> BTW, I keep reading and hearing derogative terms like "script kiddies" and "20 year olds". What's happened to diversity and inclusion? So, they have to be of a certain age? What's the magical age? And, do they have to come from the same place that created the problems as well? This isn't sensible at all.
I don't support DOGE, but I have also wondered if all the roasting them for being young is fair. For now I landed on yes, it's a fair criticism -- these people are too young to be put in control of massive agencies that have been running for decades. If you believe they can make the right choice because it's so obvious, it seems like we may as well just fire everyone, and then we can save the time and expense of even having DOGE. It is not logical IMO to say that some discretion is needed but also unelected 20-year-olds have enough discretion.
Re "script kiddies": the term is a bit rude maybe. But given it means an unskilled programmer who is only barely able to use programs written by others, then yes, it is fair to criticize these DOGE people, whose primary qualification was supposedly being really smart programmers, if they don't appear to meet the mark. (I'm not taking a position on whether it's factual that they are unskilled, but simply whether a "script kiddie" belongs at a helm of the government.)
Regarding DEI, it does seem like DOGE might be more diverse than some people portray it, and not everyone is a 20-year-old. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/02/27/us/politics/d...
Regarding what's the right age, I think of Constitutional age limits and Congressional confirmations -- those are the ways we normally have to make sure people are old enough to work in the government. But the side that's been harping about "unelected bureaucrats" is now making the most powerful bureaucrats ever, not subject to election, legal qualifications, or Congressional oversight. Hmm.
> do they have to come from the same place that created the problems as well? This isn't sensible at all.
Well, no, but I have the impression the place they are coming from is "likes right-wing tech leaders like Elon Musk and has worked for them before." I'm not going to dig into investigating or presenting that now, but if it's true, then it's not sensible either. Even under a more charitable characterization of who they are, I don't think engineers, PMs, or MBAs are going to rapidly fix agencies that have been operating in a different sphere and scale. If they went at a more careful pace than DOGE has been doing, I might have more trust they would solve problems.