DOGE

[GoCubsGo]

The model of efficiency.

[GoCubsGo]

Elon has no impulse control.
Mark Cuban thinks Elon Musk may have forgotten about the productivity emails the White House DOGE office sent to federal workers last month.

"Whatever happened to the '5 things' DoGe emails? Talked to someone really smart who just left gov, who said all the emails bounced back as inbox full," Cuban wrote in a Bluesky post on Wednesday.

"Already forgotten. Typical. Ready Fire Aim," he added.

[GoCubsGo]

Way to go Elon!

[GoCubsGo]

Ah, we're getting closer to declaring victory and running away.


Trump hints that Musk and DOGE may be coming to the end of the road


President Donald Trump hinted Monday that his close ally Musk may have to go back to running his companies full time and that the tumultuous mission of DOGE will have been accomplished after firing tens of thousands of government employees.



But first they have a few more thing to destroy.

[Vrede too]

Ah, we're getting closer to declaring victory and running away.

Trump hints that Musk and DOGE may be coming to the end of the road

President Donald Trump hinted Monday that his close ally Musk may have to go back to running his companies full time and that the tumultuous mission of DOGE will have been accomplished after firing tens of thousands of government employees.

But first they have a few more thing to destroy.

https://bsky.app/profile/nytimes.com/post/3llpv5qqms22s

MAGAts hate learning.

Elon can't say he's quitting to spend more time with his family. People would ask, 'Which one'?

Protest signs:

Deranged
Oligarchs
Get
Everything

Porsche - Fast
Ferrari - Faster
Tesla - Fascist

[Vrede too]

Way to go Elon!

Incredible


GOP senator defends telling man who said he was fired from HHS he 'probably deserved' it
Sen. Jim Banks (IN) is embracing the blowback he's gotten online.

What an asshole!

[GoCubsGo]

Not that I've ever seriously considered it.

[Vrede too]

Not that I've ever seriously considered it.

I thought of signing on one as a nurse, but never even got around to researching it.

[1 CAT FAN]

How Bill Clinton Shrunk the Federal Government 30 Years Before DOGE

The National Partnership for Reinventing Government, or REGO as it was known, was spearheaded by Al Gore and aimed at streamlining processes and cutting red tape. The initiative was recognized as successful, having delivered four consecutive budget surpluses — the last time there was a balanced federal budget.

Touting its success, President Clinton said in his 1996 State of the Union address: "We have worked to give the American people a smaller, less bureaucratic government in Washington. And we have to give the American people one that lives within its means. The era of big government is over."
https://www.newsweek.com/how-bill-clint ... ge-2032893

Leftists had to make up for being fucked over by China.

[Vrede too]

Not that I've ever seriously considered it.

https://bsky.app/profile/muellershewrot ... irg5b2vc2c

That baffled health officials since this program is paid for by cruise ship fees, not taxpayer dollars

MAGA = Idiocy

[Vrede too]

Not that I've ever seriously considered it.

https://bsky.app/profile/muellershewrot ... irg5b2vc2c

At least we can choose to avoid cruise ships. Some things aren't a choice:

My Partner Was In A Study For Dementia Patients. Then The Trump Administration Did The Unthinkable.
“If we fail to demand accountability, we risk losing not only progress, but a piece of our collective soul.”

... She told me her entire department was shutting down this week and that this would not just eliminate jobs, which is awful enough, but would wipe out years of expertise, collaboration and critical momentum in brain disease research. The loss extends beyond individuals — it erases the foundation for future breakthroughs. The funding for dementia studies is disappearing, and the idea of being further from a treatment, a cure, and identifying biomarkers for Steve’s disease and others — it’s inconceivable. It feels… sinful.

We talked through the complexities of whether starting any of these studies back up was a possibility at some point if, by some miracle, the funding was to return, but there are too many factors. The truth is, years of work in innumerable areas are just… gone. Poof.

... Her team’s research extended beyond dementia and included studies on brain disorders affecting children. She was forced to call the parents of a 2-year-old. A 5-year-old. A 6-year-old — and a multitude of others. These children were part of studies designed to help them live, and in several cases, the experimental treatments were working.

The parents of these children had scheduled their sons’ and daughters’ next treatments, believing in the possibility of more birthdays, more bedtime stories, more moments of laughter. Now, many of them will be scheduling goodbyes, because the hope that’s potentially keeping their children alive has been cruelly yanked away.

... Inexplicably, those in power made the unthinkable choice to gut funding, dismantle research and extinguish hope rather than continue advancement toward cures. They have made the unforgivable choice to abandon progress, forsake science and turn their backs on the very people whose lives depended on this research — and so many others who will need it in the future.

"unforgivable"

... Our leaders are callously dismantling the very systems that once made America a beacon of innovation and discovery — and compassion. Pulling critical funding for research is a deliberate and cruel choice, a betrayal by those who are supposed to represent us, protect us and lift us up as a society.

