D.O.G.E (Department of Government Efficiency) II

[Huckleberry]

I agree that a common ground or balance between wasteful spending and services provided by our government can and should be found. With that being said, we have seen lip service for way too long by our leaders in this department. It is like the fat lady who says every morning to all her coworkers, "I really need to start a diet and start walking." Everyone agrees with her and everyone, including her, knows it is the right thing to do, but here we are...eating a donut in the break room talking about it again...

If DOGE was being run in a thoughtful, meticulous, and objective manner, then it would be possible to find that common ground. Unfortunately, because the people in charge want to eliminate everything that they don’t agree with rather than make the effort to actually find and deal with wasteful spending, we have the current situation. Trying to advocate for meaningful and legitimate cuts often brings out the “I don’t trust government at all” mantra from those who would like to see the government burn. It’s all or nothing for some folks. In their eyes, if you don’t support DOGE, then you must be someone who’s happy with the current situation.

And as long as the programs being haphazardly eliminated are also those that “conservative independents and libertarians” find distasteful, the unwavering support from them will continue, as will their hand-waving at “sometime in the future” defense spending cuts and their fun-size concern about extending tax breaks for the wealthy.

 

[crimsonaudio]

Dichotomous thinking tends to lead to this kind of accusation. Just because someone doesn't 100% agree with your stance doesn’t make them a selfish and careless spendthrift. There can be common ground found between reckless spending and unfeeling austerity.
And unless you’re also advocating cutting all spending, both domestic and foreign, until we have balanced our budget and paid down our debt, you too are wanting to write checks that you don’t have to pay. You’re just doing it for the programs you find necessary.

As I stated before, I'm 100% for cutting everything that doesn't directly help US citizens first and foremost. The function of government is for the people of the US, not the rest of the world. Helping people in other countries is admirable, but it's a luxury.

Beyond that, I absolutely am for across-the-board cuts at whatever percentage is needed in order to balance the budget.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

If DOGE was being run in a thoughtful, meticulous, and objective manner, then it would be possible to find that common ground. Unfortunately, because the people in charge want to eliminate everything that they don’t agree with rather than make the effort to actually find and deal with wasteful spending, we have the current situation. Trying to advocate for meaningful and legitimate cuts often brings out the “I don’t trust government at all” mantra from those who would like to see the government burn. It’s all or nothing for some folks. In their eyes, if you don’t support DOGE, then you must be someone who’s happy with the current situation.

And as long as the programs being haphazardly eliminated are also those that “conservative independents and libertarians” find distasteful, the unwavering support from them will continue, as will their hand-waving at “sometime in the future” defense spending cuts and their fun-size concern about extending tax breaks for the wealthy.

Wouldn't this be done by any party in charge? If the Democrats were doing this, they'd make cuts in the areas they thought needed and not make cuts in the areas they didn't think needed, and it would be different areas from what the Republicans thought should be cut. But I guarantee you they'd make the cuts regardless of whether the Republicans agreed with it or not. Let's not pretend one party is more willing to work with the other party than the other. When the Democrats have been in office they went forward with a lot of stuff the Republicans didn't agree with.

 

[cbi1972]

Wouldn't this be done by any party in charge? If the Democrats were doing this, they'd make cuts in the areas they thought needed and not make cuts in the areas they didn't think needed, and it would be different areas from what the Republicans thought should be cut. But I guarantee you they'd make the cuts regardless of whether the Republicans agreed with it or not. Let's not pretend one party is more willing to work with the other party than the other. When the Democrats have been in office they went forward with a lot of stuff the Republicans didn't agree with.

Once upon a time there was compromise instead of the slap fight in which both participants sustain brain damage.

 

[Huckleberry]

Wouldn't this be done by any party in charge? If the Democrats were doing this, they'd make cuts in the areas they thought needed and not make cuts in the areas they didn't think needed, and it would be different areas from what the Republicans thought should be cut. But I guarantee you they'd make the cuts regardless of whether the Republicans agreed with it or not. Let's not pretend one party is more willing to work with the other party than the other. When the Democrats have been in office they went forward with a lot of stuff the Republicans didn't agree with.

Probably so, but that’s not the spin put forward by the Republicans and others who support the cuts. We’re being told that it’s waste, fraud, and abuse being eliminated in an effort to reduce unnecessary spending and cut the deficit. Instead it’s wholesale elimination of programs under the guise of fiscal responsibility. Effective and beneficial humanitarian and medical programs are being smeared as fraud in an effort to deceive the public. The Trump Administration sets new marks on a daily basis in how low they will stoop. It used to be that the GOP had members with a conscience and this behavior would have been called out. That’s sadly no longer the case.

 

[AWRTR]

As I stated before, I'm 100% for cutting everything that doesn't directly help US citizens first and foremost. The function of government is for the people of the US, not the rest of the world. Helping people in other countries is admirable, but it's a luxury.

Beyond that, I absolutely am for across-the-board cuts at whatever percentage is needed in order to balance the budget.

There is a lot of spending on things that I would like to do that needs to go away because of the long term spending and debt trajectory that we are on. Everything needs to be stream lined and cut back where ever we can while maintaining core functions.

We also need to increase revenue through taxes and policies that will add to the productivity of the economy.

 

[jthomas666]

Wouldn't this be done by any party in charge? If the Democrats were doing this, they'd make cuts in the areas they thought needed and not make cuts in the areas they didn't think needed, and it would be different areas from what the Republicans thought should be cut. But I guarantee you they'd make the cuts regardless of whether the Republicans agreed with it or not. Let's not pretend one party is more willing to work with the other party than the other. When the Democrats have been in office they went forward with a lot of stuff the Republicans didn't agree with.

