Those steering the ship have track records. I don't see anything prejudicial about evaluating the leadership of a government group w.r.t. their previous merits and shortcomings.
The people running it have track records we can assess, and have signaled their goals and in some cases stated them outright. This is simply judgement.
Elon's track record is to consistently succeed spectacularly with things that most people find laughably impossible to do. That's why I don't dismiss this project.
I missed there they stated outright that they're "only interested in enriching themselves and their cronies"?
When you name your enlightened government-saving organization after a memecoin you own a mountain of, only bootlickers are going to think you're in it for altruistic reasons.
This is similar to elon's tendency to dump boatloads of money in politics to beat the people he claims are cheating by... dumping boatloads of money in politics.
If he wants any of this to be taken seriously by anyone other than his horde of bootlickers he needs to make "earning people's trust" a priority, even when it's opposed to his own interest. Instead he acts as though he's entitled to the public's trust because (he's sure) he's such a good guy, and he's (he's sure) actually acting in their interest. Doesn't work that way. Trust is earned by listening to people and by taking seriously what you hear from them—not by egoistic paternalism.
Furthermore, these business people constantly talk in terms which reflect basically-wrong beliefs about how money works at a national level. A country is not a company. A dollar spent by a country can return to its coffers as taxes many times over, and this basic fact breaks any analogy between the two.
Because of the messaging, like cutting regulations, entire departments - things that have impact on the entire country and not just a company and its customer base.
I believe, there is certainly a lot of room for improvements in government functions. But I also believe, those improvements are hidden in details and require actual work, other than just slashing funds, regulations or entire departments. Things are how they are for reasons. And those reasons will probably withstand deeper scrutiny, but not populism and conflicts of interest.
The premise is correct, but the trust in the executors is misplaced. One made money via government so there is a certain conflict of interest, another one is an ordinary American businessman with a questionable track record on the edge of ethics. That's right off the bat, on the merits, not even going into the politics.
DOGE is not an official government department, it’s a presidential advisory committee. It’s not going to have taxpayer funding, oversight and no far-reaching powers over other official departments besides shit-stirring and distraction.
When the debt surety payments are higher than our national security budget i agree wholeheartedly. We are spending more than we are making and it's growing every year. We cannot continue like this or our surety payments will be higher than all distretionary spending by 2032.
I never understood the hate for Elon, vivek, trump. They aren't perfect people, but i'm really excited about the team he's been able to put together. Like who else has been able to hire every single person who ran against him? David sacs, elon, other extremely smart people....
Other people here seem to act like going to school and doing economics to be at Doge are just so incredibly niave... We need a huge diversity of people.
Despite all of trumps faults, he has built a powerhouse team that trancends party lines.
DOGE hasn't done anything yet, so this is purely expressing prejudice.
Those steering the ship have track records. I don't see anything prejudicial about evaluating the leadership of a government group w.r.t. their previous merits and shortcomings.
DOGE is nothing more than a glorified advisory role. They can talk whatever they want, they have no real power.
The people running it have track records we can assess, and have signaled their goals and in some cases stated them outright. This is simply judgement.
Elon's track record is to consistently succeed spectacularly with things that most people find laughably impossible to do. That's why I don't dismiss this project.
I missed there they stated outright that they're "only interested in enriching themselves and their cronies"?
6 replies →
Elon Musk has done plenty worth judging already. Am I supposed to give every single venture of his the benefit of the doubt?
How is DOGE a grift? We need to curb our government’s absolutely excessive waste.
When you name your enlightened government-saving organization after a memecoin you own a mountain of, only bootlickers are going to think you're in it for altruistic reasons.
This is similar to elon's tendency to dump boatloads of money in politics to beat the people he claims are cheating by... dumping boatloads of money in politics.
If he wants any of this to be taken seriously by anyone other than his horde of bootlickers he needs to make "earning people's trust" a priority, even when it's opposed to his own interest. Instead he acts as though he's entitled to the public's trust because (he's sure) he's such a good guy, and he's (he's sure) actually acting in their interest. Doesn't work that way. Trust is earned by listening to people and by taking seriously what you hear from them—not by egoistic paternalism.
Furthermore, these business people constantly talk in terms which reflect basically-wrong beliefs about how money works at a national level. A country is not a company. A dollar spent by a country can return to its coffers as taxes many times over, and this basic fact breaks any analogy between the two.
Because of the messaging, like cutting regulations, entire departments - things that have impact on the entire country and not just a company and its customer base.
I believe, there is certainly a lot of room for improvements in government functions. But I also believe, those improvements are hidden in details and require actual work, other than just slashing funds, regulations or entire departments. Things are how they are for reasons. And those reasons will probably withstand deeper scrutiny, but not populism and conflicts of interest.
The premise is correct, but the trust in the executors is misplaced. One made money via government so there is a certain conflict of interest, another one is an ordinary American businessman with a questionable track record on the edge of ethics. That's right off the bat, on the merits, not even going into the politics.
What they're going to end up cutting (and have) is children cancer research and infectious disease teams. Such "excessive waste!"
DOGE is not an official government department, it’s a presidential advisory committee. It’s not going to have taxpayer funding, oversight and no far-reaching powers over other official departments besides shit-stirring and distraction.
You think the people who "work" for/on DOGE will not be paid? Or you think that Musk is underwriting their paychecks?
1 reply →
When the debt surety payments are higher than our national security budget i agree wholeheartedly. We are spending more than we are making and it's growing every year. We cannot continue like this or our surety payments will be higher than all distretionary spending by 2032.
I never understood the hate for Elon, vivek, trump. They aren't perfect people, but i'm really excited about the team he's been able to put together. Like who else has been able to hire every single person who ran against him? David sacs, elon, other extremely smart people....
Other people here seem to act like going to school and doing economics to be at Doge are just so incredibly niave... We need a huge diversity of people.
Despite all of trumps faults, he has built a powerhouse team that trancends party lines.
We need to raise taxes, specifically on the people in charge of DOGE. You think that's what the plan's going to be?