Repost (with links) The DOGE scam is barking up the wrong tree

[Hector12]

You are as free to support Marxism/socialism/communism as I am to oppose it. Not sure what your point is here.

My point is that the vast majority of Americans who support progressive taxation are not Marxists.

 

[westwall]

My point is that the vast majority of Americans who support progressive taxation are not Marxists.

But they have been indoctrinated by Marxists, so that makes sense.

 

[Orangecat]

My point is that the vast majority of Americans who support progressive taxation are not Marxists.

That’s why the term “useful idiot” was coined.

 

[Rumpole]

Congratulations on your ignorant wall of text.

Intelligence= brevity.

If 'Intelligence= brevity' were a universal truth, then the Federalist papers were written by morons.

Nice logic, you may now remove your head from your ass, which will be necessary in order to grasp the aforementioned sentence, though, unfortunately, the stench of ill-logic will remain for awhile.

 

[Rumpole]

That’s why the term “useful idiot” was coined.

Which. of course, is a lie. But, feel free to prove your point, or just admit you enjoy pulling shit out of your ass while hoping no one will notice.

 

[westwall]

If 'Intelligence= brevity' were a universal truth, then the Federalist papers were written by morons.

Nice logic, you may now remove your head from your ass, which will be necessary in order to grasp the aforementioned sentence, though, unfortunately, the stench of ill-logic will remain for awhile.

The Federalist papers were written by very intelligent, and well read people. Unlike your screens they were arguing over the course the foundation of this country's government would take.

It is the first of its kind in the world, so it required quite a bit of discussion.

And yes, intelligent people say a lot, with few words.

We are gifted that way.

 

[Rumpole]

The Federalist papers were written by very intelligent, and well read people. Unlike your screens they were arguing over the course the foundation of this country's government would take.

It is the first of its kind in the world, so it required quite a bit of discussion.

And yes, intelligent people say a lot, with few words.

We are gifted that way.

Westwall, your gift for saying very little with very few words is truly… something. You have now conceded that the authors of the Federalist Papers were verbose because the subject required it, thus contradicting your own axiom--“Intelligence = brevity”. A charming self-own, really. If you were, indeed, intelligent, you'd know that intelligence knows when brevity is appropriate and when it is not. To have put it that way would have accommodated Publius, but, alas, in your total absence of depth, nuance, thus 'intelligence', you didn't. One can only conclude you lack the very quality you ascribe to the authors of the Fed Papers.

You then pivoted--without grace, I might add--to the preposterous boast that “we are gifted that way,” as if brevity alone were the birthmark of genius. One imagines you scribbling telegrams and congratulating yourself on their brilliance while the rest of us are trying to build a civilization.

True intelligence is not measured by syllable count, nor by one’s ability to quip while missing the point entirely. It lies in discernment, in depth, and yes, occasionally in a paragraph or two, or three, or--say--eighty-five essays, like the Federalist Papers, or 350,000 words on political economy, as in Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, or even a mere 4,500 carefully weighted words that launched a nation, like our Constitution. Brevity has its place, dear Westwall, but when you're laying the foundations of thought, substance--not soundbites--is the currency of the intelligent. But then, one wouldn’t expect a thimble to understand the ocean.

Now, I could have stated the entirety of the above with "keeping it short doesn't necessarily mean you are dumb," but would that have conveyed all the nuance necessary for the scope and depth of my message? If you believe that, then you are, perhaps not stupid, but definitely ignorant.

 

[westwall]

Westwall, your gift for saying very little with very few words is truly… something. You have now conceded that the authors of the Federalist Papers were verbose because the subject required it, thus contradicting your own axiom--“Intelligence = brevity”. A charming self-own, really. If you were, indeed, intelligent, you'd know that intelligence knows when brevity is appropriate and when it is not. To have put it that way would have accommodated Publius, but, alas, in your total absence of depth, nuance, thus 'intelligence', you didn't. One can only conclude you lack the very quality you ascribe to the authors of the Fed Papers.

You then pivoted--without grace, I might add--to the preposterous boast that “we are gifted that way,” as if brevity alone were the birthmark of genius. One imagines you scribbling telegrams and congratulating yourself on their brilliance while the rest of us are trying to build a civilization.

