I have mixed feelings on Musk. There's been a lot written about Jobs and Gates, but ultimately Musk will blow them away in terms of impact on civilization.

On the one hand, he's brilliant and bold.
On the other hand, because he has Asperger's (his own claim) he lacks the human quality of empathy, and this makes him a reckless threat. Not that anyone lacking empathy is reckless, but when you are very bold and the richest man in the world AND you seek to change the world, could be.

That said…

It's absolutely true that government's budget is out of control, and Congress has a decades long track record of inability to reign in deficit spending. (If a congressman cuts, it's used against him in the next election, and stupid voters punish fiscal responsibility.)

Musk doesn't need voters, so he can recommend whatever. And this could be good to great!

However!


GDP = C + I + G + (X - M)
where
C = Consumption
I = Investment
G = Govt Spending
X-M = Net Exports, a negative # for USA


Now, historically, G is 20% of our GDP. Currently, 24% (per ChatGPT).

IF Musk and Trump reign in G, GDP will suffer, and the economy will stall. And the R's will collectively get voted out.



Will they actually do that? Are the complaints a "show" of Anger (and just look at Elon there, acting the part, almost laughing at the crowd of emotional morons).

Or will they simply wipe out their opponent's projects, use the budget as a weapon, while rewarding their own and their friends' projects?

I'm guessing the latter.

Musk will be Machiavellian - he detests Trump. But he has aligned himself with him in order to achieve his own goals.

I'm betting the deficit spending continues, that Musk gets SpaceX and Tesla contracts galore.

And Trump doesn't care either way. So long as he sits in the King chair and gets to pick on his enemies while being fawned over by others.

I'm curious if the energy efficiency 30% tax credit, passed in Biden's IRA (Inflation Reduction Act, stupidly named) bill, will survive.

On the one hand, Trump is backed by the hydrocarbon economy. The IRA bill is their enemy, as a transition to cleaner tech threatens their revenue.

On the other,
Musk has argued that we are "running the dumbest experiment in history" by relying on fossil fuels and emitting carbon into the atmosphere. He supports the scientific consensus that human activity, particularly burning hydrocarbons, is driving climate change.

Musk advocates for electrification as a solution to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. Tesla's mission, "to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy," reflects this vision.

Where will the Trump Administration land on this issue?


These are very SHORT clips:







Wouldn't it be interesting if Musk ended up completely changing the "drill baby drill" mindset of R voters to be "charge baby charge"?

Maybe Trump will simply want royalties for opening up to solar vast lands owned by the federal government in the sunny southwest.

You heard it here first.

Do you see what I see?

Overlap.
And an opportunity, for Musk to advance his mission. Again, Trump doesn't care, but he will take his cut somewhere in it all, and get to call himself a transformational President.



+



+



+


(BLM owns Thacker Pass, and the only thing slowing it down are a few dozen native tribespeople who will without doubt take cash.)

=



Coming to a BLM, Tesla operated, desert near you soon.

Energy sector is 5-6% of USA GDP.

Per Musk's vision, this could be spent more efficiently.

Massive transmission line upgrades ("Infrastructure Week"!) are needed.

Eisenhower brought you the federal Highway system?
Trump can bring you a National Grid.

Interesting discussion.

See what Musk did at X. He's too prominent to take the gig and not have something come of it.

Congress allocates funds and directs it to be spent in particular ways. The agencies are part of the Exec branch. What happens to the allocated money if the Pres eliminates the recipient of funds?

Remember that the party in control of all 3 branches can do 3 Reconciliation bills per year - one each for 3 purposes (spending, revenue and something else). So Repubs get one bite at the apple to do this on their own. Trying to align the spending bill to the Musk activities seems like an impossible task.

Musk's proposal to cut $2 Trillion is laughable. Roughly 30% of annual govt. spending. Good luck with that.

Moreover, his commission has no teeth. Only Congress can make such changes.

DiabloWags said:

---

Only Congress can make such changes.

---

Serious question: is this correct? The agencies are executive branch.

