Thoughts on DOGE?

[RIP represalia]

There is always costs hidden to idiots at Doge. Like they canceled a long term study on health issues related to women and dementia. This study just recently realized that a certain type of treatment was actually unhealthy for most women, and canceled that treatment for all but a small subset of women. That canceling of treatment saved something ridiculous like $120B. If it had not been studied, it would have left an unhealthy treatment for women instated at $120B cost to medicare.

That study doesn’t help a single person.

Seriously msnbc is blurring out the images of violent criminal illegal immigrants with final orders of removal (deportation) because they think Trump admin could be lying about their crimes! They can’t embarrass if they’re falsely accused these violent criminals! THEY COULD NEVER HATE A FOREIGN ADVERSARY THAT WANTS TO KILL THEM ALL MORE THAN THEY HATE US FOR OUR CHRISTIAN CORE VALUES!

We are living in a bad mean girls movie & the girls act pristinely innocent but they’re the dirtiest nastiest lying fuccn hoes ever nobody wants to even be near them they need to be expelled!

And ya yall are hoes that’s why you all don’t have 1 single strong male leader & why you have some stupid ****ing post about $120b to study dementia do you ****ING HEAR YOURSELF $120B I KNOW YOU ARE A BROKE FUCC AND DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH ****ING MONEY THAT IS BC IF YOU DID YOU WOUD NEVER SAY SUCH STUPIS SHIT

 

[Gmoney4WW]

I guess I wasn't clear in the way I stated the issues they were studying these TWO separate studies that were funded by one source. It was two studies of women's issues and dementia among men and women. The cost of the two studies was way less than $1B. The study determined that a treatment being prescribed to women who had cancer, I believe of the uterus was unhealthy for them. So the treatment was no longer supported as a medical treatment. The fact that this treatment was no longer prescribed to women with uterine cancer saved medicare $120b. You apparently can't even read properly. Your Christian core values have nothing to do with the hatred which you are spewing.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

That study doesn’t help a single person.

Seriously msnbc is blurring out the images of violent criminal illegal immigrants with final orders of removal (deportation) because they think Trump admin could be lying about their crimes! They can’t embarrass if they’re falsely accused these violent criminals! THEY COULD NEVER HATE A FOREIGN ADVERSARY THAT WANTS TO KILL THEM ALL MORE THAN THEY HATE US FOR OUR CHRISTIAN CORE VALUES!

We are living in a bad mean girls movie & the girls act pristinely innocent but they’re the dirtiest nastiest lying fuccn hoes ever nobody wants to even be near them they need to be expelled!

And ya yall are hoes that’s why you all don’t have 1 single strong male leader & why you have some stupid ****ing post about $120b to study dementia do you ****ING HEAR YOURSELF $120B I KNOW YOU ARE A BROKE FUCC AND DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH ****ING MONEY THAT IS BC IF YOU DID YOU WOUD NEVER SAY SUCH STUPIS SHIT

@Chris Harmon please perma ban this guy. He is like this every post.

 

[watu05]

Musk gets White House fanfare for his total bust. DOGE went from removing $2T of waste,fraud and abuse, to $1T to $160B, most of which came from cancelling policies Trump disagreed with, not fraud, waste or abuse. Even his claims were repeatedly caught out as overstated and the costs of his moves (early retirements, costs to subcontract to replace work done in house) were not used to offset the 'savings' he claimed. Anyone can hack away at programs and call it savings; and that's just what happened.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

Musk gets White House fanfare for his total bust. DOGE went from removing $2T of waste,fraud and abuse, to $1T to $160B, most of which came from cancelling policies Trump disagreed with, not fraud, waste or abuse. Even his claims were repeatedly caught out as overstated and the costs of his moves (early retirements, costs to subcontract to replace work done in house) were not used to offset the 'savings' he claimed. Anyone can hack away at programs and call it savings; and that's just what happened.

And at least 30% of what got cut did serious damage to us technologically, medically, and in services that were important.

 

[URedskin54]

Musk gets White House fanfare for his total bust. DOGE went from removing $2T of waste,fraud and abuse, to $1T to $160B, most of which came from cancelling policies Trump disagreed with, not fraud, waste or abuse. Even his claims were repeatedly caught out as overstated and the costs of his moves (early retirements, costs to subcontract to replace work done in house) were not used to offset the 'savings' he claimed. Anyone can hack away at programs and call it savings; and that's just what happened.

