Sure we all know _why_. The question is whether, by the time the money gets to where it needs to go, it was an efficient use of $$. If the government (of all things holy in our society) can’t stop itself from getting royally ripped off when purchasing medication, then what warm blooded taxpayer wouldn’t want the problem fixed. Once you fix the problem the spend goes down literal orders of magnitude. Same with corruption. If the way you fund X is by dumping money into an NGO owned by the government official who authorized program X, and 90% ends up in their kids bank account, that’s got to stop.
Anyway, the topic of this tread, DOGE, is reading the books and asking questions and then recommending areas where fraud/waste/abuse can be cut. They are not directly cutting entire gov’t programs for fun and profit. This whole sub-tread feels like it’s on a different set of tracks headed a loosely similar direction. DOGE isn't cutting medicare.
I think we’re arguing semantics at this point. The leaders of the agencies where actions are taking place are cooperating (or not) with DOGE’s recommendations and executing at their discretion (which may be to accept the full recommendation and apply it immediately). If DOGE is over socializing their “wins” then sure we can agree they could tone it back.
Seems odd to participate in a comment chain, taking it further away from the post topic, and then when you realize you are wrong you say that it is not relevant.
>DOGE isn't cutting medicare.
Let’s follow up in two months to see where this statement stands.
> They are not directly cutting entire gov’t programs for fun and profit.
I mean, that's exactly what they're doing, isn't it? First thing they did was boast about shutting down entire departments at the weekend. Then they started mass layoffs of anyone on probation, with grudging acknowledgement they might have been a bit hasty in firing nuclear safety operatives without asking the question of whether they'd been promoted or recently hired because they were useful. And the subject of this entire thread is them publicly demonstrating lack of basic understanding of the books
You are correct about DOGE being advisory, but also mistaken that anybody other than the president is elected in the executive branch. The president is the only elected official in the entire executive branch and the only elected official elected by the entire country. All the whining about “unelected Elon” is hateful hogwash and betrays a fundamental lack of understanding about how our government works. I was honestly super confused but I guess unsurprised at this point when Warren introduced that rage bait.
Anyway, the topic of this tread, DOGE, is reading the books and asking questions and then recommending areas where fraud/waste/abuse can be cut. They are not directly cutting entire gov’t programs for fun and profit. This whole sub-tread feels like it’s on a different set of tracks headed a loosely similar direction. DOGE isn't cutting medicare.