Social Question

jca2's avatar

Do you think there's a problem with having the government scrutinized to try to eliminate waste and inefficiency?

Asked by jca2 (17201points) 1 month ago

What I’m hearing is that Democrats (of which I am one) are outraged about the government possibly saving money (via DOGE).

Republicans are saying for what reason could the Dems want to keep waste and inefficiency?

I’m wondering what could be the harm in trying to eliminate waste and ineffiency?

I’m not saying they should slash and eliminate everything, but there are some things that I’m sure could be changed.

I worked in local government for 30 years and I saw lots of things that were inefficient. At the end of the budget year, any remaining money had to be spent or else it would be cut out of next year’s budget. Lots of things, the people at the top would just say “this is the way we do it” or “it’s been done this way for a long time” or “there’s a right way, a wrong way and the ______ way.”

What do you think?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

33 Answers

ragingloli's avatar

@jca2
The problem is that musk and his “doge” minions are breaking the law. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaZ7g0mPhLA

seawulf575's avatar

Anyone that is against looking at the books and where the money is going is hiding something. Everyone forgets that USAID gave tons of money to NGOs that were pretty much free to use it however they wanted. If they used it for a reason they gave USAID, okay. But if they funneled it into terrorists or kickbacks to politicians or smuggling illegal aliens into the country, that was okay too. They didn’t have to account for any of it.

Using USAID as an example, let’s say they do good work as well as questionable work. Auditing will show that. If giving aid to needy people around the world is something we want to do, then let’s do it. But if giving money to George Soros’ DA fund is something that is sketchy, then let’s stop it. It isn’t magic. We haven’t had a budget in years. 2019 was the last one, I believe. Congress keeps passing “continuing resolutions” which allows all the funny money to keep flowing without any accountability.

tinyfaery's avatar

If they weren’t using it as an excuse to defund everything that does not conform to their worldview, I’d say yes. But they aren’t.

If it was about waste, Drumpf wouldn’t have gone to the Super Bowl. Time will show the truth of it.

KNOWITALL's avatar

I agree with both posters. I’m not sure anyone in either party knows what we little people would fund or not, they dont live in our reality.

ragingloli's avatar

What you also need to understand is, that they are not looking for “waste and inefficiencies” or even “fraud”. They just want to cut anything that they do not like, and they will put the label of “waste” or “fraud” on that, and lie to you about it.

chyna's avatar

I want waste eliminated as long as that is what is really happening. If this money is going to be used to line the pockets of politicians, then it’s crap.

RedDeerGuy1's avatar

I think 8 or more years ago a multi million dollars funded bipartisan committee was tasked to cut government waste.

They ended up only cutting $15,000.

If anyone remembers please post a link.

YARNLADY's avatar

If you find one bad apple in the barrel, you do not throw out the whole barrel, cut down the orchard it came from and shoot the farmer who grew it. This is what they are doing.

mazingerz88's avatar

It’s not utlimately about waste and efficiency issues in goverment. It’s about distracting the American people from things that matter most to trump and his cabal. Extending tax cuts for billionaires. To gain more wealth and/or power for each and every one in trump’s tent of deplorables.

Demonizing immigrants, the American goverment and its institutions are effective tactics in dividing the American people and gaining enough votes to get elected.

These deplorables are sorry excuses for Americans.

JLeslie's avatar

I think it’s a good idea to look for fraud and waste.

I think before changes are made there should be a little bit of back and forth with possible negative outcomes.

The latest is tariffs on aluminum. Coca cola is saying they will stop making canned soda in the US. Aluminum is much easier to recycle than plastic. We will have more plastic pollution.

That they use it to constantly call out dog whistles, like funding a trans play in another country, gets tiresome. Even though I think tax payers shouldn’t be funding plays in other countries in the multi-thousands of dollars.

ragingloli's avatar

@JLeslie
You also need to check if those claims are actually true.

hat's avatar

To ask the question is to adopt the framework that the DOGE project is about eliminating waste and inefficiency. It is not.

ragingloli's avatar

This Elon Tweet really says it all.

hat's avatar

If your house had a massive mouse and rat infestation, and someone arrived in a DOGE Exterminator truck, asked you to leave, removed all insulation from your house, stole your belongings, poisoned your water supply, cut the power lines to the house, took a shit in your sink, and put down a couple of ant bait traps, a reasonable response wouldn’t be, “Well, at least they removed some of the ants.”.

ragingloli's avatar

Nonono, they did not kill any ants. They shot your disabled children, and told you they reduced your monthly food bill.

JLeslie's avatar

@ragingloli I agree. Good point.

canidmajor's avatar

Yesterday I got a splinter in my thumb. I guess I need to get out my chainsaw and amputate my arm.

JLeslie's avatar

Obama had a “campaign to cut government waste” something like that.

Bill Clinton also went after reducing waste.

Both were looking at the bidding process for contracts and line items where the government was being “gouged.”

Clinton also had a pay as you go on his policy for new government spending.

Clinton presidency created a surplus for the US budget and Obama cut the deficit in half if I remember correctly.