Under glorious Chinese communism there is no fraud, waste, or abuse

 

[lawpoke87]

Someone better figure out a way to cut spending. The numbers are apparent to anyone with a basic understanding of mathematics. You don’t have to cut $2T. You do have to stop or significantly reduce the growth in spending we’ve seen over the past 15-20 years. Nothing will happen until we can’t pay for social services due to debt service costs. At that time we will either print money leading to hyperinflation or see widespread suffering among the most venerable.

Anyone have any ideas on how we can stop the growth in spending I’m all ears. And yes. I do realize the revenue side is also half of the equation. I also realize it would be impossible to raise taxes enough to cover this level of spending and maintain a stable economy.

 

[TU 1978]

Someone better figure out a way to increase revenues. The numbers are apparent to anyone with a basic understanding of mathematics. Letting the tax cuts expire and increasing taxes for the oligarch billionaires will be a start.

FIFY

 

[lawpoke87]

FIFY

A small fraction of what is needed. Do the math.

 

[astonmartin708]

A small fraction of what is needed. Do the math.

All for reducing spending until it's (partially) your spending that's increasing the debt.


The best way to decrease the growth rate of the debt (aside from increasing revenues) is to get the interest rates down.... meaning low unemployment and low inflation. Trump's tariffs are threatening the opposite. (Even if they're just threats). Also less military spending on things like Golden Domes, F35's, etc... Also fixing the healthcare industry which continues to cost us a boatload of money. Also stopping wasting money criminalizing peaceful immigrants. Instead of kicking them out.... figure out how to tax them more completely.

One other way is to make the VA more cost efficient and have less members. We spend $100 Billion on that program alone. If we quit fighting so many conflicts, having so many troop buildups, and getting so many of them injured, we would have less expenditure there (long term). We are seeing many of the Vietnam era traunch of troops going into a geriatric period where they need more care so that's probably not helping things.

Fundamentally, the best way to lower expenditures is to lower the % of GDP the US puts towards healthcare which is the 3rd worst in the world, and has terrible quality for the service that we're getting. We spend a ton, and get nothing in return and it's one of the government's biggest expenses that is a dependent variable if you don't want to touch retirements or defense.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

The VA is penny's on the dollar. At best, you might cut 40B dollars if you are lucky. More realistic is 20-30B. Pennies.

 

[aTUfan]

All for reducing spending until it's (partially) your spending that's increasing the debt.


The best way to decrease the growth rate of the debt (aside from increasing revenues) is to get the interest rates down.... meaning low unemployment and low inflation. Trump's tariffs are threatening the opposite. (Even if they're just threats). Also less military spending on things like Golden Domes, F35's, etc... Also fixing the healthcare industry which continues to cost us a boatload of money. Also stopping wasting money criminalizing peaceful immigrants. Instead of kicking them out.... figure out how to tax them more completely.

One other way is to make the VA more cost efficient and have less members. We spend $100 Billion on that program alone. If we quit fighting so many conflicts, having so many troop buildups, and getting so many of them injured, we would have less expenditure there (long term). We are seeing many of the Vietnam era traunch of troops going into a geriatric period where they need more care so that's probably not helping things.

Fundamentally, the best way to lower expenditures is to lower the % of GDP the US puts towards healthcare which is the 3rd worst in the world, and has terrible quality for the service that we're getting. We spend a ton, and get nothing in return and it's one of the government's biggest expenses that is a dependent variable if you don't want to touch retirements or defense.

still too many dependant on the Gov

 

[watu05]

Someone better figure out a way to cut spending. The numbers are apparent to anyone with a basic understanding of mathematics. You don’t have to cut $2T. You do have to stop or significantly reduce the growth in spending we’ve seen over the past 15-20 years. Nothing will happen until we can’t pay for social services due to debt service costs. At that time we will either print money leading to hyperinflation or see widespread suffering among the most venerable.

Anyone have any ideas on how we can stop the growth in spending I’m all ears. And yes. I do realize the revenue side is also half of the equation. I also realize it would be impossible to raise taxes enough to cover this level of spending and maintain a stable economy.

