Will you eat your words and admit you are wrong if Musk frees up a significant fraction of the budget?
I can free up a lot of budget by sacking the entire armed forces and selling the jets to Ukraine and Saudi Arabia. "freeing up a significant fraction of the budget" is not consequence free. If he forces the health insurance industry to reform and extract a sane profit margin above cost of service, he deserves a medal. If he wipes out USAID and stops his competitors being funded for battery car programmes he secured for himself in times past.. Less such.
"waste" is a very emotive term for government spending. Many economists laugh at the belief spending less money is net advantageous as a thing in itself: money makes the world go round. Sometimes you want it spent more than you want it saved.
I want to run the heater so my kids aren't cold but cant afford it. Meanwhile my mayor is using my tax dollars to buy 200 home depot sheds for 800k each from a donor.
Yes, the point is spending money, just by the people who earned it.
I do not believe paying less tax will fix the kind of cynical systematic corrupt behaviour of your mayor, and other tiers of government.
Fundamentally, the urge to eliminate taxes and reduce the size of the government is a vote of no confidence. Not just now,but permanently. It's not a vote for reform. I don't think the government leadership has my best interests at heart. I think it would happily take everything I have and leave me to starve in the street if it could.
A huge chunk of government spending is a horrendous waste/scam and you will likely never understand this unless you take the initiative to look at the spending breakdowns or actually spend a bit of time at a government contractor.
These real world observations demonstrated my theoretical model was flawed.
And for-profit companies have your best interest at heart? With government services you can at least optimize for goals other than profit.
The goal should be providing the service I want for the least tax dollars possible.
The government is horrendous at doing this. There is no performance or competitive incentive.
I don't need to be funding $50M worth of condoms to be sent to Gaza. That's a "them" problem, and while there might be second order effects to a population explosion there, I honestly don't care.
Thing is, I checked my twitter feed for the first time in a month, and was recommended Alex Jones, so I can predict how well DOGE is going to work out pretty accurately.
Though he absolutely, literally is. The executive branch taking control over finances is unconstitutional, and there are likely a bevy of other things involving laws for conflicts of interest and laws for security clearances.
The only question is what'll happen in response when the criminals control so much of the infrastructure.
As a bonus, Musk is currently breaking the First Amendment as well, as he is both wearing a government hat and actively censoring people discussing what he's doing.
Freeing up money is not actually that hard. Doing it in a constructive way is a lot more difficult. I could go in and completely defund roads, airports, social security, public schools, the courts, the military, and save a ton of money.
Then what. What's the big plan? What are we going to do with all this money that will give us a better ROI?
That money was paying for stuff. Some stuff runs smoothly we enough that we take it for granted. Is everything perfect? No, but I'd like to see a little more care when screwing around with important infrastructure and services.
This reminds me of people that join a legacy software project and start proposing that you do a completely rewrite of the system without really understanding why certain decisions were made. It's almost always a total disaster and then someone else needs to come up and clean up after them.
Even if he does manage to find his $2T to cut (which I think is pretty unlikely), he will fail at the above metrics.
But sure, it would be cool to be proven wrong on that. I really hope I'm wrong. Otherwise he'll have hurt a ton of people (that he doesn't care about) and will have set the US back on the world stage decades. Not to mention... hello recession... or worse.
The remaining 27% is split 50/50 between defense and everything else. Musk will not be given access to the DOD. The remaining half of discretionary includes things like transportation, R&D/science funding , education, NASA/SpaceX, climate/energy, etc… essentially a lot of high value investments for our future that slashing would be like shooting ourselves in the foot.
But how would the words "it's not about the budget, but ideology" but refuted by budget cuts, anyway? I can give you candy in my van, and the candy can be real, but that still doesn't make it about the candy. And freeing up a significant fraction of the budget is hardly saying anything. You can save money by throwing people on the streets and letting them starve. You can make money by letting drug dealers go free and making them give the government a cut of the profits. Maybe not enough to offset the tax cuts to the super rich, or the costs incurred by just setting everything on fire to consolidate wealth for a few sociopaths, but probably "significant". So? That's supposed to be an argument for waving firing prosecutors for political reasons through?