DiabloWags said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Only Congress can make such changes.

---

Serious question: is this correct? The agencies are executive branch.

---

First off, this Commission is NOT part of the Executive Branch. It's OUTSIDE of the Govt.

Congress has the purse strings.
Always has.
Always will.

The Executive Branch simply makes a budget proposal.

Basic high school U.S. Govt. class.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/16/us/politics/dept-government-efficiency-explainer.html

---

Loose language by me…
There are 15 Executive Agencies which are part the Exec branch
There are @50 Independent Commissions.

My Q is valid for the Agencies and invalid for the commissions.


Edit:
The Pres may be able to remove Commission heads for Inefficiency, Neglect of Duty and Malfeasance.

What's the mission statement for DOGE again?

I Repeat...

Musk can only make Recommendations.

Congress is in charge of the purse strings and doesnt have to follow anything he says. There is NO LEGAL MANDATE.

Anarchistbear said:

---

This is a joke. There is no Department of Efficiency. Only Comgress can create and find such a department and it is unlikely to be created or led by someone who gets billions in federal subsidies ( Musk)

This is Trump handing Musk something he will fail at and getting rid of him

---

Its more like a Presidential commission. Your (and this) point goes to my post above - what are the nuts and bolts for how any DOGE recommendations are executed? If Congressional action is needed thus is DOA because D's and RINOs wont help

tequila4kapp said:

---

What's the mission statement for DOGE again?

---

1. To find areas of rage. "Can you believe such-and-such allows for transgender surgeries", or "such-and-such has been paying $10,000 for a hammer".

2. To create a smokescreen.

3. To redirect funds towards areas of interest for Trump insiders. You'll hardly ever know about these, because they will be buried in spending bills.

My entire Musk Green Infrastructure is speculation. But I'm pretty confident of the above 3.

DiabloWags said:

---

Musk's proposal to cut $2 Trillion is laughable. Roughly 30% of annual govt. spending. Good luck with that.

Moreover, his commission has no teeth. Only Congress can make such changes.

---

I totally agree.

Regarding teeth - call it an Office of Propaganda. And conveniently, Musk has Twitter.

Anarchistbear said:

---

This is a joke. There is no Department of Efficiency. Only Congress can create and fund such a department and it is unlikely to be created or led by someone who gets billions in federal subsidies ( Musk)

This is Trump handing Musk something he will fail at and getting rid of him

---

I don't think so at all.
I think they are going to USE EACHOTHER like two horny 20 year olds on drugs at a Grateful Dead concert.


#night moves

We'll see just how much Trump owns Congress. But it's looking like 1933 all over again, so, yeah... it's happening.

Right.
But they will USE it to ENRAGE the population.

I predict Musk gets annoyed at his lack of authority to do anything, Trump's stupidity, and the way that politics work (consensus versus top down governance) versus being an CEO and disappears from Trump's orbit within two years.

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

This is a joke. There is no Department of Efficiency. Only Congress can create and fund such a department and it is unlikely to be created or led by someone who gets billions in federal subsidies ( Musk)

This is Trump handing Musk something he will fail at and getting rid of him

---

I don't think so at all.
I think they are going to USE EACHOTHER like two horny 20 year olds on drugs at a Grateful Dead concert.


#night moves

We'll see just how much Trump owns Congress. But it's looking like 1933 all over again, so, yeah... it's happening.

---

Musk want to be at the seat of power, benefit himself and add " government genius" to his self inflated ego. But he and his sidekick have no idea how government works- none. They will be beaten by the thousand cuts of bureaucrats

Trump cares about the border, immigration, tariffs. He doesn't care about wonky parts of government like budgets. He also doesn't want anyone stealing his spotlight. Musk and he will part sooner not later and it will be on Trump's terms. Musk also needs Trump to put tariffs on Chinese EVs

1933? No, Trump is not like Roosevelt

dimitrig said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

The $2 trillion expense cut is pure FANTASY.

---

But increased spending isn't.

---

If you think Trump is going to cut spending, you weren't paying attention during his first term.