And of course forget the revenue side. We won't get there if the sole approach is to cut expenses and not increase revenues. You need both. The unfortunate element is there is no plan. Zero. No one in this administration has a clue. Ray Dalio of the huge hedge fund Bridgewater has offered a plan that with contributions from both sides. Fat chance it will get traction or that the billionaires will give up their $4T tax cuts.

 

[lawpoke87]

And of course forget the revenue side. We won't get there if the sole approach is to cut expenses and not increase revenues. You need both. The unfortunate element is there is no plan. Zero. No one in this administration has a clue. Ray Dalio of the huge hedge fund Bridgewater has offered a plan that with contributions from both sides. Fat chance it will get traction or that the billionaires will give up their counted tax cuts.

The problem is we can’t tax enough and maintain GDP growth to sustain this level of spending. I’ve said countless times on this board that taxes need to be increased. Spending also needs to be curtailed. To correct you….neither party has a viable plan. Both the revenue and spending sides must be addressed.

 

[HuffyCane]

The problem is we can’t tax enough and maintain GDP growth to sustain this level of spending. I’ve said countless times on this board that taxes need to be increased. Spending also needs to be curtailed. To correct you….neither party has a viable plan. Both the revenue and spending sides must be addressed.

This is correct. We budget for 19 and spend 27. And do it knowingly. We have regardless of party and have done so for decades. No third party or coalition government would be able to achieve the same result.

It says a lot that private business totally disregards the experience of public service managers unless they need to blow up something or they need to learn more about the logistics of physically printing and mailing out checks. Both of which the U.S. Government absolutely does better than any other entity in history.

 

[watu05]

Remember the Laffer Curve and the endlessly repeated arguments that tax cuts would spur growth that would pay for the cuts? Never happened. Delusional tax cut claims have put us in this fix years, and yes it is spending. Tax cuts are simply life style spending when used to redistribute wealth as the Bush and Trump tax cuts have done. Yet Trump and MAGA are still running on those claims. Meanwhile Trump's cuts are gutting US medical and scientific research assets which were our chief, if not main, competitive advantage.

Trump
Tuesday, March 4, 2025 to Congress
"In the near future, I want to do what has not been done in 24 years: balance the federal budget. We are going to balance it."

 

[Gmoney4WW]

It says a lot that private business totally disregards the experience of public service managers unless they need to blow up something or they need to learn more about the logistics of physically printing and mailing out checks. Both of which the U.S. Government absolutely does better than any other entity in history.

Is that why Vegas keeps in regular contact with the govt.?

 

[Gmoney4WW]

Meanwhile Trump's cuts are gutting US medical and scientific research assets which were our chief, if not main, competitive advantage.

 

[lawpoke87]

There is zero incentive not to spend money under our current budget, appropriations and spending model. In fact, there is an incentive to increase budgets and spending whether needed or not. Out system is setup to spend and our leaders have zero restraint or consideration of our pending fiscal crisis because their power is derived from giving tax cuts and people free stuff. Not to mention getting rich during and after holding office from said spending.

You guys are upset about cuts to research and the like. Some of that concern is valid. Just wait for the forced cuts when debt service hits a level where we can’t pay for social services.

Sure would be nice to hear equal outrage or even the mention of some of the spending from USAID while running $2T a year deficits. Not sure anyone has even mentioned it

 

[watu05]

DOGE was just more Trump reality show style theater for the MAGA audience. Musk with a buzz saw, 20+ year old computer geeks, etc. all made for great theater. Assessing the aftermath and the costs or the deaths is lost on his supporters, and what's the entertainment value of a downer anyway?

There is zero incentive not to spend money under our current budget, appropriations and spending model. In fact, there is an incentive to increase budgets and spending whether needed or not. Out system is setup to spend and our leaders have zero restraint or consideration of our pending fiscal crisis because their power is derived from giving tax cuts and people free stuff. Not to mention getting rich during and after holding office from said spending.

You guys are upset about cuts to research and the like. Some of that concern is valid. Just wait for the forced cuts when debt service hits a level where we can’t pay for social services.

