Not sure I was posting on the crossfire board back then. I certainly don’t recall you bringing up legislating through EOs if I was. My position on the subject doesn’t change based on the party doing it. Bad precedent is bad precedent.
The first 100 days
- Thread starter watu05
- Start date
Neither of us were.. this is case of the royal we. My point is that you're not the only person who has pointed out the dangers of executive overreach and had it fall on deaf ears going back several administrations.
I think we can both agree the office of the President has become more powerful over the past 25 plus years. We can also probably agree this isn’t a good trend
Trump begins firings of FAA air traffic control staff just weeks after fatal DC plane crash
The Trump administration has begun firing several hundred Federal Aviation Administration employees, upending staff on a busy air travel weekend and just weeks after a fatal mid-air collision in Washington.
apnews.com
Please, please tell me why I should appreciate this?
The savings will be miniscule and the risk will be tremendous.
You mean guys that sit in chairs with their arms folded, twiddling their thumbs while the real ‘adults’ do the important business?
Guys that spend more time on the golf course than they in the office?
A new executive order: "Only the president or the attorney general can speak for the United States when stating an opinion as to what the Law is"....
....something....something....something....foreign AND DOMESTIC.....
Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:
www.whitehouse.gov
....something....something....something....foreign AND DOMESTIC.....
Last edited:
Because these traitors deserve to be on the same dais that saw Beatles and Led Zeppelin.
www.yahoo.com
J6 Prison Choir to Perform at Kennedy Center
Trump recently appointed himself as chairman of the performing arts center in Washington, DC. J6 Prison Choir to Perform at Kennedy Center Alex Young
Ridiculous savings claims continue.
Earlier this week, it was discovered that DOGE somehow added a couple of zeroes when claiming to have cut one ICE contract worth $8 billion. In actuality, the contract was worth only $8 million. Even as DOGE’s accounting discrepancies are uncovered, the total savings touted by DOGE on its website remains at $55 billion—and that number becomes more dubious with every passing day.
Earlier this week, it was discovered that DOGE somehow added a couple of zeroes when claiming to have cut one ICE contract worth $8 billion. In actuality, the contract was worth only $8 million. Even as DOGE’s accounting discrepancies are uncovered, the total savings touted by DOGE on its website remains at $55 billion—and that number becomes more dubious with every passing day.
Knowing your disdain for deficit spending, I assume you’re thrilled about every penny saved and thus not borrowed
Who the fk cares about 55 billion, and it probably being half fake. 55 billion is not pennies on the dollar, it ia .0275%. That is not even a third of a percent. They are going to have to show a whole lot more than that to amount to anything. In reality it is probably a lot closer to .015 than it is to .0275. And what damage have they done to achieve this monumental savings. You slough off the damage, but they saved a damned farthing for the trouble.
What's the cost benefit of the savings? If you cut 10 dollars, but that 10 dollars was going towards programs making you 100 dollars... then it was a bad idea unless you are going to redirect it to another project that can make you more than 100 dollars.
If you run a restaurant and you decide to cut the budget for the food you prepare to the point that no one eats at your restaurant anymore (because your food sucks) then you made the wrong decision. If you cut actual inefficiencies that's fine, but you have to make sure they don't do more to detriment your bottom line than what you saved.
Government spending typically has a poor ROI. One reason why we are $37T in debt. Far too early to answer your question. Everyone on this board would acknowledge our current rate of deficit spending is not sustainable. It’s funny…we’ve had years to address the issue. Now those who ignored the fiscal calamity ahead are complaining about how reductions in spending is being done. Hard for me to take those who refused to act seriously for criticizing spending reductions when they are finally implemented. Bottom line is without action on our deficits, we will soon reach a point where we won’t be able to fully fund line items such as our social safety nets and defense.
cut the congress budget; reduce staffers, let the congreman do his own research; term limits; no pension; same insurance as us; pay for his own dc office space and residence.
Last edited:
They haven't really made intimations of attacking the real stuff. They are just attacking around the margins, and destroying our government. I have no confidence that they will attack things other than that they want for philosophical reasons. immigration, foreign aid, DEI, etc don't make a difference. They just apply to their racist belief system not the budget. The times that they briefly look at the things that will make a difference, they show that they are running a clown show that has no comprehensions of what to do with things that matter to the budget. And the lies that come out of them are comical.(8m becomes 8b.)
Would you like to wager as to whether they will look at and cut the big budget items? I’m not saying any of us will agree with those spending cuts but they will be attempted. The larger programs will take longer as they are far more complex than giving millions to our buddy hotel owner in NYC to house illegals
We can revisit in 6-9 months. I will be shocked if they don’t try to reduce spending in SS, Medicare, Defense, etc
He convinced Trump to allow a few of his fellow white South African buddys to come to the US with carte balance as far as a path to citizensship. That was a nice little arrangement.
