Discussion on Musk's DoGE ideas, the federal deficit, and GDP

78,378 Views | 1079 Replies | Last: 3 days ago by bear2034
bear2034
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MinotStateBeav • 1:27a, 6/28/25
MinotStateBeav said:
Big Balls is Back

Former DOGE aide 'Big Balls' returns to government

https://thehill.com/policy/technology/5372838-edward-coristine-big-balls-former-doge-aide-joins-ssa/

What a week!

Reply Quote
3
movielover
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bear2034 • 2:48a, 6/28/25
Baller.
Reply Quote
3
Eastern Oregon Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MinotStateBeav • 2:58a, 6/28/25
MinotStateBeav said:
Big Balls is Back

Former DOGE aide 'Big Balls' returns to government

https://thehill.com/policy/technology/5372838-edward-coristine-big-balls-former-doge-aide-joins-ssa/
Yep. His allowable 130 days as a special government employee was up, so he left DOGE for a day or two and then he was rehired as a special government employee of the Social Security Administration. He'll step down again 130 days from now and then get rehired as a special government employee for some other agency around the time when Cal gets to 8-0 Halloween.
Reply Quote
3
movielover
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Eastern Oregon Bear • 7:52p, 6/28/25
Don't hate the Big Ballz.
Reply Quote
3
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:14p, 6/29/25
Shocker.

Senate GOP declines to meet with the parliamentarian on whether Trump tax cuts add to deficit.

Senate Democrats, GOP clash over Trump tax cuts' impact on federal deficits
Reply Quote
1
3 edits
Anarchistbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:18p, 6/29/25


Where does Musk get his orders?
Reply Quote
1
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Anarchistbear • 2:23p, 6/29/25
Anarchistbear said:


Where does Musk get his orders?
His decision to go all-in on helping Trump and Republicans win has perhaps proven a faulty one for his business.
Reply Quote
2
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 3:10p, 6/29/25
sycasey said:

His decision to go all-in on helping Trump and Republicans win has perhaps proven a faulty one for his business.

How could he not see this coming?
Reply Quote
1
Anarchistbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:11p, 6/29/25
Musk likes free government s$it. I don't believe anything he says
Reply Quote
1
bear2034
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Anarchistbear • 4:21p, 6/29/25
Anarchistbear said:
Where does Musk get his orders?

Only a couple of months ago, the libs were upset Musk was the one running the country.
Reply Quote
3
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bear2034 • 4:49p, 6/29/25
bear2034 said:
Anarchistbear said:
Where does Musk get his orders?

Only a couple of months ago, the libs were upset Musk was the one running the country.

Yes, and you all were breathlessly defending his every move. And now?
Reply Quote
2
Anarchistbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bear2034 • 4:53p, 6/29/25
bear2034 said:
Anarchistbear said:
Where does Musk get his orders?

Only a couple of months ago, the libs were upset Musk was the one running the country.


China mole
Reply Quote
3
bear2034
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 5:14p, 6/29/25
sycasey said:
bear2034 said:
Anarchistbear said:
Where does Musk get his orders?
Only a couple of months ago, the libs were upset Musk was the one running the country.
Yes, and you all were breathlessly defending his every move. And now?


The MAGA movement is a large tent so not everyone is going to agree on everything. In the same way you saw friction during the Israel-Iran conflict, there will be friction in other areas such as the debate surrounding H-1B visas, open for everyone to see.

Reply Quote
3
bear2034
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Anarchistbear • 5:15p, 6/29/25
Anarchistbear said:
bear2034 said:
Anarchistbear said:
Where does Musk get his orders?
Only a couple of months ago, the libs were upset Musk was the one running the country.
China mole
That's what Steve Bannon thinks.
Reply Quote
2
Anarchistbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bear2034 • 5:49p, 6/29/25
bear2034 said:
Anarchistbear said:
bear2034 said:
Anarchistbear said:
Where does Musk get his orders?
Only a couple of months ago, the libs were upset Musk was the one running the country.
China mole
That's what Steve Bannon thinks.


Of course Manchurian Candidate sent here as a super capitalist but really undermining in with his electric bull.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bear2034 • 5:54p, 6/29/25
bear2034 said:
Anarchistbear said:
bear2034 said:
Anarchistbear said:
Where does Musk get his orders?
Only a couple of months ago, the libs were upset Musk was the one running the country.
China mole
That's what Steve Bannon thinks.