Sure would be nice to hear equal outrage or even the mention of some of the spending from USAID while running $2T a year deficits. Not sure anyone has even mentioned it

If you want to do a serious spending cut that doesn't minimum harm, follow the 80/20 rule and look at the 20% of the items that control 80% of the costs. Trump went after areas that added up to less than 4% of the discretionary budget (USAID is about 2%) because they fit his and the MAGA anti-foreign bias. Hundreds of thousands will die as a result, but, hey, we're talking about budgets here. Military spending is one of the main components of the key 20%, but it was increased not cut. Talk about an area with waste, inefficiencies, and fraud. Musk ignored the list of Medicare abuse items that the internal Medicare inspectors had already assembled. No theater there. IOW DOGE was not a serious effort; it was a scripted play for the public, just like a 'key' to the Whitehouse.

 

[lawpoke87]

DOGE was just more Trump reality show style theater for the MAGA audience. Musk with a buzz saw, 20+ year old computer geeks, etc. all made for great theater. Assessing the aftermath and the costs or the deaths is lost on his supporters, and what's the entertainment value of a downer anyway?

If you want to do a serious spending cut that doesn't minimum harm, follow the 80/20 rule and look at the 20% of the items that control 80% of the costs. Trump went after areas that added up to less than 4% of the discretionary budget (USAID is about 2%) because they fit his and the MAGA anti-foreign bias. Hundreds of thousands will die as a result, but, hey, we're talking about budgets here. Military spending is one of the main components of the key 20%, but it was increased not cut. Talk about an area with waste, inefficiencies, and fraud. Musk ignored the list of Medicare abuse items that the internal Medicare inspectors had already assembled. No theater there. IOW DOGE was not a serious effort; it was a scripted play for the public, just like a 'key' to the Whitehouse.

I’ll play. The largest areas of spending are:

Social Security 22%
Interest 14% and growing
Medicare, Medicaid and other health programs 27%
Welfare 11%
VA 5%

That is almost 80% of the budget. What areas are you suggesting we make significant cuts? Omit fraud and abuse since we have no idea what that amounts to. I’m speaking to actual cuts.

As far as USAID, it’s laughable you can’t even acknowledge some of the ridiculous programs which were being funded. All while running a $2T deficit. The head of a private company with those type of expenditures while running a huge losses on the P&L would be fired at a minimum and jailed at a maximum. The fact your partisanship prevents you from even acknowledging the waste here is laughable. Especially from someone who has consistently called out deficit spending when one and only one party controlled the WH. Surely you see the hypocrisy here…right ?

 

[aTUfan]

the best Social Program is a good Job!

 

[watu05]

I’ll play. The largest areas of spending are:

Social Security 22%
Interest 14% and growing
Medicare, Medicaid and other health programs 27%
Welfare 11%
VA 5%

That is almost 80% of the budget. What areas are you suggesting we make significant cuts? Omit fraud and abuse since we have no idea what that amounts to. I’m speaking to actual cuts.

As far as USAID, it’s laughable you can’t even acknowledge some of the ridiculous programs which were being funded. All while running a $2T deficit. The head of a private company with those type of expenditures while running a huge losses on the P&L would be fired at a minimum and jailed at a maximum. The fact your partisanship prevents you from even acknowledging the waste here is laughable. Especially from someone who has consistently called out deficit spending when one and only one party controlled the WH. Surely you see the hypocrisy here…right ?

It's a joke that you want to talk about USAID's 2% as if it would move the needle and not kill programs that are life and death to hundreds of thousands, but hey we're talking about budgets here. Assuming that USAID has zero value so it should be completely destroyed makes life easy, but it's also mindless. If there are programs that are wasteful, cut them but that is not what happened.

And the DOD is not a large area of spending? i've worked with companies that served the DOD market and that system is as far from a normal market place as communism. Lots of waste, fraud and abuse, but also lots of political connections.

As for Social Security and Medicare, as I've posted here before, they need to be addressed The Medicare Advantage Plans cost $80B a year more than standard Medicare, look at the areas of Medicare fraud that internal auditors have identified and go after them immediately, and lift the caps on Social Security contributions. Musk found very little if any Social Security fraud despite the hyped up claims.

As for interest, stop spending dough on tax breaks, playing with tariffs and undermining trust in the US$. Show the world that we are trusted serious borrowers or it will only continue to get worse. The idea that we can bully the rest of the world into ignoring tax cuts and kowtowing to the US$ is not going to work.