HAHAHAHAHAHA. You want congressman to become experts in literally every subject to the point they know enough to effectively weigh in on details of policy?
The congressman / senators that your party elects are broadly not intelligent enough to even approach that. You've got football coaches (mediocre ones) in office. You've got MTG and Lauren Boebert. I'm not sure they can actually read a research paper with any level of comprehension much less interpret its impact to other areas.
I don't particularly think the lower ranks of the Democrats are much better either.
I think in your head you imagine going back to the days of the continental congress. The only thing is... the world was much less complex then, and even so you still had only a few notable men who had a firm grasp on enough areas of policy to make intelligent decisions. If we had a modern congress filled with Ben Franklins and Thomas Jeffersons, we might be able to do what you're suggesting.... but that's wholly unrealistic. Even with them, the scale of our nation has increased exponentially in both managed population and area, but also complexity.
If you want to go back to Ultra Small government, then I suggest starting with the executive. We're going to get rid of the entire White House staff...
Assistants to the President, secretaries, etc... (Gone, or funded by the president)
Chief of Staff, all his deputies, and entire office .... gone (Washington didn't need them why does Trump?)
Maids, cooks, security guards, tour guides, handymen, plumbers, gift shop folks, switchboard workers gone.... (We don't run a charity... why does he need this? Give him a per diem if he's working overtime like the rest of us.)
Press Secretary and their entire office... gone (If he wants to communicate something, let him call all of the news agencies)
Digital Strategy office.... gone (No one needs this from the executive)
Air Force One Pilots, ground crew, and Air Force One itself.... gone (He can fly coach with all of us)
Secret Service.... gone (give him a gun and let him protect himself like Andrew Jackson did)
Chaplin and entire "faith office"... gone (never should have been created in the first place)
Office of the first lady... gone (never should have been created in the first place)
Counselors & Advisors outside of the first 4 (State, War, Attorney General, Treasury) ... all other departments and employees... gone
CIA, FBI, NSA, ICE, ATF, OMB... gone (Why would we ever need these?)
Intergovernmental / Legislative affairs offices .... gone (The president can correspond with congress on his own time)
Last edited:
Musk is trying to use his Twitter takeover tactic with the US government... the only problem is he tanked Twitter when he purged his staff, mostly because of his interpretation of what he felt was important to retain vs what was actually important for the customers.
If a business dies or loses 3/4ths of its value because the CEO sucks who cares? If the US government dies or loses 3/4ths of its value because the people put in charge suck that really matters. Very few businesses in our Capitalist society have lasted as long as our nation has... and it's because YOU DON'T RUN THE GOVERNMENT LIKE A BUSINESS. IT'S NOT A BUSINESS.
Musk didn’t acquire Twitter as a business. He acquired Twitter to combat what he saw was the violation of the first amendment rights of Americans by the federal government through our social media platforms.
If you care to examine the businesses he does care about valuations and P/L I would suggest Tesla and Starlink. How has the values of those done under his leadership ?
Arguing the richest man in the US and the man who grew Tesla and Starlink is a businessman is quite the assertion
Okay, assertion one is completely false. He acquired Twitter to have his own mouth piece where he could control conversations and direct them exactly where he wanted them to go. There is a MOUNTAIN of evidence of him personally using his platform to silence speech he disagrees with or to promote speech (including his own) even pushing it into people's faces when people try to avoid it.... and now, he works for / with the government in the most direct way anyone ever has... so I don't get where you would believe that he cares about the government's influence on speech. He does it every day.
Starlink and Tesla are currently having their valuations driven down by his antics. They could have been worth twice what they are if he had kept his mouth more or less shut and actually produced something of value without playing games with his products. Starlink's valuation is going to suffer as the rest of the world isn't going to trust it now that he's using it as leverage try and get Ukraine to surrender. Tesla lost pretty much its entire European market share more or less overnight and it betrayed its customer base in the US in favor of another customer base that prefers combustion engines and fossil fuels. His cybertrucks are being defaced all over the country (that is, when they're not crapping their pants mechanically)
He has made his place in society based off of the genius and talent of others very infrequently due to his own prowess.
Last edited:
He bought Twitter to expose the suppressing of our first amendment rights by the Biden Admin. Which is why his first act was to release correspondence between the Admin and Twitter.
Stop it as far as Tesla and Starlink. Both have exploded in value under his leadership. You look dumb arguing otherwise. Fortune certainly seems rather bullish on their future
Musk’s companies set to add $613 billion in value since election
Investors are eager to get close to Musk, President Trump's so-called “first buddy.”
