The decoder ring tells all, to those who subscribe. $12.99 monthly subscription is all that it takes!
Never refuse good profit for perfect profit!
More winning
- Thread starter twenty02
- Start date
Never refuse good profit for perfect profit!
Right up there with Mexico will pay for this wall. Or maybe I will end this war on day 1. But the rubes believed it.
The sad part is there is waste in government. But the unserious way they went about the review doomed them from the start. The chaos and disruption they caused for a paltry at best 200b. I think they did more harm than good.
How is cutting 150 billion dollars a swing and miss for fiscal conservatives?
lol...how many trillions do they need to save for it or be a success? Using your 200b number, DOGE will end up saving taxpayers 2 trillion (assuming the waste wouldn't have grown, so the number is most likely low) over the next 10 years and we will get less inflation. I'm not even including the extra growth that will come from it as people move from unproductive government jobs to more productive private jobs.
I think it’s the $2T bloviation he’s speaking of. Sure, $150B is good, but they way over promised and under delivered. Just as everyone predicted they would.
Musk blows off all the time on his forecasts. Cutting nothing was the baseline and eventually it will add up to 2T. Cutting a 150 billion is a major accomplishment. No one else was doing it.
It matters because the promises made in the run up to the election were that he would cut 2 trillion, and he kept that promise until right before the inauguration where he says "still looking at 2 trillion but likely 1 trillion this year". In February he said “If you add competence and caring, you’ll cut the budget deficit in half". He said that right in the oval office.
Now he's at 150 bil (according to him), but the numbers still don't add up and are riddled with errors. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/13/us/politics/doge-contracts-savings.html
That doesn't mean he cut out zero.
There is another issue, namely, what he cut out:
- Major downsizing agency responsible for ensuring air travel is safe, in the middle of a spate of deadly airline crashes, then trying to rehire fired ATC for money that what they were paid before;
- White Collar Crime units have been eviscerated;
- Cybersecurity completely undermined (Making America Safe Again???);
- Firing of Department of Energy workers who insured the safe handling and storage of nuclear materials--including warheads;
Elon is not here to help. Elon is here to make money.
Last edited:
There was a way to go about this and they missed because they are unserious people. When you promised 2T and you get around 10 percent of that you failed.
I've been a part of two structure studies at my Fortune 50 company. You can't just take a chain saw to things. You have to understand where value is added and where it is not. Firing a bunch of IRS agents and park rangers does not help this country. Same with some of our scientists now looking to leave the country.
What if it was the wrong 150 billion?
Once again, I'm a fiscal conservative who wants a Federal government a quarter of the size that it is currently. He has accomplished more than any politician since the Clinton era on cuts?
Also, I disagree with your characterization of taking a chainsaw approach. The Federal Budget is around 7 trillion dollars. Cutting 150 billion dollars isn't a chainsaw approach. It's a small trimming of fat.
Last edited:
I think he is saying that a chain saw approach doesn't mean amount of dollars, but rather what is being cut without knowing/understanding the impacts of cuts. For example, cutting NASA research dollars. NASA researches, for example, how we can grow crops on Mars/moon, etc. That research has and does have a positive impact on US farmers. Cutting university research programs means we just got rid of significant research that goes into developing, inter alia, weapon systems, space travel, etc.
As to excesses or fat, I wouldn't call dumping the white collar crime units, ATC or the cyber security division fat. The fat lies in giant government contracts, pork provisions in spending bills, etc.
Even Musk’s revised and much smaller goal ($150 billion) isn’t feasible because DOGE has been inflating its progress with billion-dollar errors and making assumptions about future federal spending that are highly speculative.
DOGE was mostly a pretext for Trump and Musk to gut agencies and organizations they didn’t like, dump watchdogs who were (or would be) in their way, gain systems access, acquire more power, and evade accountability. Mission accomplished.
In recent news, a whistleblower has attested to evidence that DOGE staffers were given unprecedented and sweeping access to the National Labor Relations Board’s systems that store sensitive case files. In early March, logging protocols created to audit users were tampered with, and the whistleblower detected the removal of 10 gigabytes worth of data from NLRB’s network soon thereafter. The data includes proprietary business information from competitors, union organization and unfair labor practice respondents and their claims, including private affidavits. It’s no secret that Musk hates organized labor.
All of this is a masterful con job
presided over by the greatest con artist of our time.
DOGE whistleblower says he was stalked and threatened after raising alarm
A National Labor Relations Board employee noticed the removal of information from databases following DOGE intervention.
www.newsweek.com
And we love it each and every day. You got almost four years of this left my friend.Even Musk’s revised and much smaller goal ($150 billion) isn’t feasible because DOGE has been inflating its progress with billion-dollar errors and making assumptions about future federal spending that are highly speculative.