 

[URedskin54]

Remember the Laffer Curve and the endlessly repeated arguments that tax cuts would spur growth that would pay for the cuts? Never happened. Delusional tax cut claims have put us in this fix years, and yes it is spending. Tax cuts are simply life style spending when used to redistribute wealth as the Bush and Trump tax cuts have done. Yet Trump and MAGA are still running on those claims. Meanwhile Trump's cuts are gutting US medical and scientific research assets which were our chief, if not main, competitive advantage.

Trump
Tuesday, March 4, 2025 to Congress
"In the near future, I want to do what has not been done in 24 years: balance the federal budget. We are going to balance it."

Laffer curve is irrelevant here. There is a known historical % of GDP range of revenue that can be achieved regardless of tax levels. It is not possible to tax your way to enough revenue to cover what we spend. Not close.

 

[HuffyCane]

Laffer curve is irrelevant here. There is a known historical % of GDP range of revenue that can be achieved regardless of tax levels. It is not possible to tax your way to enough revenue to cover what we spend. Not close.

This is correct. Historically 19% of GDP roughly is the limit you’ll get from taxation before there are diminishing returns on higher tax rates.

And we are legislatively or contractually obligated to spend 26%.

No member of the executive, not matter how many billions he makes innovating businesses, can reduce that amount unilaterally. Certainly not in four months. Though he did a really good job of examining and in some cases attacking the superstructure of government and how the system is staged so a certain amount of political graft has to flow out of programs that appear noble on its face. Like the current talking point that we have to release billions of dollars to business entities controlled by ex Biden officials or 1 million kids will die. Musk succeeded in getting Congress and the media to talk about that actually for once in about the last thirty years. Hopefully that will lead to some substantive reform but I doubt it. In any event even that won’t close the gap.

I’m waiting for folks to say the quiet part out loud - we have to keep borrowing until our entitlement obligations naturally lessen once the Boomers begin to die off. That demographics will solve the program. Then we can look at controlling costs for the next birth bubble.

If you were born before 1965, you are probably fine. If you were born between 1965 and 1985 then get ready for an entitlement cut and or keep working until you physically can no longer report to some kind of work.

Otherwise we have start talking about defaulting on debt but calling it something else to get re-elected.

 

[watu05]

The same point can be made about cutting our way out of a deficit, especially when Republicans are calling for trillions in tax cuts at the same time.

If we were we would let theTrump tax cuts expire, address Medicare excess, especially Advantage plans and the known list of already IDed fraud, and modify Social Security. And not by not taxing it. Add in a hard review of DOD spending, including the hundreds of millions it with take to modify Trumps 747 bribe for use as Air Force 1.

I am sure there are other worthy targets, but if these aren’t on the list, it’s not a credible effort.

 

[URedskin54]

The same point can be made about cutting our way out of a deficit, especially when Republicans are calling for trillions in tax cuts at the same time.

If we were we would let theTrump tax cuts expire, address Medicare excess, especially Advantage plans and the known list of already IDed fraud, and modify Social Security. And not by not taxing it. Add in a hard review of DOD spending, including the hundreds of millions it with take to modify Trumps 747 bribe for use as Air Force 1.

I am sure there are other worthy targets, but if these aren’t on the list, it’s not a credible effort.

No you actually mostly have to cut your way out of a deficit. Receipts don’t change that much and are more impacted by economic growth or contraction than tax rates at any given time.

 

[lawpoke87]

Love the talk about fraud and waste. Until I’m shown otherwise those savings will continue to be peanuts. You’re going to have to get control of rising spending. I mentioned USAID as some of those expenditures are a microcosm of the deeply embedded problem we face in trying to curtail expenditures.

54 and Huffy are correct. You can only raise so much revenue from taxes until it starts to have an adverse effect on the economy and in turn tax receipts. The reason why should be obvious

 

[Gmoney4WW]

I agree with what URedskin & Huffycane are saying about tsxes only bringing in so much revenue until they have diminishing returns. If you look at it rationally and mathematically you can't believe any other viewpoint. It is not an opinion, but a legitimate fact. But talking about things like USAid being an example is just not true.

The only way it could possibly be true would be if you are talking strictly about the rationale being used and it's similarity to that being used in other facets of our spending. Except that correlation doesn't really fit in my mind. What it gains for what it costs, no matter the reasoning, is of great value. Maybe a few programs could be cut based on what they do or don't accomplish, and it wouldn't affect our image to do so. But to cut it out almost completely is ridiculous. We gain from USAid and other forms of foreign aid in ways that should not be discounted.

