Live data from Hacker News

DOGE's only public ledger is riddled with mistakes

nytimes.com

511–520 of 1001 posts

Re: DOGE's only public ledger is riddled with mistakes

#511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Scaling with GDP, rather than population, implies that government spending is scaling with the country's ability to provide services commensurate with prosperity.

Who said the problem is solely deficits? I don't think spending should just "scale" with anything and there is empirical evidence that that is a horrible way to run an economy. You are literally just suggesting we spend more no matter what. Obviously, there is a massive difference in types of spending right? And we have an incredible amount of bad spending. In fact, in places like public education and health, we cont…

"Bad spending", according to who?

Conservatively, 20% of the nation's wealth goes to the top 1%. The people who need it the least.

I can buy the argument that we could be more effective with spending, but not with the idea that we need less wealth transfer from rich to poor.

Re: DOGE's only public ledger is riddled with mistakes

#512
post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It scales linearly because the same ratio of services to people continues. There aren’t suddenly less kids to educate, less elderly that need health care or less cases in federal court as the population grows. —- As someone that has been in healthcare for 12 years it’s broken because of the corporate structure and administrative state of companies. The payors and providers share the same incentive to raise rates beca…

> It scales linearly because the same ratio of services to people continues That would be scaling with population, not GDP. > The payors and providers share the same incentive to raise rates because they each collect a percentage of premiums This must be an oversimplification. Why would insurers ever reject a claim, or spend time negotiating lower rates, if they're only incentivized to see health costs increase?

No, because the level of services and cost to provide them scales also.

Inflation. What paying workers costs. What is considered an “acceptable” level of poverty vs abject poverty as we get richer. New, expensive medical procedures. And as the world gets richer, defense gets more expensive.

We can’t pay 1930 salaries to workers, field a 1930s army, nor would we consider it humane for our elderly to end up with an impoverished 1930s standard of living with 1930s medical care.

Inflation is misleading for these purposes, too, because it includes hedonic adjustments. So a new better procedure or bigger apartment costing 40 pc more might only be 10 pc higher from an inflation point of view, even though you can’t really buy the old one.

Re: insurers— it is an oversimplification. Suffice it to say they are at scale where they have market power and thus don’t price where p=mc, and the regulatory pressures and price opacity push them even further away from efficiency. They are not completely insulated from costs or market pressures, but it’s fairly close.

Re: DOGE's only public ledger is riddled with mistakes

#514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The United States in an extreme outlier in terms of cost. This is separate from rationing care. This is separate from even population health (ex. higher obesity rates) Are you sure? People comparing US healthcare costs to European costs don't realize that these are two very different products. The US population is much more unhealthy, yet it has about the same life expectancy as an average European country. This wo…

That's the point of looking at global healthcare plans, which are giving two prices for the same person depending on whether they will or won't be in the US. And while they aren't giving the same service, there isn't much evidence the service is necessarily worse. More healthcare doesn't necessarily lead to better outcomes, it's not uncommon for more liberal treatment guidelines to only improve through statistical er…

I don't think your methodology of looking at global plans holds up, because on balance those are a self-selected crowd (a bias, likely toward healthier people) and if you note that the standard of care is different, the price is going to be different. These healthcare companies know what product they are selling well.

I think it's clear that there's significant waste in terms of advertising, haggling with each other, etc. that you don't get in a universal healthcare system. However, there is also waste in universal healthcare systems around the cost of the bureaucracy to manage the leviathan.

Re: DOGE's only public ledger is riddled with mistakes

#515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why should it scale linearly with GDP? It doesn't have to. But GDP is a good proxy for the tax base. If the problem is deficits and spending isn't increasing linearly with GDP, that suggests the problem is with taxation. Not spending.

spending doesn't take into account debt payments though, and those snowball.

> spending doesn't take into account debt payments

Spending is related to debt only inasmuch as it exceeds taxation.

Re: DOGE's only public ledger is riddled with mistakes

#516

Except, these are not mistakes. This is every single Musk's company modus operandi. Completely made up or inflated numbers, unrealistic timelines etc. Customers or investors buying into it, but if you look under the hood, outside of government subsides and contract, there is pretty much 0 money made from ALL of his businesses. He's just using the same playbook now, except when people will realize that the 5000$ DOGE…

> but if you look under the hood .. there is pretty much 0 money made from ALL of his businesses.

There are many valid criticisms of Musk. Saying that he has not added any real value in his ventures, or that he doesn't really know how to make money, just destroys your credibility.

