Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Could DOGE cut $2T? The legal and practical reality of government reform

thedispatch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 76 posts

Re: Could DOGE cut $2T? The legal and practical reality of government reform

#31

Post by MichaelZuo »

alephnerd wrote: post #28
MichaelZuo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congress can’t force anyone, not even the lowliest office clerk, to actually spend money though… the appropriated money can just sit in various accounts. (Well they can try to compel expenditures, but that would likely never withstand court scrutiny) The real question is how the incoming administration plans on effecting such a desire on such a huge number of people.

The people hired to hire those people need to be confirmed by Congress as well. The US system has been designed this way for over a century after the spoils system became unpopular. Also, I've bumped into you multiple times on this forum talking about governance, and while I appreciate the zeal PLEASE read an introductory book on Civics - you seem to have a cursory understanding of how governments are designed. I'd r…

> Also, I've bumped into you multiple times on this forum talking about governance, and while I appreciate the zeal PLEASE read an introductory book on Civics - you seem to have a cursory understanding of how governments are designed. I'd recommend the AP Gov curriculum for the US.

Who are you to decide for other HN users what they know or don’t know?

And why do your opinions even matter in determining what other HN users know about ‘governance’ or ‘how governments are designed’?

Re: Could DOGE cut $2T? The legal and practical reality of government reform

#33

Post by alephnerd »

MichaelZuo wrote: post #31
alephnerd wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people hired to hire those people need to be confirmed by Congress as well. The US system has been designed this way for over a century after the spoils system became unpopular. Also, I've bumped into you multiple times on this forum talking about governance, and while I appreciate the zeal PLEASE read an introductory book on Civics - you seem to have a cursory understanding of how governments are designed. I'd r…

> Also, I've bumped into you multiple times on this forum talking about governance, and while I appreciate the zeal PLEASE read an introductory book on Civics - you seem to have a cursory understanding of how governments are designed. I'd recommend the AP Gov curriculum for the US. Who are you to decide for other HN users what they know or don’t know? And why do your opinions even matter in determining what other HN…

> And why do your opinions even matter

My opinions don't matter, but the fact that you make very basic mistakes around how checks and balances work, as well as how institutions are run in the US seems to show this lack of elementary understanding of civics.

If you just want to kvetch, so be it.

But if you want to have an actual serious discussion about these topics, actually understand these intricacies.

Re: Could DOGE cut $2T? The legal and practical reality of government reform

#34

Post by motohagiography »

removing collective bargaining would be a fair and gradual upstream strategy the public sector would adapt to and reform itself around.

after spending over a decade consulting in the public sector, I concluded public servants of any kind should not have collective bargaining. it's capture and it creates the perverse incentives at the root of most complaints about it, with existential consequences for the whole society. in several countries, entire agencies get created to get around having to hire unionized staff in existing agencies, and they're just 19th century cartels that aren't fit for purpose.

it's the fairest and most wise path.

Re: Could DOGE cut $2T? The legal and practical reality of government reform

#36

Post by MichaelZuo »

alephnerd wrote: post #33
MichaelZuo wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, I've bumped into you multiple times on this forum talking about governance, and while I appreciate the zeal PLEASE read an introductory book on Civics - you seem to have a cursory understanding of how governments are designed. I'd recommend the AP Gov curriculum for the US. Who are you to decide for other HN users what they know or don’t know? And why do your opinions even matter in determining what other HN…

> And why do your opinions even matter My opinions don't matter, but the fact that you make very basic mistakes around how checks and balances work, as well as how institutions are run in the US seems to show this lack of elementary understanding of civics. If you just want to kvetch, so be it. But if you want to have an actual serious discussion about these topics, actually understand these intricacies.

> My opinions don't matter,…

It doesn’t make sense to continue writing the same opinions after self declaring those opinions don’t matter…?

Declaring your opinions are ‘facts’ in an HN reply, doesn’t magically transform or transmute them into bonafide facts…

So this seems about as coherent as random LLM output.

Edit: And I can also declare the above to be a ‘fact’… and it will carry the same weight too.

Re: Could DOGE cut $2T? The legal and practical reality of government reform

#37

Post by BriggyDwiggs42 »

motohagiography wrote: post #34

removing collective bargaining would be a fair and gradual upstream strategy the public sector would adapt to and reform itself around. after spending over a decade consulting in the public sector, I concluded public servants of any kind should not have collective bargaining. it's capture and it creates the perverse incentives at the root of most complaints about it, with existential consequences for the whole societ…

If employees, even of the government, want to get together to push for a change in their workplace, what right do we have to prevent that?

Re: Could DOGE cut $2T? The legal and practical reality of government reform

#38

Post by BriggyDwiggs42 »

travisporter wrote: post #21

I gotta say I appreciate the enthusiasm of this venture. It’s great to be excited about more efficiency. But I’m really anxious about whether it will be done without screwing over poor people, raising technical debt, or sacrificing long term infrastructure.

I don’t think any of the major players involved have any reason not to do those things is the issue.

Re: Could DOGE cut $2T? The legal and practical reality of government reform

#39

Post by calderwoodra »

> What DOGE should tackle is fraud, which is a known problem.

You know how you stop/reduce fraud? More regulation, the exact thing these folks want to avoid.

Some fraud is good, it enables processes to be efficient, so I doubt DOGE will tackle this.

Re: Could DOGE cut $2T? The legal and practical reality of government reform

#40

Post by archagon »

motohagiography wrote: post #34

removing collective bargaining would be a fair and gradual upstream strategy the public sector would adapt to and reform itself around. after spending over a decade consulting in the public sector, I concluded public servants of any kind should not have collective bargaining. it's capture and it creates the perverse incentives at the root of most complaints about it, with existential consequences for the whole societ…

Do you want a general strike?
Post reply on HN