US aid in all fashions, not just 'USAid' has given us a great image and reputation in the world without affecting our budget in any meaningful way. Cutting those things before you cut anything else only affects our reputation, it does zero for our budget. It should have been last on the agenda, not first. It is only being attacked first for the impression it has with the MAGA contingent. They see billions in how it would affect them, not the US economy. The world's impression of us has changed drastically for the worse since 2016. Our budget is only closer to the black in the most minuscule way.

 

[watu05]

An examination of DOGE claims and reality of USAID

https://fb.watch/z-mTNQuV_U/?mibextid=wwXIfr&fs=e

 

[lawpoke87]

An examination of DOGE claims and reality of USAID

https://fb.watch/z-mTNQuV_U/?mibextid=wwXIfr&fs=e

Appreciate the completely unbiased analysis from Fareed

 

[lawpoke87]

I agree with what URedskin & Huffycane are saying about tsxes only bringing in so much revenue until they have diminishing returns. If you look at it rationally and mathematically you can't believe any other viewpoint. It is not an opinion, but a legitimate fact. But talking about things like USAid being an example is just not true.

The only way it could possibly be true would be if you are talking strictly about the rationale being used and it's similarity to that being used in other facets of our spending. Except that correlation doesn't really fit in my mind. What it gains for what it costs, no matter the reasoning, is of great value. Maybe a few programs could be cut based on what they do or don't accomplish, and it wouldn't affect our image to do so. But to cut it out almost completely is ridiculous. We gain from USAid and other forms of foreign aid in ways that should not be discounted.

US aid in all fashions, not just 'USAid' has given us a great image and reputation in the world without affecting our budget in any meaningful way. Cutting those things before you cut anything else only affects our reputation, it does zero for our budget. It should have been last on the agenda, not first. It is only being attacked first for the impression it has with the MAGA contingent. They see billions in how it would affect them, not the US economy. The world's impression of us has changed drastically for the worse since 2016. Our budget is only closer to the black in the most minuscule way.

I used USAID as an example because it’s discretionary and has been in the news of late. In truth it could be any discretionary expenditures. We’re borrowing the money to pay for every dime of discretionary spending at this point due to our $2T yearly deficits. Should we be borrowing and then spending $2M on gender affirming care in Guatemala or $1.5M on LBTQ integration in Serbia ? There are many other examples. Are these small amounts…yes. Do they represent a widespread disregard for fiscal responsibility…also yes.

Sadly, when you’re headed toward a fiscal cliff you have make sacrifices. There will be some worthy programs which are or should cut. Today those cuts are our choice. Without fiscal changes those cuts will be mandatory and drastic. Remember…we are paying 5% (more or less) interest in perpetuity on every cent we spend on discretionary spending.

Until I see actually significant numbers regarding fraud and waste I will keep ignoring those who claim we can dig ourselves out of this hole by solely cleaning up certain programs. I simply don’t believe there’s $500B in savings there.

 

[astonmartin708]

I’ll play. The largest areas of spending are:

Social Security 22%
Interest 14% and growing
Medicare, Medicaid and other health programs 27%
Welfare 11%
VA 5%

That is almost 80% of the budget. What areas are you suggesting we make significant cuts? Omit fraud and abuse since we have no idea what that amounts to. I’m speaking to actual cuts.

As far as USAID, it’s laughable you can’t even acknowledge some of the ridiculous programs which were being funded. All while running a $2T deficit. The head of a private company with those type of expenditures while running a huge losses on the P&L would be fired at a minimum and jailed at a maximum. The fact your partisanship prevents you from even acknowledging the waste here is laughable. Especially from someone who has consistently called out deficit spending when one and only one party controlled the WH. Surely you see the hypocrisy here…right ?

Your gripes about USAID are the equivalent of complaint about someone who is in bankruptcy proceeding due to a failed business buying their kid a candy bar every 3 months.

Is it a wast of money? Technically yes. Does it materially have anything to do with their financial straights? Probably not. Is it going to be better for them in the long run to have the good will of their children? Yes.

Are we going to lambast Trump’s waste of almost a billion dollars in parade costs?