True intelligence is not measured by syllable count, nor by one’s ability to quip while missing the point entirely. It lies in discernment, in depth, and yes, occasionally in a paragraph or two, or three, or--say--eighty-five essays, like the Federalist Papers, or 350,000 words on political economy, as in Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, or even a mere 4,500 carefully weighted words that launched a nation, like our Constitution. Brevity has its place, dear Westwall, but when you're laying the foundations of thought, substance--not soundbites--is the currency of the intelligent. But then, one wouldn’t expect a thimble to understand the ocean.

Now, I could have stated the entirety of the above with "keeping it short doesn't necessarily mean you are dumb," but would that have conveyed all the nuance necessary for the scope and depth of my message? If you believe that, then you are, perhaps not stupid, but definitely ignorant.

Westwall, your gift for saying very little with very few words is truly… something. You have now conceded that the authors of the Federalist Papers were verbose because the subject required it, thus contradicting your own axiom--“Intelligence = brevity”. A charming self-own, really. If you were, indeed, intelligent, you'd know that intelligence knows when brevity is appropriate and when it is not. To have put it that way would have accommodated Publius, but, alas, in your total absence of depth, nuance, thus 'intelligence', you didn't. One can only conclude you lack the very quality you ascribe to the authors of the Fed Papers.

You then pivoted--without grace, I might add--to the preposterous boast that “we are gifted that way,” as if brevity alone were the birthmark of genius. One imagines you scribbling telegrams and congratulating yourself on their brilliance while the rest of us are trying to build a civilization.

True intelligence is not measured by syllable count, nor by one’s ability to quip while missing the point entirely. It lies in discernment, in depth, and yes, occasionally in a paragraph or two, or three, or--say--eighty-five essays, like the Federalist Papers, or 350,000 words on political economy, as in Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, or even a mere 4,500 carefully weighted words that launched a nation, like our Constitution. Brevity has its place, dear Westwall, but when you're laying the foundations of thought, substance--not soundbites--is the currency of the intelligent. But then, one wouldn’t expect a thimble to understand the ocean.

Now, I could have stated the entirety of the above with "keeping it short doesn't necessarily mean you are dumb," but would that have conveyed all the nuance necessary for the scope and depth of my message? If you believe that, then you are, perhaps not stupid, but definitely ignorant.

I'll let my friend explain it to you.

 

[Hector12]

But they have been indoctrinated by Marxists, so that makes sense.

There is no such thing as indoctrination. One does not get places in politics by changing people's minds. One gets laces by channeling and articulating sentiments that already exist. Telling people that they should accept higher taxes so that the rich become even richer is not a winning political strategy. The Republicans do not win by advocating flat taxes. They win on social issues.

The Democrats make this easy for the Republicans by telling whites that we should feel guilty about high rates of black poverty and incarceration, and by trying to prevent people like Charles Murray and Jared Taylor from expressing their opionions.

 

[Hector12]

That’s why the term “useful idiot” was coined.

A useful idiot or useful fool is a pejorative description of a person, suggesting that the person thinks they are fighting for a cause without fully comprehending the consequences of their actions, and who does not realize they are being manipulated by the cause's leaders or by other political players.<a href="Useful idiot - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>1<span>]</span></a><a href="Useful idiot - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>2<span>]</span></a> The term was often used during the Cold War in the Western bloc to describe non-communists regarded as susceptible to communist propaganda and psychological manipulation.<a href="Useful idiot - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>1<span>]</span></a>

This statement has traditionally been attributed to Vladimir Lenin, but this attribution is not supported by any evidence.

Useful idiot - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[westwall]

Westwall, your gift for saying very little with very few words is truly… something. You have now conceded that the authors of the Federalist Papers were verbose because the subject required it, thus contradicting your own axiom--“Intelligence = brevity”. A charming self-own, really. If you were, indeed, intelligent, you'd know that intelligence knows when brevity is appropriate and when it is not. To have put it that way would have accommodated Publius, but, alas, in your total absence of depth, nuance, thus 'intelligence', you didn't. One can only conclude you lack the very quality you ascribe to the authors of the Fed Papers.

You then pivoted--without grace, I might add--to the preposterous boast that “we are gifted that way,” as if brevity alone were the birthmark of genius. One imagines you scribbling telegrams and congratulating yourself on their brilliance while the rest of us are trying to build a civilization.