DOGE was mostly a pretext for Trump and Musk to gut agencies and organizations they didn’t like, dump watchdogs who were (or would be) in their way, gain systems access, acquire more power, and evade accountability. Mission accomplished.
In recent news, a whistleblower has attested to evidence that DOGE staffers were given unprecedented and sweeping access to the National Labor Relations Board’s systems that store sensitive case files. In early March, logging protocols created to audit users were tampered with, and the whistleblower detected the removal of 10 gigabytes worth of data from NLRB’s network soon thereafter. The data includes proprietary business information from competitors, union organization and unfair labor practice respondents and their claims, including private affidavits. It’s no secret that Musk hates organized labor.
All of this is a masterful con job
presided over by the greatest con artist of our time.
DOGE whistleblower says he was stalked and threatened after raising alarm
A National Labor Relations Board employee noticed the removal of information from databases following DOGE intervention.www.newsweek.com
"a way to go about this"
Have you noticed that the people charged with overseeing our national pocketbook never seem to "go that way", BCC? That's the issue here. I understand your criticisms and concerns. All fair enough.
But it has to be looked at in the proper context. We are hurtling towards a very problematic fiscal future. And it would be too generous to say that our policymakers have been indifferent and negligent. It's more accurate to say they inexplicably keep looking for more fuel to throw on the fire.
For all those kvetching about "doing it the wrong way", I would just ask: then can we please do it the right way?
Like...what the hell happened to the Simpson-Bowles blueprint? I was heartened when President Obama formed the commission. How naive. Everybody just feted Alan Simpson on his passing -- and his service on the commission was often cited. But what did it amount to in meaningful actions? Nothing. They produced a series of recommendations to bolster our fiscal position and then....crickets. It's in a file cabinet somewhere, or archived on the Internet. And that's it.
Meanwhile, the data that matters continues to get more and more harrowing. And we're complaining about *how* somebody goes about at least trying to address it?
And how would you rate the job performance of all our Congresses and all our presidents in dealing with the problem?
Who promised $2T...?
The chainsaw was and remains a metaphor.
And you need to realize that the remaining fed employees, seeing for their first time ever a management which will enforce a standard of performance, will sink or swim.
Their choice! But performance and value of services to the American citizen WILL improve.
What was the worth of DOE when compared to the results internationally of academic achievement since the '60s? Bankrupt.
As far as 'scientists'( or actors, comedians, influencers,media mavens) looking to leave the country, we've heard that before.
It's actually more serious than you've pointed out; much later in the game.
The National Debt in 1970 was 371 bil, which crept up to $475 bil at the end of the Nixon presidency.
76-79 were not good years--stagflation and recession jumped it to 827 bil by the end of year in 1979. 1980 --recall that is when Volker rasied the fed rate to 20%., and the debt rose to $908. From 1981 to 1988 (end of reagan era, the debt was $2,602 tril. Bush era had the national debt up to $4.065 tril. Under clinton the debt rose to $5.674 tril, but had largely stayed the same for about 4 years. By 2008, it rose to 10.025 tril. By the end of 2015 it rose to $18.151 tril.
I'm not going to blame trump or biden for dealing with Covid stuff on the financial side--it is hopefully a once a century issue.
Clearly, nobody has done a good job, but that is just obfuscation over the Musk issue.
DOGE gets an F and so does Congress and the President - except for the late 90s when they get a B.
So basically he was running around telling everyone how big and huge his cuts and cost savings will be when in reality they were tiny mushroom sized. Sounds apt and par for the course for this administration.
Clinton. Doge gets a D+. At least it’s part of the dialogue and some effort. Harris won it would be expansion and no dialogue/effort
Obfuscation?
No, it isn't obfuscation. It's an appropriately stinging indictment of the people and institutions that are charged with the stewardship of our federal finances. Hell, I've conceded all along that DOGE wasn't going to save us all that much money and that they're going about what they're doing very indiscriminately.
But there's some very important context left out of that. And I just don't have a great deal of sympathy for complaints about the manner in which the only people taking concrete action to address an untenable problem....when the people who are supposed to be addressing it are, at best, paralyzed at the wheel with eyes wide shut.
What you see in the below chart is not sustainable. And all indications are that their plan all along has been to rely on central bankers to address it. If you think Elon & Co. are being destructive, you ain't seen nothin' yet.
As for the late 90s, keep in mind that two things were going on there. And these two things pretty much entirely led to that brief period of surplus.