Re: DOGE's only public ledger is riddled with mistakes

#517

Rule of law is what allows us to grow. Acemoglu won a nobel prize showing that institutions cause growth. Destroy institutions and you'll undershoot potential.

Pet peeve: there is no Nobel prize of economics, Alfred Nobel didn't include "economy" in his will. Instead there is a "Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences" whose purpose is to give credibility to the unscientific field of economics. The prize itself is mostly awarded to neoliberalists economists and does not often represent the majority views in the field.

> there is no Nobel prize of economics

It's commonly called the Nobel prize of economics. That it's not a classic Nobel prize is mostly finance jargon.

> prize itself is mostly awarded to neoliberalists economists

Source? The period in which neoliberal economics won the prize was when neoliberal economics was in vogue (and most successful and producing useful theories).

Re: DOGE's only public ledger is riddled with mistakes

#518
post #248

For those who want to have a substantive discussion on the federal budget and believe these cuts are justified, I have a few questions (putting aside questions of constitutionality for this thread): 1. There are claims that federal spending is out of control. How do you square that with the fact that spending as a percentage of GDP is only slightly elevated compared to the historical average going back to at least th…

A deeper issue is one I mentioned here on how contractors outnumber US government employees by more than 2-1, quoting experts in public administration: "Washington Monthly "Fire the Contractors": paradoxically add government employees to reduce costs" https://www.reddit.com/r/fednews/comments/1iq66qa/washington...

From the article: "Voters are right to want a less bloated and wasteful government. But Elon Musk’s plan will fail because the most inefficient parts lie outside it."

And also: "That’s because Trump and his DOGE sidekicks both misunderstand the nature of the problem and risk undermining the government services that their base depends on. The primary source of government waste and inefficiency isn’t what they say it is: a bloated civil service insufficiently “loyal” to the president. Rather, as writers for this magazine ... have tried to explain, the problem is the opposite. Federal agencies have too few civil servants with the right expertise to manage the contractors who increasingly deliver the federal government’s services. The key to reducing waste and increasing efficiency is for the government to hire more high-quality government employees and shrink the number of contractors. And there’s even a huge opportunity here of bringing in the technology and people skills to remake government so it’s ready for the challenges of the future."

Why are there so many contractors? As the article explains: "There are two reasons why the number of federal workers has flatlined over the past six decades. Republicans have been distinctly unsuccessful in cutting federal programs—and often have been complicit in increasing them—but they’ve found that attacking federal employees is a useful proxy battle in the war for controlling government. Democrats have been too afraid of being labeled as apologists of big government to fight back very hard. As a result, the two parties have reached a quiet understanding. Government can grow, as long as it doesn’t grow its workforce. ... After decades of the “no more bureaucrats” political feedback loop, private contractors working for the federal government now outnumber federal employees by a factor of more than two to one, as estimated by the New York University professor of public service Paul C. Light. That’s right: There are more than twice as many contractors working for the federal government as there are federal employees. The result has been an endless parade of stories about cost overruns and policy snafus, which get blamed on Washington—and on incompetent federal bureaucrats. ..."

The solution? "What we ultimately need is a massive increase in the number of civil servants in the federal government— upward of one million more by 2035, according to the eminent political scientist and scholar of government John DiIulio. ...""

Re: DOGE's only public ledger is riddled with mistakes

#519
post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Number 3 can’t be overstated. Healthcare costs for the exact same care are 2x-3x what they are in Europe. Global health insurance plans usually come in two flavors: 1. Global coverage 2. Global coverage excluding United States (for half the monthly premium of the first plan) The United States in an extreme outlier in terms of cost. This is separate from rationing care. This is separate from even population health (ex…

> The United States in an extreme outlier in terms of cost. This is separate from rationing care. This is separate from even population health (ex. higher obesity rates) Are you sure? People comparing US healthcare costs to European costs don't realize that these are two very different products. The US population is much more unhealthy, yet it has about the same life expectancy as an average European country. This wo…

If US healthcare is optimizing for outcomes, it’s doing a poor job and maybe we should optimize for something else. Our outcomes based on relative rating does not justify the additional cost.

Re: DOGE's only public ledger is riddled with mistakes

#520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Fuck you, I got mine" mentality and short-termism has been festering for decades at many American institutions, such as for-profit companies. Openly selling the country short for personal benefit is just one small step after many hundreds of them to get where we are.

When have the corporations ever not had a short-termist "Fuck you, I got mine" mentality in America?

Ever heard of Bell Labs?
Post reply on HN