True intelligence is not measured by syllable count, nor by one’s ability to quip while missing the point entirely. It lies in discernment, in depth, and yes, occasionally in a paragraph or two, or three, or--say--eighty-five essays, like the Federalist Papers, or 350,000 words on political economy, as in Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, or even a mere 4,500 carefully weighted words that launched a nation, like our Constitution. Brevity has its place, dear Westwall, but when you're laying the foundations of thought, substance--not soundbites--is the currency of the intelligent. But then, one wouldn’t expect a thimble to understand the ocean.

Now, I could have stated the entirety of the above with "keeping it short doesn't necessarily mean you are dumb," but would that have conveyed all the nuance necessary for the scope and depth of my message? If you believe that, then you are, perhaps not stupid, but definitely ignorant.

I find it amusing how you believe

There is no such thing as indoctrination. One does not get places in politics by changing people's minds. One gets laces by channeling and articulating sentiments that already exist. Telling people that they should accept higher taxes so that the rich become even richer is not a winning political strategy. The Republicans do not win by advocating flat taxes. They win on social issues.

The Democrats make this easy for the Republicans by telling whites that we should feel guilty about high rates of black poverty and incarceration, and by trying to prevent people like Charles Murray and Jared Taylor from expressing their opionions.

Of course there is. Indoctrination is merely another form of propaganda.

Marxism 101.

 

[fncceo]

that's not a counter argument,,

Just a (very accurate) prognostication.

If you’re this fired up over a month, the next 47 are going to drive you over the edge if you don’t seek help.

 

[Z99]

I'm a panentheist, which should answer your question. Why do you ask?

You need to humble and submit yourself to serving and following Jesus, the Lord of Lords.

 

[Rumpole]

You need to humble and submit yourself to serving and following Jesus, the Lord of Lords.

Thanks, but reread my reply until you understand it.

 

[Rumpole]

DOGE is the only way OUR government gets fixed. I didn't read your wall of whine, didn't need to. Your country has bigger problems than mine maybe pay attention to that.

Rebuttal is incompetent.

 

[Rumpole]

Yes .
It is clearly a Troll Bot OP with material supplied by his Manager/ Sales Office .
The links stink .
It is Copy and Paste and probably duplicated on many other Social Platforms by novice Bots as attempted influencing material .
Bottom end of the Soros sponsored propaganda .

Incompetent rebuttal

 

[Rumpole]

That's a nice fantasy pushed by Democrats to fire up poor voters.

It won't solve all our problems but it's a step in the right direction

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

So, you assign an equally narcissistic arrogant billionaire (as Trump is) untrained in auditing science, ignorant of the law and the constitution's bicameral system (as Trump is), and what could possibly go wrong? Well, it's going wrong -- the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE--Elon Musk's latest foray into bureaucratic bungling. Market’s are crashing, Tesla is crashing and protests ar mounting in just about every state, people, children, veterans, are suffering because toss the baby out with the bathwater approach is about as wise as a lemming going gleefully over a cliff. They boasted about slashing billions from the federal budget, but it turns out their math skills are as reliable as a politician's promise. They claimed an $8 billion cut from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, but oops, it was just $8 million. And those three $655 million cuts at USAID? Try a paltry $18 million total. Now, they've quietly scrubbed these "savings" from their website, yet still tout a $65 billion reduction. It's like watching a magician botch every trick but still expect applause.

But wait, there's more! They also boasted about a $232 million cut to the Social Security Administration, which in reality was a mere $560,000. And let's not forget the $1.9 billion "saving" from the Treasury Department, based on a contract canceled during the previous administration. It's like they're using Monopoly money to balance the budget. They even claimed a $2 billion savings, well, turns it was saved during Biden's term, so they had to delete it from the list.

Despite these blunders, DOGE's website still flaunts a $65 billion savings claim which I hold as suspect. It's as if they're hoping no one notices the emperor has no clothes--or in this case, no calculator. Besides, the 'savings' or alleged savings, is a subterfuge because Trump is planning a massive tax cut for his rich chronies, including himself and if the 'savings' pay for the tax cut, how does that lower the debt? It doesn't.