There's a difference between making considered cuts in areas you don't think are needed and making cuts like you're a drunk frat boy with a lightsaber.

 

[AWRTR]

There's a difference between making considered cuts in areas you don't think are needed and making cuts like you're a drunk frat boy with a lightsaber.

We are so far down the rabbit hole we probably need the lightsaber. The amount of absolute ridiculous waste is appalling, and I've heard the use a scalpel approach for decades with nothing being done. Time to try something else. Break it and then fix it later if you need to sounds fine to me.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

Probably so, but that’s not the spin put forward by the Republicans and others who support the cuts. We’re being told that it’s waste, fraud, and abuse being eliminated in an effort to reduce unnecessary spending and cut the deficit. Instead it’s wholesale elimination of programs under the guise of fiscal responsibility. Effective and beneficial humanitarian and medical programs are being smeared as fraud in an effort to deceive the public. The Trump Administration sets new marks on a daily basis in how low they will stoop. It used to be that the GOP had members with a conscience and this behavior would have been called out. That’s sadly no longer the case.

It still goes back to they're making cuts based on what they think needs to be cut. Do I agree with how some of it's going about being done? No, I don't. There are things that's been cut that I feel like needed to be done in phases rather than all in one swoop. Whether something is waste or fraud will always be in the eyes of the beholder. Those concepts are rarely absolute. What is waste to them may not be waste to you or the other party. Look at you and Crimsonaudio going back and forth on foreign aid. You think it isn't waste, and he (at this time) believes it is. Who's right?

As I said previously, balancing the budget is not going to be a one administration thing. It is going to take several administrations doing their part to balance it. So, if the democrats want to determine what needs to be cut and what doesn't, then win the election. Unfortunately, out of the three times Trump has run, they haven't been able to figure out how to win but once.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

There's a difference between making considered cuts in areas you don't think are needed and making cuts like you're a drunk frat boy with a lightsaber.

I get it, there are people who think they're making cuts in the wrong areas and those who believe they're making them in the right areas. That will exist as long as you have multiple parties. I don't expect the opposing party to agree on much of anything the party in power is doing. It's American politics at its finest.

 

[jthomas666]

I get it, there are people who think they're making cuts in the wrong areas and those who believe they're making them in the right areas. That will exist as long as you have multiple parties. I don't expect the opposing party to agree on much of anything the party in power is doing. It's American politics at its finest.

Making cuts in the wrong areas is only part of it. As far as i can tell, a lot of the people doing the slashing aren't particularly qualified. And there doesn't appear to be any oversight. So, unless you have total faith in Trump's ability to run a business...

 

[Huckleberry]

Making cuts in the wrong areas is only part of it. As far as i can tell, a lot of the people doing the slashing aren't particularly qualified. And there doesn't appear to be any oversight. So, unless you have total faith in Trump's ability to run a business...

I think it's become clear that a lot of people don't care who's doing the cutting, what's being cut, or who suffers as a result. They just want there to be cutting, and as much of it as possible.

 

[jthomas666]

I think it's become clear that a lot of people don't care who's doing the cutting, what's being cut, or who suffers as a result. They just want there to be cutting, and as much of it as possible.

They want to be able to say "LOOK AT ALL THE SPENDING CUTS" while they vote to extend the Trump tax cuts.

 

[crimsonaudio]

They want to be able to say "LOOK AT ALL THE SPENDING CUTS" while they vote to extend the Trump tax cuts.

Nah, we don't need tax cuts. We need spending cuts and increased revenue.

 

[jthomas666]

Nah, we don't need tax cuts. We need spending cuts and increased revenue.

Yeah, that's what we need...I'm just saying what's gonna happen.

 

[AWRTR]

Yeah, that's what we need...I'm just saying what's gonna happen.

At this point we have one party that wants to cut taxes and spending. The other party wants to raise taxes and spending. Neither has it right. They both have half the equation. We need targeted tax increases on top earners and deep cuts in spending along with deregulation to help increase productivity and make economic growth easier.

 

[JDCrimson]

We will never not be borrowing money to meet our obligations.

When we moved from the gold standard to fiat currency we moved toward an economic system where there are creditor nations and debtor nations. We are a creditor nation and will forever be. Unless we make a complete 180 whereby our standard of living falls to such a degree we are a low cost producing nation. The key is that you must control the amount of interest expense relative to the growth in our GDP which we have done a supremely poor job the last 8 years.

We must grow our GDP substantially or increase tax revenue substantially to rebalanced our interest to GDP to a sustainable level. Implementing tariffs does not raise GDP...

What we are doing now is the equivalent of sticking a screwdriver in a electrical outlet...

I agree 100% - once we're not borrowing money to meet these obligations.

Until then, cut whatever we can - especially things that don't directly help US citizens. Once we're not borrowing money to fund things people want, then we can debate which wants should take priority.

 

[JDCrimson]

The only way to fix this is to jettison our current system of taxation. It is not built for a services based consumption driven economy.

 

[Bodhisattva]

In my experiences, helping someone who can never repay you is one of the most intrinsically valuable things you can do in this life.

Absolutely! And the charity work we do has had a profound effect on our daughter. Lily has been able to go on two medical missions so far: Dominican Republic and Honduras. The DR trip was a particularly rough experience - very poor conditions and long hours. Yet Lily loved it. She never focused on her discomfort but only on the help the medical team was providing. The trip to Honduras was for orthopedic surgeries. Seeing people endure broken bones - sometimes even compound breaks - for months while waiting for the "Americanos" to arrive because there is no other alternative was quite the experience. Lily didn't recoil from any of what she experienced; in fact, she embraced it. She will become a great nurse.

 

[Tidewater]

$36,653,131,000,000