Live data from Hacker News

DOGE's only public ledger is riddled with mistakes

nytimes.com

761–770 of 1001 posts

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

#761

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we all agree that making the Gov more efficient is a good thing but this is about terrorizing federal employees for ideological reasons. There is no crisis to justify this. We do have a crisis in healthcare which is being ignored.

I am certainly not a supporter of this government, but I do find it unsettling to have massive amounts of ideologically fueled bureaucrats running the government. It goes both ways. The pendulum is now swinging in the other direction. I am losing hope that it will return to the middle one day.

What makes you think that "massive amounts of ideologically fueled bureaucrats" run the government?

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

#762
post #326
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…

1. US GDP estimated GDP in 2024 is $29 trillion. According to your first source, U.S. Federal Spending was 23% of GDP. If that were reduced to the 2014-2019 average of 20%, that would trim $870 billion from federal spending. That seems like good progress toward avoiding a potential debt crisis. 2. Reduce defense overall and make the process of getting money to the needy more efficient. 3. No comment. Healthcare is me…

> Taxes on corporations, like tariffs, are just passed onto consumers.

Perhaps, but that's not really how it works. The market price doesn't care how much it costs to make a particular good, it's just the market price. If you raise prices in order to pass on new costs, fewer people will buy your stuff.

Put another way, if consumers would tolerate higher prices, corporations would already be charging those higher prices.

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

#763
post #84

I think impartial observers have not spent time in actual government bureaucracy. Basically everything will seem like “they’re cutting something important!” Or “they’re stopping critical research!” because every government contract needs justification; so naturally they will all sound good. The data and accounting itself is such bad quality in all cases that it is impossible to be perfect at this; there are entire in…

> it’s insane watching everyone around me get gaslit into thinking the government is actually efficient. It's equally insane to me that people think the private sector is somehow efficient. The amount of resources used to feed profit alone are a huge waste.

Private is not 100% efficient but it is much more efficient because if you don't make a profit you no longer exist. A government program can't go broke. Government programs simply get money with zero effect on their budget or revenue if they execute poorly or well. That's why removing an 'optional' HR role like DEI that does not actual produce anything measurable is slow hanging fruit. You are reducing cost and the result will not actually effect the outcome. It's an unnecessary ideological add-on, not a function. It's like removing the training on how to use a coffee machine in an office that doesn't drink coffee.

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

#764

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And don't worry, the House is ready to extend and expand tax cuts to more than extinguish any potential "savings" - to the tune of over $3 trillion in extra deficit spending. But don't worry, they've planned for that- just increase the debt limit by $4 trillion to cover the difference! After all, now that the Democrats aren't in charge any longer, increasing the debt limit is no biggie - we'll just grow ourselves out…

Wait, I thought the GOP was the party of fiscal conservatism and reducing the deficit? Shouldn't they be reducing the debt ceiling rather than raising it?

GOP is not what it used to be

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

#766
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…

The core question is less about the cuts themselves and more about if we the people are getting what we're paying for. 1) It kinda doesn't matter if it was caused by the pandemic or not, what matters is it needs to be fixed. Cherry-picking "since the 1970s" keeps us in difficult times energy-wise which we've attempted to correct for with more spending. If you go further back, our current ratio is what it was during W…

> Corporations do not pay corporate tax, their customers and employees do

Corporations pay tax on their profits not, revenue. Employees have already been paid and customers have already bought before these taxes are levied. (The first bit is of course more complicated; for example, salaries paid for R&D don't always count as a deductible business expense.)

The market price is the market price. If corporations could raise prices further (even without new taxes) without losing customers, they would. If corporations end up being taxed more, raising prices in order to "pass on" those taxes will just cause them to lose customers, and end up with lower revenue (and likely profit too), perhaps even more than if they just sucked it up, paid their taxes, and left prices alone.

> If the argument is that tariffs are passed on to the customer, then corporate tax is definitely passed on to the customer and the employee

No, because they're not the same thing. Taxes, as I said, are applied only to profits. Tariffs are essentially in increase in COGS. They more or less require corporations to increase prices, with the expectation that sales will decrease. (They can also choose not to raise prices, and live with lower profits, if they have the margin to do so.) And this is the actual point of tariffs: to get people to buy less of that particular good, and presumably buy more of a similar locally-produced good. (The problem, of course, is when the locally-produced good already has a higher price, so everyone either has to pay more, or do without.)

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

#767
This "wall-of-receipt" data does not meet the standards of the government's data communication requirements. It is not transparent, inaccurate and many difficulties are added to make it available to the public.

Anyone thought of a petition to request and meet the standards?

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

#768
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…

An even deeper issue is the fact that Trump's and Musk's plan isn't to eliminate government waste, it's to privatize as much of government as possible in order to funnel money to their corporate cronies. And on top of that, eliminate much of the government's ability to make and enforce regulations, so those same corporate cronies can spend less on regulatory compliance.

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

#769
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…

1. Public debt 120% of GDP, higher than it has been since WWII [1] 2. I would support cuts in all of those categories. Pete Hegseth has ordered the DoD to begin budget cuts. [2] [1] https://www.capitalgroup.com/individual/insights/articles/us... [2] https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/19/pete-hegseth-orders...

As discussed in the reports above, these budget cuts are not for the sake of saving money, but for redirecting said money towards "border defense" and other priorities of the new administration

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

#770

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DOGE isn't really cutting things to fund others. Many of their cuts are going to be net revenue negative. Many will cost taxpayers more of their money. It's about gutting the civil service and staffing them with loyalists that will do what Trump or Musk want, despite what the law says. It's consolidation of power and corruption. Musk is also crippling many of the agencies that enforce regulations on his businesses.

The most obvious case is the CFPB, which returns roughly twice its cost to taxpayers. I would argue that's honestly very inefficient, I'd like to see the CFPB returning a multiple of its cost to taxpayers... but nonetheless it is obvious shutting it down will cost taxpayers more.

We only see what it's directly returning to customers, not the damage it prevents to happen in the first place by a) forcing companies to change their behaviour and b) possibly influencing legislation and policy making.
Post reply on HN