DOGE claims $65 billion in savings — but its own ‘wall of receipts’ shows just $9.6 billion

DOGE says it's saved $105 billion, though it's backtracked on some of its earlier claims

The DOGE website is now updated to claim cost-cutting savings of $105 billion -- though it deleted several contracts that it previously claimed saved billions of dollars.

abcnews.go.com

The national debt is $36 trillion, so $9.6 billion represents about one quarter of one percent. And since they are planning to use theses so-called 'savings' to enact a massive tax cut, how in holy hell is that savings going to drive down the debt? Hmmm? All it will do is pay for billionaire's tax cuts, money they sure as hell don't need, anyway.

Yeah, suspect. I don't trust anything these clowns, Musk and his merry band of slightly older than teenyboppers say.

Incompetence or intentional deception? Either way, it's a masterclass in how not to run a government efficiency program. Maybe next time, they should try using an abacus, or better yet, the trained folks in auditing science and protocols over at the GAO, and the IG system, constitutionally and lawfully assigned to these tasks, by non partisan professionals.

As for Musk and 'DOGE' (which should be retitled as, 'Dysfunctional Oligarch Grifting Excessively ), Excuse me if I don’t trust or care to take the word of a billionaire (whose billions are courtesy of the US taxpayer) who is a partisan hack with extreme conflicts of interest, no training in auditing, no grasp of its science or protocols, and no regard for the constitutional role of the IG apparatus and GAO -- established by Congress to do precisely what he’s redundantly attempting, and have been doing it for years. The inescapable fact that DOGE is illegal, unconstitutional, and driven by someone so arrogant and full of himself (given his wealth) he thinks he’s untouchable and above learning or accountability.

We have the IGs and the GAO detecting this stuff all the time, and they are staffed with experts in the auditing fields, which is far more complex than Musk and Trump realize.

You can't solve the problem of a bloated government with a simplistic mindset, it's too big, too complicated.

If you are going to cure an illness, medicine doesn't cure, you need to attack the cause, and DOGE doesn't do it.

I attacked (see below) what I believe is the cause, which must be dealt with, and, unless it is done, the symptom, bloated government, will just return.

DOGE is a scam, and NOT the solution. The firings 'cost savings' are a miniscule fraction of 1% of the national debt, and will cause for more havoc than shrink the debt, and the 'cost benefit' ratio just isn't there. Moreover, we have the IG system and the GAO establish per the constitution by Congress, all of whom have training in auditing, knowledge of it's science and auditing protocols which Musk and his merry band of boppers haven't a clue. What's tragic is that they assume they do, but theirs aligns with hyperpartisanship, and ignores the law and the constitution. Like I said in the link, below:

There's a reason for Congress, it represents 'the people'. This is why the bicameral system is in place, so that the people have a voice in policies, that no one person or faction can tyrannize another, that we all have to compromise and find common ground, this is the why of 1776, the Declaration of Independence, why we broke from Great Britain and it's king and his tyranny, we had a enough, and we created a republic. It is why our service personnel died in wars for this cause. They sure as hell didn't fight for our freedom from tyranny only to have a guy Like Trump trying to become one.

Founders Online: The Federalist No. 51, [6 February 1788]

The Federalist No. 51, [6 February 1788]

founders.archives.gov

Trump’s and Musk’s justification for these mass firings -- that it will significantly reduce spending and lower national debt -- is economically illiterate. The total federal payroll, based on 2.4 million federal workers earning an average salary of $108,510, amounts to approximately $260.42 billion -- a mere 0.72% of the total U.S. national debt of $36.22 trillion. Even if every federal worker were fired, the impact on national debt would be negligible (2/3rds of 1%)

Fiscal Effects of Reducing the Federal Workforce - EPIC for America

A reduction in the federal workforce creates significant changes to the budget and could be a useful part of the reconciliation process.

epicforamerica.org

What the data says about federal workers

As President-elect Donald Trump returns to the White House, here are answers to some common questions about the federal workforce.

www.pewresearch.org

Fiscal Data Explains the National Debt

Check out @FiscalService Fiscal Data’s new national debt page! #NationalDebt

fiscaldata.treasury.gov

Moreover, the debt issue is systemic, stemming from (imo) two key flaws:

The Fractional Reserve Banking System: The U.S. monetary system is structured to encourage perpetual debt. The Federal Reserve creates money through lending, and the government must borrow to function, ensuring an ever-growing debt cycle.