"betrayal"

... Disease does not recognize party lines. It does not discriminate by zip code, gender, color or belief. It does not care who you love… or who you choose to hate. It does not care about your bank account or what’s in it. It will touch every family, in one way or another. It will touch yours, too, no matter who you are.

If we fail to demand accountability, we risk losing not only progress, but a piece of our collective soul. And if we don’t open our eyes to what’s being taken from us, we won’t just fall behind — we’ll forget who we are.

[GoCubsGo]

I honestly fail to understand any sort of rationale and have yet to hear any sort of rationalization.

[O Really]

Yeah, the decency of at least a bull-shit rationale would be nice. Even the infamous "got to destroy the village to save it" contained at least one line of ummm, "reasoning" that could be twisted into sense. They have so much contempt for other people that they don't even bother to pretend to explain.

[GoCubsGo]

Yeah, the decency of at least a bull-shit rationale would be nice. Even the infamous "got to destroy the village to save it" contained at least one line of ummm, "reasoning" that could be twisted into sense. They have so much contempt for other people that they don't even bother to pretend to explain.

Don't forget delusional hubris.

[1 CAT FAN]

Yeah, the decency of at least a bull-shit rationale would be nice. Even the infamous "got to destroy the village to save it"

Like living a hypothetical life style in a gated community? Hopefully, y'all have some form of security protecting the gates.

[O Really]

I guess there are some, and Jasmine might be one of them, who thinks that "smaller government" is inherently better. Dunno about Jasmine, but most of the people who believe that haven't thought things through very far. F'rinstance, a smaller military with better training and weapons might be better than a larger military with muskets, but when "the Russians are coming the Russians are coming" you probably want a big well-trained and equipped military. Ask Ukraine. Same principle would apply to other functions, too. Sure, buy better technology for the IRS, but bring in the tech first, then trim the staff. Doing it backwards would be considered a firing or hanging offence for any private industry executive. Doing it backwards, and with no effort to understand the purpose or process has to be considered intentional sabotage.

Plus, "big government" doesn't necessarily apply only to number of people or number of agencies or programs. It can also apply to executive rulings or directives that attempt to control various aspects of private lives. Does anybody else think "the world is burning around him, and he's worried about shower head pressure?"

[Supsalemgr]

I keep hearing democrats rant about Trump and the GOP are hell bent on cutting Social Security. Would some of you wizards of wisdom please advise what specific cuts are they referring?

[O Really]

I keep hearing democrats rant about Trump and the GOP are hell bent on cutting Social Security. Would some of you wizards of wisdom please advise what specific cuts are they referring?

Well to give an entry-level answer to the question, from the Senate Committee on the Budget, here's an example:

The current budget proposed by the Republican Study Committee, which represents 80 percent of House Republicans, calls for $1.5 trillion in cuts to Social Security benefits over the next 10 years. It would reduce benefits for seniors and raise the retirement age to 69, which would especially hurt low-income retirees.Sep 26, 2024

Now has anybody proposed a direct reduction in benefits to existing and currently eligible retirees? Maybe not, or at least not publicly. But you don't have to look far to see long-held proposals to reduce the overall value of Social Security and make it more difficult to work within the program. There have been proposals to "privatize" the plan, or to place assets into the stock market, etc. Reduction to access to services - already implemented - represent cuts to the program.

Your question implies you haven't been following the proposals and rhetoric of your own party. They'd be happy to answer your question better than I.

[Vrede too]

Or, what possible rationale is there for cancelling research and treatment for dementia and brain disorders affecting children? It's shortsightedness and cruelty in the extreme, NOT efficient government.

The GQP has been deliberately vague about where it will find the massive savings it envisions. Realistically there are only 4 pots of money it can come from - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid or the Pentagon. Pick your poison, at some point the GQP has to be honest about its scheming.

[Supsalemgr]

I keep hearing democrats rant about Trump and the GOP are hell bent on cutting Social Security. Would some of you wizards of wisdom please advise what specific cuts are they referring?

Well to give an entry-level answer to the question, from the Senate Committee on the Budget, here's an example:

The current budget proposed by the Republican Study Committee, which represents 80 percent of House Republicans, calls for $1.5 trillion in cuts to Social Security benefits over the next 10 years. It would reduce benefits for seniors and raise the retirement age to 69, which would especially hurt low-income retirees.Sep 26, 2024

Now has anybody proposed a direct reduction in benefits to existing and currently eligible retirees? Maybe not, or at least not publicly. But you don't have to look far to see long-held proposals to reduce the overall value of Social Security and make it more difficult to work within the program. There have been proposals to "privatize" the plan, or to place assets into the stock market, etc. Reduction to access to services - already implemented - represent cuts to the program.

Your question implies you haven't been following the proposals and rhetoric of your own party. They'd be happy to answer your question better than I.

Thank you for acknowledging no cuts. The proposal suggests a reduction of future benefits to not yet recipients. The raising of the normal retirement age is sound.