I think “little” expenditures matter as much as large. If someone is in big debt I tell them to stop buying $3 coffees and $50 manicures. Their POV might be it’s just a few dollars, but debt costs money and shackles you. The $3 is really $5 and the $50 is really $80 if you pay it over time with interest.

The problem is the Republicans have a very specific agenda regarding cutting government.

elbanditoroso's avatar

I have no problem in principle. But going about it with a machete – without having studied the costs and benefits of each agency – smells like revenge and stupidity, rather than thoughtful decision making.

That[‘s the problem with it. People (citizens) will suffer because these idiots are slashing things they know nothing about. People will die.

Remember those ‘death panel’ scares they talked about when the ACA was being debated? We have that now, except that the death panels are made up of President Musk and his friends.

Demosthenes's avatar

Do I think there’s a problem with eliminating waste and inefficiency in the government? No.

Do I think that’s the primary objective of Musk and his army of twinks groypers “computer geniuses”? Also no.

Forever_Free's avatar

Nobody is saying that it should not be looked at. It should. What is wrong here is the methods they are using and the places they are targeting. Red state reps are already trying to get exemptions handed their way due to funding cuts towards their Universities that will be impacted.
What we are seeing is undeniably unprecedented. People can frame this however they want, but it is wrongful, targeted and against the constitution.
627 days till mid term elections. Let’s hope we all make it.

ragingloli's avatar

You know what wasteful spending they are not going to touch? The 400 million that the state department is going to spend on armoured teslas:
https://www.npr.org/2025/02/13/g-s1-48571/trump-administration-order-400-million-worth-of-armored-teslas

LifeQuestioner's avatar

I don’t have the energy to read all the comments, sorry, and I’m just catching up after being off Fluther for a week or so, but this Democrat doesn’t mind stuff like that being examined, as long as it is done in a proper manner and by someone who is totally unbiased. Obviously, that is not the case here. Also, the person should be well educated as to what the different programs do, so that they’re not making medicine be withheld from African countries that is sitting on pallets and going bad. And so on, and so on…

Blackwater_Park's avatar

You all act like Elon is literally doing this. He is just the troll pick figurehead. The real auditors are apparently, finding real fraud, waste and abuse.

ragingloli's avatar

just like poland really did attack that radio station.

flutherother's avatar

I’m very suspicious of Musk and Trump. They should not be allowed unbridled access to sensitive government records. Musk is comparing the incomes of government workers with the money they have in the bank and if they have too much, he suspects fraud. It is intrusive, and somewhat sinister.

Zaku's avatar

“Do you think there’s a problem with having the government scrutinized to try to eliminate waste and inefficiency?”
– Not in general, of course not.

“What I’m hearing is that Democrats (of which I am one) are outraged about the government possibly saving money (via DOGE).”
– What silly people are you hearing that from?

“Republicans are saying for what reason could the Dems want to keep waste and inefficiency?”
– Well THOSE people would be, as usual, inventing a stupid spin to confuse people and waste time and add another disingenuous stupid conversation to the mix.

“I’m wondering what could be the harm in trying to eliminate waste and ineffiency?”
– Stop wondering. It’s not a real argument.
– It’s also obviously NOT what is happening with DOGE – that’s a berserk power grab and attack on our government, lying about having found inefficiency while doing as much damage as quickly as possible, seizing illegal powers, etc. THAT is the actual issue.

“I’m not saying they should slash and eliminate everything, but there are some things that I’m sure could be changed.”
– OF COURSE. THIS HAS BEEN KNOWN AND DISCUSSED FOR DECADES.
– Don’t add oxygen to the GOP noise. It’s not an actual question. No one wants less efficiency for its own sake.
– In a sane non-coup actual government, sane intelligent qualified people, who go through the appropriate channels, would work on improving efficiency, with actual beneficial intentions. That’s not what’s happening with DOGE. Acting like it is, is a big problem.

Lightlyseared's avatar

GK Chesterton once said “Do not remove a fence until you know why it was put up in the first place.” (Well actually he said something much longer and wordier but that’s the gist of it)
There’s nothing wrong with scrutinising government for waste but you need to understand why previous governments made the decisions they did before you get rid of them.

Blackwater_Park's avatar

I fully support making gov’t more efficient, I do not support this bull in a china shop approach. I don’t like Trump using Musk just to intentionally cause outrage. I also don’t like that real findings from DOGE are not being widely reported.

YARNLADY's avatar

I don’t like it when one person decides that “waste” is anything he disagrees with. In my household, I believe buying computer games and spending money in-game is a waste, but other members of my family spend hundreds of dollars (combined) on them.

Lightlyseared's avatar

Look at the National Nuclear security Agency. Fired most of their staff on Thursday so quickly they didn’t get contact details and on Friday discovered that looking after the nuclear weapons stockpiles was probably a good idea but now can’t get get in touch with them to rehire them.

chyna's avatar

If I were king of the forest.
If I only had a brain.

Forever_Free's avatar

^^ What would you do if you had a brain?

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther