3 ms·
There's a lot wrong here, but I'll just cut to the meat here: >the US Gov is in so much debt, drastic measures are absolutely required. Any argument to the con
by johnnyanmac 1y ago
There's a lot wrong here, but I'll just cut to the meat here:
>the US Gov is in so much debt, drastic measures are absolutely required. Any argument to the contrary ignores the fiscal situation.
https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/ https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/feder...
https://i.imgur.com/cm4yvbL.png https://i.imgur.com/cm4yvbL.png (for preservation of FY2026)
As always, 60% of government spending is in 3 categories. Anyone who is touting a ned to balance the budget and is not taking moves to hit on these 3 (Medicare, Social Security, National Defesnse) is not seriously interested in balancing the budget.
- SS is political suicide and no one is even fancying touching it (and to be fair, it's hard to touch). Just kicking it down the road until it's too late. Ideally we remove the contribution caps from this so we can keep it funded, but alas.
- Medicare is the health plan for the old people, so it's equally risky to touch that
politically. Any backlash seen from making healtchare cuts this year would be 10-fold if they touch medicare
- So then there's national defense. Not as unpopular to touch, but instead we keep pouring more money into it.
So no. Playing penny slots with all this turmoil isn't helping the budget. Pretty sure the ICE funding boost alone cancelled out even the most optimistic reports of DOGE savings.
- spwa4 1y agoThe problem with DOGE savings is that they had the typical Musk promise progression: October 2024: Musk: “at least $2 trillion” promise. January 20 2025: DOGE officially established by executive order. February/March 2025: Revised target up to $1 trillion. 10 April 2025: $150 billion savings expectation announced. By April 2025: Claim of ~$160 billion saved. 23 November 2025: Reuters reports DOGE disbanded ahead of schedule. Independent reports of the actual result ... well claim negative savings. Musk increased spending instead of decreasing it: A analysis by CBS News reports DOGE claims to have saved US$ 160 billion, but estimates that the cuts may instead cost taxpayers around US$ 135 billion. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doge-cuts-cost-135-billion-analysis-elon-musk-department-of-government-efficiency/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doge-cuts-cost-135-billion-anal... The Washington Post showed that many of the announced savings were inflated: for example, of 1,125 contracts listed as cancelled, only ~US$ 7.2 billion in savings could be verified; many reflected zero savings. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/02/22/doge-savings-found-list-analysis/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/02/22/doge-savi...
- qcnguy 1y agoThere was just the longest federal shutdown in history exactly because the Republicans were trying to control healthcare spending. You can't claim they aren't trying to touch the big ticket items. They theorize that the ICE funding will be net revenue positive in the end. They've also done big tax rises (tariffs), again, partly to try and get the debt under control. You can't claim DOGE is somehow inconsistent or they're chickening out of fights over spending. They are doing what they can within the party allocations the voters gave them.
- spwa4 11mo agoMusk/DOGE started out by claiming they could save $2 trillion of the federal budget. They quickly backpedaled to $1 trillion and kept downscaling it, until now they're claiming less than $160 billion. Independent reports claim it is closer to MINUS $200 to $300 billion (as in Musk/DOGE increased federal spending rather than save anything at all). I would call this a pretty fucking big inconsistency. If you backpedal on your promises 100% I would call that inconsistent. Musk/DOGE backpedaled on their promise 92%, and according to independent observers 115%. Whichever of those 2 figures is true, I would call it pretty damn fucking inconsistent ...