Right.
As Tesla gets absolutely HAMMERED by BYD and XIAOMI.

Tesla Faces Fresh Rival As New Xiaomi SUV Challenges Model Y in China - Business Insider
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bear2034 • 9:32p, 6/29/25
bear2034 said:
sycasey said:
bear2034 said:
Anarchistbear said:
Where does Musk get his orders?
Only a couple of months ago, the libs were upset Musk was the one running the country.
Yes, and you all were breathlessly defending his every move. And now?


The MAGA movement is a large tent so not everyone is going to agree on everything. In the same way you saw friction during the Israel-Iran conflict, there will be friction in other areas such as the debate surrounding H-1B visas, open for everyone to see.


Similarly, not everyone on the left agrees about everything. Glad we could clear that up!
Reply Quote
Eastern Oregon Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bear2034 • 10:17p, 6/29/25
bear2034 said:
sycasey said:
bear2034 said:
Anarchistbear said:
Where does Musk get his orders?
Only a couple of months ago, the libs were upset Musk was the one running the country.
Yes, and you all were breathlessly defending his every move. And now?
The MAGA movement is a large circus and not everyone is going to agree about the antics of the clowns in the center ring.
I fixed your post for you. No need to thank me.
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:29a, 6/30/25
Reply Quote
1
MinotStateBeav
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 10:37a, 6/30/25
USAID means United States Agency For International Development

It's a intelligence cutout that has nothing to do with saving children lol. Oh and the Washington Post is the mouthpiece for the CIA.
Reply Quote
2
2 edits
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MinotStateBeav • 10:46a, 6/30/25
MinotStateBeav said:
USAID means United States Agency For International Development

It's a intelligence cutout that has nothing to do with saving children lol. Oh and the Washington Post is the mouthpiece for the CIA.
So these funding cuts did not kill any of these children, is that what you're saying? All of that reporting is false?
Reply Quote
1
MinotStateBeav
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 10:50a, 6/30/25
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
USAID means United States Agency For International Development

It's a intelligence cutout that has nothing to do with saving children lol. Oh and the Washington Post is the mouthpiece for the CIA.
So these funding cuts did not kill any of these children, is that what you're saying? All of that reporting is false?
No the funding cuts didn't kill any children. That's actually ridiculous to say that. This is american taxpayer money that is suppose to be going to places that benefit the american people. The United States is not a charity. You know what is a charity? Churches. You know what American churches spent their charity money doing? Flooding the United States with immigrants from all over the world and profited off it. Go do some research on Catholic Charities of San Antonio and see what they spent their millions on.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MinotStateBeav • 10:54a, 6/30/25
MinotStateBeav said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
USAID means United States Agency For International Development

It's a intelligence cutout that has nothing to do with saving children lol. Oh and the Washington Post is the mouthpiece for the CIA.
So these funding cuts did not kill any of these children, is that what you're saying? All of that reporting is false?
No the funding cuts didn't kill any children. That's actually ridiculous to say that. This is american taxpayer money that is suppose to be going to places that benefit the american people. The United States is not a charity. You know what is a charity? Churches. You know what American churches spent their charity money doing? Flooding the United States with immigrants from all over the world and profited off it. Go do some research on Catholic Charities of San Antonio and see what they spent their millions on.
So if money was going to something (like food services for children) and then that money was cut off and the children didn't get the food, you would say that the funding cuts had nothing to do with the children starving?

Interesting perspective.
Reply Quote
2
MinotStateBeav
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 11:14a, 6/30/25
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
USAID means United States Agency For International Development

It's a intelligence cutout that has nothing to do with saving children lol. Oh and the Washington Post is the mouthpiece for the CIA.
So these funding cuts did not kill any of these children, is that what you're saying? All of that reporting is false?
No the funding cuts didn't kill any children. That's actually ridiculous to say that. This is american taxpayer money that is suppose to be going to places that benefit the american people. The United States is not a charity. You know what is a charity? Churches. You know what American churches spent their charity money doing? Flooding the United States with immigrants from all over the world and profited off it. Go do some research on Catholic Charities of San Antonio and see what they spent their millions on.
So if money was going to something (like food services for children) and then that money was cut off and the children didn't get the food, you would say that the funding cuts had nothing to do with the children starving?