How about his spending on golf trips and not operating the government out of the several mansions we already pay for (White House, camp david, etc…) We borrow for stuff that too…. As well as for his extra protection at Mara Lago.

 

[Gmoney4WW]

Appreciate the completely unbiased analysis from Fareed

Are you being sarcastic or serious? Asking because I can't tell, not for any other motive. Can't remember if you've ever said anything about Fareed.

 

[lawpoke87]

Your gripes about USAID are the equivalent of complaint about someone who is in bankruptcy proceeding due to a failed business buying their kid a candy bar every 3 months.

Is it a wast of money? Technically yes. Does it materially have anything to do with their financial straights? Probably not. Is it going to be better for them in the long run to have the good will of their children? Yes.

Are we going to lambast Trump’s waste of almost a billion dollars in parade costs?

How about his spending on golf trips and not operating the government out of the several mansions we already pay for (White House, camp david, etc…? We borrow for stuff that too…. As well as for his extra protection at Mara Lago.

I think Trump’s expenses are fair game to criticize in light of our current fiscal condition. Borrowing money for a parade is just another example of the climate of fiscal irresponsibility pervasive in Washington. It’s the equivalent of a president of a corporation on the verge of bankruptcy throwing a lavish party. Let’s take another draw on our credit line so me and my buddies can party it up in Cabo. Sadly the shareholders (American public) seem to be perfectly fine with both parties foolish spending habits

 

[watu05]

Appreciate the completely unbiased analysis from

Nice ad hominem snark. But if that is best you have….

 

[lawpoke87]

Nice ad hominem snark. But if that is best you have….

When Fareed questioned why DOGE didn’t first go after social security but failed to mention that an Obama appointed district court judge and Circuit Court had blocked their access to the same I turned off the video. Seemed pointless to go further.

 

[watu05]

I have a conservative friend who despairs that Americans are so polarized that we can’t talk to each other. Ruining the country. But if he runs across something he disagrees with, he damns it and refuses to discuss it. He is a good guy.

 

[RIP represalia]

I have a conservative friend who despairs that Americans are so polarized that we can’t talk to each other. Ruining the country. But if he runs across something he disagrees with, he damns it and refuses to discuss it. He is a good guy.

If what’s in the bill can impact the deficit, then it can be addressed after the bill is signed into law just the same. We have $150T in federal trust fund (essentially) — a fraction of which would put us at surplus by Tuesday.

We all know Elon is under attack. From the start, it was apparent it affected him far more than it ever has Trump. I’m not going to say anything bad about Elon nor lament that he’s gone. I never trusted him, I’ve always associated him with the Anti-Christ (not that he is but it’s been proclaimed he will reveal the anti-Christ to the world.)

The fact is taking a few classes & doing some workouts in Muay Thai, Kung fu or martial arts x whatever tf, it doesn’t prepare one for the heat of a real fight. That is found by the fighter only in the very first or among their principal fights ie IN THE BEGINNING.

The battlefield of public attack, for Elon, is best situated neighborhood adjacent, county oposite from his own residence. For Trump, it starts in his bedroom & extends infinitely thus as inescapable as it may seem to some, it is where Trump performs at his best. Elon never handled the hate well.

It’s sad & I do pray Elon finds peace but so long as he can’t stand any single of the plural mothers to his children enough to marry her & be in the household help raise the child, he’s on the outside of the cause for which we fight.

 

[RIP represalia]

I have a conservative friend who despairs that Americans are so polarized that we can’t talk to each other. Ruining the country. But if he runs across something he disagrees with, he damns it and refuses to discuss it. He is a good guy.

Yeah that’s a problem with the left. Tell your friend that.

I don’t hate the people on the left I don’t think they’re awful people (many are definitely not all.) I, like many conservatives, believe they’re misguided.

The liberals, in contrast, despise us conservatives far more than they could ever detest a foreign adversary invading our shores intent on killing us. Indeed, they’d try to convince the foreign adversary to let them help itself kill the remainder of us. (Of course this wouldn’t end well for them but for so many that’s why they’re misled — just not that smart or no spine / insecurities).

Which actually brings me to this: I have to ask, watu, your friend the conservative, was he disagreeing with you on a matter of opinion or was he not disagreeing, rather; disputing a claim you represented as fact? It’s important to distinguish between the two: