Live data from Hacker News

GSA Eliminates 18F

nextgov.com

341–350 of 495 posts

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#341

This is a good program that should be retained. But theres a nagging thing bothering me about the whole dynamic going on with DOGE critics. You get mad at the waste this represents, the unfairness. Ask your average middle class worker how they feel about the taxes taken out of their paycheck being wasted in the massive amount of waste fraud and abuse we all know happens in government. That is massively unfair. It one…

The average worker doesn’t appreciate all of the different things the government does, and we’ve had decades of polls showing that people wildly misunderstand where money is spent. For example, people think we spend a lot more on foreign aid than we actually do – and also think that we should spend more than we do:

https://www.usglc.org/blog/americans-vastly-overestimate-u-s...

I mention this because there’s another side of this: taxes have been cut massively over the last half century, but a lot of people have not internalized what that means and simply assume that most of the money is going to something they don’t like. Cutting expenditures in any meaningful way means cutting the military, and the big social programs like Medicaid, SNAP, etc. People talk like we’re spending trillions on foreign and buying Reagan’s welfare queens new Cybertrucks but it’s really coming down to whether we want to spend less on the military, deal with our world-leading medical costs, or have rich people pay taxes at the same rates they paid around the turn of the century. The DOGE cuts work out to a few dollars per person total, and that’s before you factor in the significant new costs those cuts have incurred. It’s like looking at your personal budget and saying that the place to cut is your monthly movie date while ignoring rent, food, and car payments.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the right thing to do would be to remove tax deduction at source from payroll. People will notice how much they are paying in taxes when they have to write a check every month to the government and start asking questions. For most people, taxes are more than the next 3 biggest expenses.

Are you sure the question wouldn’t be “why don’t they just take it out at payroll like they did before $RIGHT_WINGER did this, that would be more efficient and save everyone time like every other country in the world?”

If you want efficiency, then sure, remove them automatically and save everyone the time. But Americans, by and large, aren't into efficiency.

If you want people to visually see where their money goes and when taxes are increased, you do a better job breaking down where it goes when described on a paycheque. Think "$0.82 for military spending; $0.05 for road maintenance" instead of "Federal tax: $317.02"

If you want the people to misunderstand and hate the government, then you make the people do math every month with numbers that change throughout the year and have financial penalties for getting wrong.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#343
post #325
post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But 18f? They've been one of the most visible streamliners of government bureaucracy we've seen.

They want to make government bureaucracy less streamline, so they can point out how inefficient it is and therefore should be abolished (ignoring the fact that they sabotaged it).

Like they do with USPS. Yes, I agree.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't actually know who the bureaucrats are that they want to traumatize. Anyone calling a product manager, UX designer, or software developer at 18F a "bureaucrat" simply has no idea what they actually do. They are just demonizing the scapegoat du jour. Also among these so call "bureaucrats" are psychologists at the VA helping veterans with PTSD; search and rescue professionals working for forest service, park…

> They don't actually know who the bureaucrats are that they want to traumatize. Anyone calling a product manager, UX designer, or software developer at 18F a "bureaucrat" simply has no idea what they actually do. "Bureaucrat" is always a pejorative for a professional person who works in a bureaucracy. It doesn't mean anything.

> "bureaucrat" is a pejorative

> "bureaucrat" doesn't mean anything

These two sentences appear to be contradictory.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#345
post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The executive cannot just unilaterally shut down departments created by acts of congress. That's what makes it illegal.

18F was not created via act of Congress, as far as I have been able to tell. Do you see a source that shows otherwise?

18F was a business unit of the General Services Administration, which was created via 41 U.S.C. 251, the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949. The act transferred the function of the Federal Works Agency and the Treasury Bureau of Federal Supply to the GSA. The agency is directed and authorized to perform a variety of tasks, from real estate, to acquisition, to information technology and telecommunications.

31 USC 1535, The Economy Act, authorizes Federal agencies to purchase from each other in the interests of economy. Obvious application is that rather than have the Social Security Administration lease an office or build a building, they sublease or lease a facility owned by the GSA so Federal demand can be aggregated. 1 big lease is cheaper than 12 little ones.

In the case of 18F, having a consultive entity within the GSA maximizes the value of procurements made by GSA and other agencies. When congress appropriates money to say, the Department of Labor to perform a function, DOL may choose to engage 18F to deliver or assist, avoiding additional procurement and taking advantage of investments and capability already built.

Congress in 1949 recognized that basic concepts like shared services, aggregation and mission focus deliver value and promote efficient operations. The current regime's corrupt interest is obvious to anyone with a brain.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They claim that if the government could calculate taxes for you, then it would be too easy for the left to add new taxes that you wouldn't notice. The real kicker of course is that if you don't file your taxes, they actually do calculate your taxes for you, and send you a bill. It just includes the non-payment penalty and doesn't include donations.

> They claim that if the government could calculate taxes for you, then it would be too easy... to add new taxes that you wouldn't notice. As a non-American whose country break out the VAT into a separate line item, with the explicit intent to inform consumers how much tax they are paying, and who has shopped in countries where they roll it all into one, I can say that this 'claim' is absolutely what happens in pract…

Even in countries where price tags must include VAT/GST, the exact tax content is usually broken down as a line item on invoices and receipts. Best of both worlds.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#347
post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

who, exactly, is in control of independent agencies if Congress never corrects their power and the Executive isn't in charge? For example: the perennial fight over "net neutrality" was because Congress absconded their duty to write regulation and handed it off to the Executive to figure out in a vague way that allowed for flip flopping policies with the force of law every time the administration changed. You know wha…

The purple fringes of the congressional GOP would be crucified by their constituents if they were doing this shit, which is why it is sitting back and letting the executive do everything that the party always wanted, but couldn't, while they keep their hands free. The legislature could stop this, yes. But it won't, because he is carrying out the program the GOP always wished it could have done, but couldn't. Once thi…

It's way worse than that. The playbook is simple - "it's not us, it's Elon. Trump wants to make america great, Elon went too far. Us innocent legislators didn't see it coming!"

If the democrats grow a pair and shutdown the government by filibustering the budget, Trump will fire (or worse) Elon, scorched earth whatever is left and blame the democrats. They are all about the big lie -- they'll float the idea that Elon was secretly working with the democrats the whole time. If Trump is lucky, there will be an early hurricane or an earthquake in California and the devastation will be Chuck Schumer's fault. Long live the king.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#348
All of this lament is great, but if you don’t like this, please pick up the phone and call your reps. Every day.

Please. It’s an emergency. No one is coming to save us.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And given just how fucking fast a dedicated executive can destroy anything it doesn't like, there's literally nothing the Dems could have done to prevent this. It doesn't matter what laws they passed when they had control of government, when the current executive simply doesn't follow the law. Oh yes there is. It's just more radical than they were prepared to admit was necessary. It's things like ramming through th…

People suggest things like that as if the underlying problem is that Republicans often get into office with 46% of the vote and if they had to get 51% every time everything would be perfect, under the assumption that then they would never win. What do think would really happen in that case? They'd change their platform slightly in a way that allows them to get 5% more of the vote and then still get in half the time.…

The issues you mention are more or less valid, but I think you overestimate the extent to which those explain why Republicans get elected. Moreover, the problem isn't so much "Republicans get elected" as "bad stuff happens". That stuff happens in large part because Republicans get elected after talking about doing the things that you mention, and then instead passing tax breaks and "deregulation" that largely favors the wealthy. But they also get elected in large part because of the highly unequal and unrepresentative system that they perpetuate, including a media system built on feeding people falsehoods utterly disconnected reality (which is another reason ~half of voters voted for them).

It's true that to some extent both parties participate in propping up that system, but Republicans clearly do so far more. There are a lot of problems with the Democratic party as well, which is precisely why radical change is needed rather than just "pass some garden variety Democrat measures".

I agree that there are important changes to be made that Democrats are lamentably unwilling to engage with, but I'm not talking about a world where Republicans need 51%. For most of the Republicans of national prominence, we should consider ourselves as a failure as a nation if they can even get 5%.

Post reply on HN