Interesting perspective.
I would say the money should never have went to that in the first place which is why the entire USAID got cut out of the government. Hello, is anybody home there? The CIA was using it to fund rebel groups and horrible dictators .
Reply Quote
3
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MinotStateBeav • 11:18a, 6/30/25
MinotStateBeav said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
USAID means United States Agency For International Development

It's a intelligence cutout that has nothing to do with saving children lol. Oh and the Washington Post is the mouthpiece for the CIA.
So these funding cuts did not kill any of these children, is that what you're saying? All of that reporting is false?
No the funding cuts didn't kill any children. That's actually ridiculous to say that. This is american taxpayer money that is suppose to be going to places that benefit the american people. The United States is not a charity. You know what is a charity? Churches. You know what American churches spent their charity money doing? Flooding the United States with immigrants from all over the world and profited off it. Go do some research on Catholic Charities of San Antonio and see what they spent their millions on.
So if money was going to something (like food services for children) and then that money was cut off and the children didn't get the food, you would say that the funding cuts had nothing to do with the children starving?

Interesting perspective.
I would say the money should never have went to that in the first place which is why the entire USAID got cut out of the government. Hello, is anybody home there? The CIA was using it to fund rebel groups and horrible dictators .
So the money should never have been spent to save starving children because the CIA did other bad things. Okay.

EDIT: I just want to point out here that the argument went from "no the spending cuts did not kill the children" to "okay they kind of did but we shouldn't have been spending that money anyway," within the span of about 40 minutes. Remarkable. I await the next step which will surely be "it's good those kids died, actually."
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
bear2034
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:23a, 6/30/25
The CIA does a poor job of feeding malnourished kids.
Reply Quote
3
2 edits
Anarchistbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:52p, 6/30/25


Dip **** Manchurian Candidate agitprop
Reply Quote
1
bear2034
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:04p, 6/30/25
Reply Quote
2
oski003
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bear2034 • 8:13p, 6/30/25
bear2034 said:


Hopefully, there are Democrats out there willing to spend their own money to help the less fortunate.
Reply Quote
3
chazzed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 8:55p, 6/30/25
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
USAID means United States Agency For International Development

It's a intelligence cutout that has nothing to do with saving children lol. Oh and the Washington Post is the mouthpiece for the CIA.
So these funding cuts did not kill any of these children, is that what you're saying? All of that reporting is false?
No the funding cuts didn't kill any children. That's actually ridiculous to say that. This is american taxpayer money that is suppose to be going to places that benefit the american people. The United States is not a charity. You know what is a charity? Churches. You know what American churches spent their charity money doing? Flooding the United States with immigrants from all over the world and profited off it. Go do some research on Catholic Charities of San Antonio and see what they spent their millions on.
So if money was going to something (like food services for children) and then that money was cut off and the children didn't get the food, you would say that the funding cuts had nothing to do with the children starving?

Interesting perspective.
I would say the money should never have went to that in the first place which is why the entire USAID got cut out of the government. Hello, is anybody home there? The CIA was using it to fund rebel groups and horrible dictators .
So the money should never have been spent to save starving children because the CIA did other bad things. Okay.

EDIT: I just want to point out here that the argument went from "no the spending cuts did not kill the children" to "okay they kind of did but we shouldn't have been spending that money anyway," within the span of about 40 minutes. Remarkable. I await the next step which will surely be "it's good those kids died, actually."


It really is mind boggling. MAGA doesn't want anything to do with reality at this point. So, for them, moving the goalposts is easy peasy. Anyway, I just love his "hello, is anybody home there?" It is the cherry on top.
Reply Quote
sycasey
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to chazzed • 9:05p, 6/30/25
chazzed said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
USAID means United States Agency For International Development

It's a intelligence cutout that has nothing to do with saving children lol. Oh and the Washington Post is the mouthpiece for the CIA.
So these funding cuts did not kill any of these children, is that what you're saying? All of that reporting is false?
No the funding cuts didn't kill any children. That's actually ridiculous to say that. This is american taxpayer money that is suppose to be going to places that benefit the american people. The United States is not a charity. You know what is a charity? Churches. You know what American churches spent their charity money doing? Flooding the United States with immigrants from all over the world and profited off it. Go do some research on Catholic Charities of San Antonio and see what they spent their millions on.
So if money was going to something (like food services for children) and then that money was cut off and the children didn't get the food, you would say that the funding cuts had nothing to do with the children starving?

