World, Writing, Wealth discussion

President-elect Donald Trump has announced that Texas billionaire Elon Musk and former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, a close ally of Trump, will head a newly established "Department of Government Efficiency."

Trump stated that the Department of Government Efficiency will not function as a federal agency within the U.S. government. Instead, it will offer advice and guidance "outside of government" while collaborating with the White House and the Office of Management and Budget to "drive structural government reform."

Elon said on X that the department would provide “maximum transparency” and that all of DOGE’s actions will be posted online.

“Anytime the public thinks we are cutting something important or not cutting something wasteful, just let us know!” Musk posted.

Musk also said that DOGE would create a “leaderboard for most insanely dumb spending” of tax dollars, which he said would be “extremely tragic and extremely entertaining.”

While Trump has given DOGE less than 18 months to complete its work, Musk said Wednesday that it “will be done much faster.”

It will be done fast, and must be done fast.

Or else, the beast will fight.

Fast leads to unintended consequences

What is the beast, Graeme?

Ian, big brains can handle fast. They're not like the rest of us.

Calling a commission to cut waste a, "Department", is a bit concerning. I'm concerned that this commission will become another large and expensive department. The swamp creatures will dub it a new Inquisition.

Scout, there is a well-known engineering saying:

You can have fast, cheap, or make a good job. Choose two.

The idea is not bad, however hearing about some of the prospective appointments it looks like Trump is going to thrash the entire establishment. I'm more for evolution over revolution, but we shall judge the results ...

Scout wrote: "President-elect Donald Trump has announced that Texas billionaire Elon Musk and former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, a close ally of Trump, will head a newly established "Depar..."




I believe you mean South African billionaire Elon Musk.

Scout wrote: "What is the beast, Graeme?

Ian, big brains can handle fast. They're not like the rest of us."

The Beast is the Establishment/Administrative State and its Ogliarchic sponsors/beneficiaries.

Got it. There will be massive resistance from rich corporations and their political cronys to cutting government spending. Those who oppose it have a lot to lose, but taxpayers have much to gain.

And, J., it will only operate for 18 months and will offer advice and guidance "outside of government." That's what I like about it: it's not empowered to become a permanent government fixture. It has a finite end date.

Scout wrote: "And, J., it will only operate for 18 months and will offer advice and guidance "outside of government." That's what I like about it: it's not empowered to become a permanent government fixture. It has a finite end date."

So did income tax.

Didn't know that. So you think this is a lie? An attempt to sneak in a permanent Department of Control?

I think what J might be suggesting is that once you get something like this started, it takes on a life of its own

Rand Paul for some time has been releasing his account of government wastefulness around the end of the year. It was called his "Festivus" list as a nod to the Seinfeld episode where a holiday alternative to Christmas was invented, featuring as it's highlight "the airing of grievances." I'm sure you can find it online.

Rand's DOGE can contribute to Donald's

Ian wrote: "I think what J might be suggesting is that once you get something like this started, it takes on a life of its own"

Yes, and there will always be those who seize any opportunity to build a power base.

The appointment that's interesting me is Matt Gaetz as AG. I don't think he's the best qualified person. But it seems to me that the reaction is way out of proportion to his inadequacies. It must be about something being prosecuted.

Most of the cases against Trump are state level. The only federal prosecutor has already exceeded his tenure as a special prosecutor. It doesn't matter who gets installed as AG, that'll get dropped.

The conspiratorial part of me is wondering about some federal prosecutions in NYC, Epstein and Diddy. We know that Epstein's list was never fully released. What are the odds the same will be true of Diddy's parties? Is Gaetz the kind of guy who hates Hollywood enough to throw them to the wolves? How many of them are big rollers on the DNC's donor list?

DOGE doesn't have anything to do with prosecutions. Its purpose is to advise how to cut government spending. It is outside of the government looking in. It has no enforcement capacity and will be disbanded after 18 months. The public will have input. Its only purpose is to find wasteful government spending and point it out. It will be left up to those in government to use its findings or not. I'd say that there's lots of wasteful spending in government that the taxpayers should be aware of and should not be paying for.

Finding government financial incompetence isn't a tough job.

Pentagon Fails 7th Audit in a Row but Hopes To Pass by 2028
https://reason.com/2024/11/18/pentago...

So why do they need all that?

It is a great idea that will ultimately fail. Congress ocntrols the purse strings and no one is going to prevent them from spending.

The moment US government bonds stop being bought...

So it's destined to fail? We're just stuck with government waste paid for with our tax dollars?

Something else to cut:

Soda manufacturers push to keep sugary drinks on SNAP list
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare...

SNAP is the US nutritional support program. It was intended to ensure that children in poor families would get good hot meals daily. Of course, Coke, Pepsi, and the rest gave money to politicians to make sure their tooth rotting diabetes in bottles was on the list.

Is the whole J.D. Vance and Mountain Dew thing starting to make sense?

That’s not the kind of nutritional support you’d want undernourished kids to have

Last year I was in line behind a couple with a cart loaded with candy, soda, and junk food and they paid for it with a SNAP card. I thought at the time that those items shouldn't be paid for with tax money. Maybe Kennedy and DOGE will put a stop to that.

when DOGE goes after Republican holy relics, then we will see what serious this concept turns out in reality.

As for Kennedy, I hope he can make positive changes. It would be best for all of us.

As for SNAP, I agree there is lots of stupidity allowed that should not be able to purchase. Except I have yet to see Hell freeze over, too much money to lose out on.

We'll see. DOGE has no enforcement authority. But I'd sure like to see some accountability when it comes to government handouts and SS disability. I've watched people use a SNAP card at the grocery store and buy things I can't afford and then get into a new vehicle. Something's wrong there. And I know of people who are working full time jobs and getting disability. That extra income on the taxpayer's dime must be nice. I don't know how much DOGE can cut this kind of fraud, but I can hope something will be done. Just asking for social programs to be monitored and tax payers not to support people who don't need it.

As ending corporate welfare and tax holidays will hardly be on the cards, maybe they’ll deal with social security

Who do you think had lobbied the composition of a SNAP list?

I don't understand your last two comments. Can you explain?

With pleasure.
1. Since the new administration will be run by a bill, sponsored by a superbill, who just moved into the president's manor, I doubt they would deal with corporate welfare, which may be the biggest government's spending, much bigger than all others together, if to believe the mentioned study can be somewhat true: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corpora... , but they may well deal with social funds disbursement to eliminate embezzlement there.
2. I assume the composition of a SNAP list might've been lobbied to include different items by food and beverages manufacturers. That's just an assumption, I didn't look into it. They don't care who pays - a poor kid or the government, as long as their produce get sold. It could've been done under pseudo-scientific pretexts and researches gamed to assert that "a homeless kid would be happier drinking coke rather than water" and so on... Those who really benefit are corporations.

Thanks. I don't know much about how to curb corporate greed. The things I've seen them talking about have to do with government spending. I guess they could address it from the angle of curbing spending when govt buys from corporations? I don't know.