do you have on their actions outside of what corporate media says, which is constantly attacking both of them? if we're going to say "let's loo

by 93po 1y ago

what perspective do you have on their actions outside of what corporate media says, which is constantly attacking both of them? if we're going to say "let's look at the actions" then let's look at what they're actually doing instead of the hysterical narrative being spun around it by organizations who have a monetary and political reason to do so

BriggyDwiggs42 1y ago
Most of my awareness of doge comes from browsing the resources they’ve released or watching small commentators do the same. I don’t particularly like or trust corporate media as a rule. My top complaints would be 1 - a lack of transparency. They are very public about the small number of cuts that they can make look good to their base while obscuring/not elucidating a clear, extensive list of their actions. It’s not easy to examine the details of cut programs beyond short descriptions of dubious accuracy. 2 - clear political bias. The cuts/“fraud” they do publicize are frequently just things which appear, on their surface, to be ideologically liberal or left, rather than examples of clear waste or fraud. I say surface level appearance because the details of the cut are rarely more than a single sentence description and a monetary amount. 3 - security concerns. Doge isn’t careful enough/lacks the oversight to be handling Americans’ sensitive records. Their approach is very deliberately to behave more like a small startup, but they neglect security far too much as a consequence. I think a department of government efficiency is a good idea, but I think doge pretends to be such a thing in order to cut government programs for ideological reasons without having to go through the legislature.
- 93po 1y ago
  1. https://www.doge.gov/savings https://www.doge.gov/savings this seems like incredibly transparency for a brand new government initiative that's like 100 days old. and in the ways it doesn't provide enough info, it acknowledges that, and says they're working on it, which i believe. 2. i agree that there is a lot of highlighting of stuff that is cut that is aligned with leftist ideology, e.g. money spent on programs that are gender affirming or involving trans/LGBTQ issues. i am LGBTQ/trans myself and I am massively in support of all initiatives to make the world a more loving, kind, accepting place. but i can also empathize that government attempts to do so are probably rampant with fraud and abuse and theft and waste, and it's not clear to me to what extent our government should be funding things surrounding social issues like this at all. 3. again i think this is a sentiment based on hyperbolic media reporting and is hard to substantiate with concrete evidence other than "MSNBC had an anonymous source that said so". it's also hard to know how much the claims, if true, are misaligned with "business as usual" in the government. if doge has access to personal information to help reduce social security fraud, is that really unusual? it seems like it's necessary if you're going to audit fraud and catch things like a 9 year old getting veteran benefits or whatever. i think doge is definitely framing cuts in ideological ways for political points. and i believe they are specifically looking for and cutting DEI related stuff, because they've plainly stated as much. but problematic framing and motivations aside, i do think it's a massive net benefit, and especially if their work helps weed out and cut off people who systemically commit fraud and waste for years and for millions/billions of dollars.

by 93po 1y ago

BriggyDwiggs42 1y ago

Most of my awareness of doge comes from browsing the resources they’ve released or watching small commentators do the same. I don’t particularly like or trust corporate media as a rule. My top complaints would be 1 - a lack of transparency. They are very public about the small number of cuts that they can make look good to their base while obscuring/not elucidating a clear, extensive list of their actions. It’s not easy to examine the details of cut programs beyond short descriptions of dubious accuracy. 2 - clear political bias. The cuts/“fraud” they do publicize are frequently just things which appear, on their surface, to be ideologically liberal or left, rather than examples of clear waste or fraud. I say surface level appearance because the details of the cut are rarely more than a single sentence description and a monetary amount. 3 - security concerns. Doge isn’t careful enough/lacks the oversight to be handling Americans’ sensitive records. Their approach is very deliberately to behave more like a small startup, but they neglect security far too much as a consequence. I think a department of government efficiency is a good idea, but I think doge pretends to be such a thing in order to cut government programs for ideological reasons without having to go through the legislature.

93po 1y ago
1. https://www.doge.gov/savings https://www.doge.gov/savings this seems like incredibly transparency for a brand new government initiative that's like 100 days old. and in the ways it doesn't provide enough info, it acknowledges that, and says they're working on it, which i believe. 2. i agree that there is a lot of highlighting of stuff that is cut that is aligned with leftist ideology, e.g. money spent on programs that are gender affirming or involving trans/LGBTQ issues. i am LGBTQ/trans myself and I am massively in support of all initiatives to make the world a more loving, kind, accepting place. but i can also empathize that government attempts to do so are probably rampant with fraud and abuse and theft and waste, and it's not clear to me to what extent our government should be funding things surrounding social issues like this at all. 3. again i think this is a sentiment based on hyperbolic media reporting and is hard to substantiate with concrete evidence other than "MSNBC had an anonymous source that said so". it's also hard to know how much the claims, if true, are misaligned with "business as usual" in the government. if doge has access to personal information to help reduce social security fraud, is that really unusual? it seems like it's necessary if you're going to audit fraud and catch things like a 9 year old getting veteran benefits or whatever. i think doge is definitely framing cuts in ideological ways for political points. and i believe they are specifically looking for and cutting DEI related stuff, because they've plainly stated as much. but problematic framing and motivations aside, i do think it's a massive net benefit, and especially if their work helps weed out and cut off people who systemically commit fraud and waste for years and for millions/billions of dollars.