Interesting perspective.
I would say the money should never have went to that in the first place which is why the entire USAID got cut out of the government. Hello, is anybody home there? The CIA was using it to fund rebel groups and horrible dictators .
So the money should never have been spent to save starving children because the CIA did other bad things. Okay.

EDIT: I just want to point out here that the argument went from "no the spending cuts did not kill the children" to "okay they kind of did but we shouldn't have been spending that money anyway," within the span of about 40 minutes. Remarkable. I await the next step which will surely be "it's good those kids died, actually."


It really is mind boggling. MAGA doesn't want anything to do with reality at this point. So, for them, moving the goalposts is easy peasy. Anyway, I just love his "hello, is anybody home there?" It is the cherry on top.
And of course we have oski003 stupidly arguing above that Democrats should have scrambled a massive operation to immediately replace a thing the US government has been doing in multiple countries for years. I forgot, it's always the Democrats' fault!
Reply Quote
1
chazzed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 9:12p, 6/30/25
oski003 is up against the back wall of the MAGA closet.
Reply Quote
2
DiabloWags
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:17p, 6/30/25
You just cant fix stupid.
You really cant.
Reply Quote
oski003
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to sycasey • 9:30p, 6/30/25
sycasey said:
chazzed said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
sycasey said:
MinotStateBeav said:
USAID means United States Agency For International Development

It's a intelligence cutout that has nothing to do with saving children lol. Oh and the Washington Post is the mouthpiece for the CIA.
So these funding cuts did not kill any of these children, is that what you're saying? All of that reporting is false?
No the funding cuts didn't kill any children. That's actually ridiculous to say that. This is american taxpayer money that is suppose to be going to places that benefit the american people. The United States is not a charity. You know what is a charity? Churches. You know what American churches spent their charity money doing? Flooding the United States with immigrants from all over the world and profited off it. Go do some research on Catholic Charities of San Antonio and see what they spent their millions on.
So if money was going to something (like food services for children) and then that money was cut off and the children didn't get the food, you would say that the funding cuts had nothing to do with the children starving?

Interesting perspective.
I would say the money should never have went to that in the first place which is why the entire USAID got cut out of the government. Hello, is anybody home there? The CIA was using it to fund rebel groups and horrible dictators .
So the money should never have been spent to save starving children because the CIA did other bad things. Okay.

EDIT: I just want to point out here that the argument went from "no the spending cuts did not kill the children" to "okay they kind of did but we shouldn't have been spending that money anyway," within the span of about 40 minutes. Remarkable. I await the next step which will surely be "it's good those kids died, actually."


It really is mind boggling. MAGA doesn't want anything to do with reality at this point. So, for them, moving the goalposts is easy peasy. Anyway, I just love his "hello, is anybody home there?" It is the cherry on top.
And of course we have oski003 stupidly arguing above that Democrats should have scrambled a massive operation to immediately replace a thing the US government has been doing in multiple countries for years. I forgot, it's always the Democrats' fault!


No, I am arguing that this aid generally shouldn't come from U.S. taxpayers. If it does, it should be out in the open, instead of funneled by a secretive organization. I'd be much more comfortable if they spearheaded donor initiatives to help impoverished Africans.

IRC is a good charity for those who want to help.

https://help.rescue.org/donate/evergreen-crisis-ME?ms=gs_ppc_fy25_gaza_mmus_apr&initialms=gs_ppc_fy25_gaza_mmus_apr&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=16774902889&gbraid=0AAAAADqhbzO-ibzSqhhJ7j14CtPt8AfFK&gclid=Cj0KCQjw64jDBhDXARIsABkk8J5m1WRvaIo54XL8Zkq9N2k2DvK8bcr8lDrmFRNKcFcFhifCg7qyBqoaAhTyEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds
Reply Quote
3
oski003
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DiabloWags • 9:30p, 6/30/25
DiabloWags said:
You just cant fix stupid.
You really cant.


You get bored when I ignore you and complain to the mods when I respond to you. You are pathetic.
Reply Quote
3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.