---

Most Trump supporters voted for him to fix the things he didn't do the first time in office like the border.

What makes them think he will get them done this time?

---

The same reason why you're hating Trump's cabinet picks.

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

The $2 trillion expense cut is pure FANTASY.

---

But increased spending isn't.

---

If you think Trump is going to cut spending, you weren't paying attention during his first term.

---

The above is exactly correct. Trump has shown no willingness to cut spending.

That being said, can he slow the growth of spending?

And those saying that only congress can appropriate/cut are correct. But I think that ignores one important fact. The executive branch has some discretion as to when funds are actually spent and the overall operation of government. I believe, for example, Trump could simply announce a hiring freeze and let the government shrink by natural attrition. Or he could announce nothing and just let that happen.

And there are lots of complicated laws. For example, Biden announced he was slowing (and threatened to suspend) congressionally approved arms transfers to Israel. Those were approved/appropriated by Congress, but there were other laws that arguably applied to permit this. So often, where there's a will, there's a way. The problem is there is likely no will.

dimitrig said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

The $2 trillion expense cut is pure FANTASY.

---

But increased spending isn't.

---

If you think Trump is going to cut spending, you weren't paying attention during his first term.

---

Most Trump supporters voted for him to fix the things he didn't do the first time in office like the border.

What makes them think he will get them done this time?

---

The same reason why you're hating Trump's cabinet picks.

---

Trump is incompetent?

---

The libs think he's incompetent and Hitler at the same time.

dimitrig said:

---

I predict Musk gets annoyed at his lack of authority to do anything, Trump's stupidity, and the way that politics work (consensus versus top down governance) versus being an CEO and disappears from Trump's orbit within two years.

---

Could be.
It's certainly a fascinating development to watch play out. World's richest man tries to engineer society - that's more daunting than catching a falling rocket with chopsticks. Not just because he must navigate the masses, but the world's biggest narcissist along the way.

Anarchistbear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

This is a joke. There is no Department of Efficiency. Only Congress can create and fund such a department and it is unlikely to be created or led by someone who gets billions in federal subsidies ( Musk)

This is Trump handing Musk something he will fail at and getting rid of him

---

I don't think so at all.
I think they are going to USE EACHOTHER like two horny 20 year olds on drugs at a Grateful Dead concert.


#night moves

We'll see just how much Trump owns Congress. But it's looking like 1933 all over again, so, yeah... it's happening.

---

1933? No, Trump is not like Roosevelt

---

Ha. Weak jest. You know damn well what I was referring to.

Anarchistbear said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

This is a joke. There is no Department of Efficiency. Only Congress can create and fund such a department and it is unlikely to be created or led by someone who gets billions in federal subsidies ( Musk)

This is Trump handing Musk something he will fail at and getting rid of him

---

I don't think so at all.
I think they are going to USE EACHOTHER like two horny 20 year olds on drugs at a Grateful Dead concert.


#night moves

We'll see just how much Trump owns Congress. But it's looking like 1933 all over again, so, yeah... it's happening.

---

Musk want to be at the seat of power, benefit himself and add " government genius" to his self inflated ego. But he and his sidekick have no idea how government works- none. They will be beaten by the thousand cuts of bureaucrats

Trump cares about the border, immigration, tariffs. He doesn't care about wonky parts of government like budgets. He also doesn't want anyone stealing his spotlight. Musk and he will part sooner not later and it will be on Trump's terms. Musk also needs Trump to put tariffs on Chinese EVs

---

As I was alluding to, Trump could actually take significant political credit for building out the Transmission Lines and getting western sunshine and midwestern wind electricity to population centers, and excess winter Mississippi waters (seasonally) west (or via vast expansion of desalination plants).

Trump wants the acclaim.
Musks wants the solutions.
And they both can become fabulously rich.

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

bear2034 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

The $2 trillion expense cut is pure FANTASY.

---

But increased spending isn't.

---

If you think Trump is going to cut spending, you weren't paying attention during his first term.

---

I think he was saying trump will increase spending.