The Appropriations Process: Congress writes spending bills without a structured plan to balance debt accumulation. It’s as if the left hand (Congress) doesn’t know what the right hand (Treasury and the Federal Reserve) is doing. This lack of coordination leads to unchecked spending and unsustainable deficits.

But that's just an overview, here is more in-depth view:

The debt crisis is not just a consequence of reckless spending or tax cuts but also systemic flaws in how money is created and allocated. Trump’s brand of fiscal vandalism is merely an acceleration of an already broken process. To avoid economic catastrophe, both spending reform and monetary realignment are necessary.

Debt-Conscious Appropriations Process
Congress should tie new spending to long-term fiscal sustainability rather than passing bills that add debt with no repayment strategy.

A mechanism (such as a balanced budget amendment with exceptions for recessions and emergencies) could force lawmakers to offset new spending with revenue or cuts elsewhere.

Reforming the Fractional Reserve System Without Disrupting Credit Growth
Stronger coordination between the Fed and Congress to align interest rate policies with spending habits.

Explore targeted monetary policy tools (such as direct infrastructure investments instead of debt-financed spending) that yield long-term growth rather than short-term borrowing binges.

Eliminating the Tax-Cut Scam
End the cycle of reckless tax cuts for the wealthy under the pretense of economic growth.

Increase corporate tax rates and close loopholes that allow corporations to pay zero in taxes while working-class Americans carry the burden.

Strengthening Fiscal Coordination
Establish better transparency and communication between Congress, the Treasury, and the Federal Reserve to ensure spending policies do not conflict with monetary policies.

Implement these and the debt will eventually take care of itself, no shock treatment needed. Why? All we have to is just reverse the ship's direction, pull it away from the wall towards which it is headed, because the shock treatment will just sink it.

Moreover...

Legal and Constitutional Violations
DOGE’s firings are not just reckless -- they are unconstitutional. Article I of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power of the purse, meaning that Musk’s interference in appropriations is a direct violation of the law. The Inspectors General (IG) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) have been instrumental in maintaining oversight, proving that federal agencies have already made efficiency strides without the need for Musk’s authoritarian interference.

Historical Precedents and Backlash

Rehiring After Public Outcry: The last time a significant number of federal workers were dismissed, the operational chaos and public backlash forced the government to rehire critical personnel. This cycle of reckless firings and costly rehiring only adds to the deficit Musk claims to be solving.

Failed Government Shutdowns: Previous government shutdowns have shown that even temporary furloughs of federal workers cause immense disruption, yet DOGE is advocating for permanent eliminations, a move that is far more destructive.

In summary; Musk’s & Trump's Plan is a National Suicide Pact
Firing federal workers so wantonly and indiscriminately is not a solution -- it is an act of national self-destruction. Musk’s initiative is not precision surgery; it’s a chainsaw amputation. His reckless disregard for the nation’s institutional framework and constitutional laws makes him less of a reformer and more of a demolitionist. He says 'no agencies' should be the default, so fire all of them, and replace them as needed. This is insane.

If Musk & Trump truly wanted to fix the debt problem, they would advocate for systemic fiscal reform, including changes to the banking system and budgetary processes. Instead, their actions mirror a child smashing a clock because don't don’t like what time it is.

The United States needs competent governance, not indiscriminate destruction. Musk’s & Trump's meat-cleaver approach to governance is a ticking time bomb, and the nation cannot afford to let it detonate. If you think Trump's the cat's pajamas, you've been Trumped.

Nobody is reading a long bloviating TDS diatribe especially from you.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

The last thing we should do is run the country like a business. Middle Class wages compared to wealth accrual of the upper echelons fell flat right at the time Reagan turned the nation towards neoliberalism and we've yet to recover from the damage Reagan did, with that trickle down bullshit. Trump couldn't find his prick with a magnifying glass, he is a moron, the dumbest president in history. But how could you even know? you're not too swift, either.

Reagan’s philosophy was not trickle down. Get informed leftard.

 

[Z99]

Thanks, but reread my reply until you understand it.

I understood. The only path to God is through Jesus.