1) The "Peace Dividend". Defense spending was down substantially between the Cold War and 9/11 -- from a late 80s high of about 6.8% GDP to an early 2000s low of 3.4% GDP. So almost half as much from the peak to the trough, relative to GDP.
2) The Dot-Com boom led to several years of extraordinary tax revenues -- this amounted to a couple more % of GDP that lasted about 4 years. The highest year on record was 2000, with tax revs of 19.6% GDP. That number typically vacillates between 15-17%. Naturally, revenues reverted back to the mean once the boom went bust.
As for the DOGE v. Congress/President....which of these are constitutionally charged with our fiscal management?
Because that's who we should be angry at.
Dems get back in they’ll want to spend ten trillion on climateAs for the late 90s, keep in mind that two things were going on there. And these two things pretty much entirely led to that brief period of surplus.
1) The "Peace Dividend". Defense spending was down substantially between the Cold War and 9/11 -- from a late 80s high of about 6.8% GDP to an early 2000s low of 3.4% GDP. So almost half as much from the peak to the trough, relative to GDP.
2) The Dot-Com boom led to several years of extraordinary tax revenues -- this amounted to a couple more % of GDP that lasted about 4 years. The highest year on record was 2000, with tax revs of 19.6% GDP. That number typically vacillates between 15-17%. Naturally, revenues reverted back to the mean once the boom went bust.
As for the DOGE v. Congress/President....which of these are constitutionally charged with our fiscal management?
Because that's who we should be angry at.
One of the interesting aspects of our ability to run deficits all these decades is the willingness of investors to buy our treasury securities.
China, for example, uses part of its trade surplus to help with our budget debt.
The irony being in spite of our budget debt habits our government securities are considered to be sound investments.
For many years Ive been both dismayed and amazed at how our government conducts itself and how we've managed to remain fairly successful.
However, can it last forever?
Agree with peace dividend and dot com boom, of course.
They also made a sensible effort to downsize government, and it was successful. What DOGE is doing isn't going to be successful and it's not done with any analysis. It's doing real damage and it's going to take a long time to fix. As I said, the last place I worked while on active duty is now not fully mission capable. They'll soon be mission incapable because they can't hire people to replace those in key positions that have either been fired by DOGE (newbies) or took the illegal incentive to leave government (who doesn't like months of full pay, especially if you're going to retire anyway) because NO ONE wants to apply for these jobs under the current DOGE inflicted environment. When I was there, we'd advertise a job and get 100 people apply for them and then whittle that down to 20 great people (on paper) to interview. We hired superstars. Now they're getting no stars to apply.
Yes, the mission is important AND failure is going to actually harm America's national security eventually if they don't do it.
They also made a sensible effort to downsize government, and it was successful. What DOGE is doing isn't going to be successful and it's not done with any analysis. It's doing real damage and it's going to take a long time to fix. As I said, the last place I worked while on active duty is now not fully mission capable. They'll soon be mission incapable because they can't hire people to replace those in key positions that have either been fired by DOGE (newbies) or took the illegal incentive to leave government (who doesn't like months of full pay, especially if you're going to retire anyway) because NO ONE wants to apply for these jobs under the current DOGE inflicted environment. When I was there, we'd advertise a job and get 100 people apply for them and then whittle that down to 20 great people (on paper) to interview. We hired superstars. Now they're getting no stars to apply.
Yes, the mission is important AND failure is going to actually harm America's national security eventually if they don't do it.
The original discussion was about Musk's promises and efforts and consequences. You want to talk about something else.Obfuscation?
No, it isn't obfuscation. It's an appropriately stinging indictment of the people and institutions that are charged with the stewardship of our federal finances. Hell, I've conceded all along that DOGE wasn't going to save us all that much money and that they're going about what they're doing very indiscriminately.
But there's some very important context left out of that. And I just don't have a great deal of sympathy for complaints about the manner in which the only people taking concrete action to address an untenable problem....when the people who are supposed to be addressing it are, at best, paralyzed at the wheel with eyes wide shut.
What you see in the below chart is not sustainable. And all indications are that their plan all along has been to rely on central bankers to address it. If you think Elon & Co. are being destructive, you ain't seen nothin' yet.
Let's talk about those costs. Cutting the IRS. You want to cut 10 bil from the IRS okay, but then be prepared lose on tax revenues of 1.6 tril or more over a period of time. We don't need to have a calculator to do the math on 10bil vs 1.6 tril. Every dollar cut has a multiplier effect on enforcement--they can't get it all.
What about cutting the cybersecurity staff? How will that impact costs for American companies?
Defense spending is project to go up
Long-term efforts as I described above with regard to research issues.
There are ways to cut the budget and getting fraud claims cleaned up. Not one person has objected to that. Not one person has objected to the fact that we have a national debt problem.
I don't know what other federal contracts say, but having negotiated and dealt with many COE contracts, they are run very tight, with onerous provisions and you almost never get a change order unless there is a significant SOW change. I have no idea if we are buy $2k toilets or $400 hammers. That would be a good start
Elon Musk is an opportunist, not a savior. The GAO has done more to identify waste and fraud than anybody, but clearly, not much is happening on the congressional side.
i think jdb nails it here. musk/trump have not done a good job with how this has been promoted but as crazed intimated it's at least being addressed, albeit in a ham-fisted way. i think it can be analogized to the nonprofit world. betty is showing up every day. the community outreach program she runs at 14 different ymcas isn't fraught with fraud or waste. she brings walmart cookies and participants drink grape vess. but what impact is it really having for $325,000 a year. now in its 17th year. is it really making a difference. does that little survey 20% turn back in really mean anything. and how much inertia is involved here vs looking at new ways to do things
Jamie Dimon says Elon Musk’s DOGE ‘needs to be done’ — calls US government ‘inefficient’ and claims it’s more than just ‘waste and fraud.’
“It’s not just waste and fraud, it’s outcomes. Why are we spending the money on these things? Are we getting what we deserve? What should we change? I think doing that needs to be done,” he said. “I’m hoping it’s quite successful.”
I think it's like any other financial entity -- it can last forever, so long as everything remains rational.
It is true that a sovereign with its own currency, unlike any other kind of entity (including a US State or city) can always expand its monetary base. But there are limits to that. I've never thought we had to have a balanced budget. When you can borrow money cheaply and get the benefit of the Keynesian multiplier, there is actually some sound economic sense to the use of deficit spending.
But that, too, has limits. And the truth is that human beings are terrible Keynesians. While it's true that General Theory advocated for the use of deficit spending to induce demand during contractions, it's also true that it advocated for surpluses during expansions to keep the resulting debt loads manageable.
Well, it would take a special kind of fool to look at the last 90ish years of US fiscal data and conclude that we've carried out Lord Keynes' proscriptions faithfully. We don't limit our deficit spending to contractions, we rely on a growing amount of it just to pay our regular ongoing bills. Why? Well, because it's politically profitable for elected officials. We voters love public spending high and our tax bills low...and don't have any tolerance for anything else. We want the unicorn -- and then we're indignant when we don't get it.
And you're right to notice that supply of US Treasuries is regularly outpacing demand for them. The Fed now holds about 13% of our entire public debt. And that number is almost certainly set to grow briskly -- because we're officially in that period we've long known was coming where entitlement costs are climbing on a steeper curve. And since we're outpacing tax revenues and now Treasury demand, we're increasingly relying on the funder of last resort: the printing press.
We've seen how this movie plays out, numerous times. We shouldn't want to see it play out again.
Last edited:
Oh, I beg to differ. Not with the first sentence -- there are ways to cut the budget, yes.
But many people object to them -- or, at least, actually doing them. That's why they haven't happened -- despite, literally, decades of knowing that this day would eventually get here.
And, you're right, I will not discuss DOGE without this critical context. It cannot be left out of the discussion. If we don't want to rely on Elon and his band of pimple-faced computer geeks to deal with the mess in DC, then we need to start demanding that the people who are supposed to be fixing the mess actually do it.
Until such time as that happens, I'm perfectly fine with DOGE and any other effort to finally, at long last, do something about the problem.
OK. But you didn't address my final point.
Should our ire be directed at DOGE -- a pro-forma group that didn't even exist until a few months ago -- or should it be directed at our elected officials who not only got us into this mess, not only have steadfastly refused to do anything to clean up their mess, but also insist on continuing to make the mess even worse?
I appreciate your gripes about DOGE. But all life experience should tell us that if untenable matters aren't dealt with responsibly by the people charged with dealing with them, then eventually they're probably going to be dealt with irresponsibly.
Same goes for immigration and Donald Trump's ascendancy. It was inexcusably foolish for the political establishment -- R and D alike -- to think they could just look the other way at that issue, while public sentiment was moving from a simmer to a boil, without some kind of unintended consequence. And now governments all over the world are going so far as to invalidate elections and imprison victorious candidates in order to fend off the populist revolt.
Aloha, it is easy to talk about cleaning the swamp by firing bureaucrats. This along with eliminating programs once deemed necessary, but suddenly declared to be unnecessary examples of waste, fraud, and abuse.
Will this all end up to be like the dieter who loves to eat and gives up all his treats? At first he loses ten pounds only to return to his old habits and gain twenty pounds.
