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

GSA Eliminates 18F

nextgov.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 495 posts

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#481

Post by dekhn »

rayiner wrote: post #480
dekhn wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Folks, don't fall for rayiner's in-bad-faith comments. Best not to respond, they are trying to goad you into an argument.

I’m not making a “bad faith argument.” I’m trying to fight the widespread misinformation that there are “checks and balances” within the executive branch. Where is Community Notes when you need it?

You weren't even making an argument, just a comment. Standard tactic (you have been called out on this before) to write a short, goading comment with no content.

If you want, you can attempt to clarify why you're asking the person you're replying to if they know what checks and balances are. We can all ready social study books and read wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers_under_the...) and it seems unlikely the response to your question is going to differ much from the philosophy and practice described there.

Not sure where you got the "widespread misinformation about checks and balances in the executive branch", the C&B are across branches, nobody implied otherwise.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#482

Post by rayiner »

dekhn wrote: post #481
rayiner wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not making a “bad faith argument.” I’m trying to fight the widespread misinformation that there are “checks and balances” within the executive branch. Where is Community Notes when you need it?

You weren't even making an argument, just a comment. Standard tactic (you have been called out on this before) to write a short, goading comment with no content. If you want, you can attempt to clarify why you're asking the person you're replying to if they know what checks and balances are. We can all ready social study books and read wikipedia ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers_under_the... ) and…

This is an article about laying off a group (18F), that was never established by Congress in the first place. So I think if someone invokes checks and balances here, it’s fair to enquire what they think checks and balances are.

Saying “hey, don’t you know what checks and balances are” seems ruder.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#483

Post by johnnyanmac »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #353
hayst4ck wrote: post #238

Everyone should watch the director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, speak on government workers: We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want their funding to be shut down so that the EPA can’t do all of the rules against our energy industry because the…

Yes, I firmly believe that Trump was elected to punish the current political class in the US for failing to serve the interests of his voter base (largely working class men). The whole election and his sad little mandate is about tearing down the permanent bureaucracy in the executive branch, not about fixing anything or really even changing any systems.

And those working class men will suffer the most for the consequences of their actions. cutting off a nose to spite their face.

The silver lining is that it's not too late for those people to get some upcoming elections to swing and push to a congress that will kick out Trump before it's too late.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#484

Post by johnnyanmac »

khazhoux wrote: post #310
Modified3019 wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“The cruelty is the point”

Incorrect. Their goal is to dissolve these agencies, to reduce regulation that burden certain industries.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/10/who-is-russe...

The cruelty is the point.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#485

Post by johnnyanmac »

mistrial9 wrote: post #441
refurb wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhhh is there a full clip because 18 seconds of what looks like a speech seems like cherry picking.

California here - completely agree that one-sided media clips are a universal occurrence in the modern US media; secondly, completely agree that full speeches, primary sources and thinking for yourself are first-order ingredients in forming real insights and opinions.

It's an unfortunate attempt to appeal to a generational shift. The youth are consuming more shortform content, and even older social media loves to dismiss proper longform content with TL;DR. Especially videos that set their own pace.

It may, again sadly, be the best of both worlds. The motivated ones will see a link in the description and start their research, the non-motivated ones (the majority) will accept or reject it right here.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#486

Post by johnnyanmac »

refurb wrote: post #362
acdha wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of context do you think would excuse that sentiment? Given his extensive public record, would you argue that this is somehow out of character for him? It seems rather consistent based on the rest of his career: https://www.economist.com/united-states/2025/01/03/russ-voug...

Why? Because I've seen Propublica cherry pick quotes before and taken them entirely out of context? The media has been lying to us for decades and no, I don't take them at their word, especially when they share a clip that removes all context.

in some extents you may have to. because unlike the Zelensky talk, these kinds of people operate the best in the shadows. They don't want the public to see "the full clip". That's where you have to trust some kind of journalist and check their report.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#487

Post by johnnyanmac »

nxobject wrote: post #410
jmathai wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The motivation behind DOGE didn't make sense to me until I also realized the money saved on government employees could be used to justify reducing taxes on corporations or the very wealthy. And the rhetoric that the reason the working class have lower quality of life now than 20 years ago being due to immigrants and the poor ... is a way to focus attention elsewhere instead of increasing taxes on the rich.

I’m not sure why the downvotes are here - tax breaks and rebates are likely going to be part of Republican spending outlines going forward, damn the deficit.

1. It's happening right now. House passed a budget cutting 900b from medicare to fund capital tax cuts.

2. That's been the republican spending outline for at least 60 years now. And it's no coincidence that our deficit tends to increase under republical administrations.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#488

Post by johnnyanmac »

jonstewart wrote: post #437
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The super rich don’t really pay taxes, No. They often pay FAR less than an average person as a percentage, often times paying nothing for a year. In total amounts - most of them are still paying millions in taxes per year - most of them end up paying tens if not hundreds of millions in taxes over their lifetimes.

Thank you for agreeing with me. I think everyone else on HN understands how percentages work.

You'd be surprised these days.

But we should not understate how much they fight for tax cuts. Deregulation is nice long term, but we're in "number go up" mode right now. Tax cuts would benefit them very quickly.

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#489

Post by johnnyanmac »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #100
xyst wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

No, absolutely wrong. Neoliberalism is about a big, functional government that is utopian and takes care of everything for you. "You own nothing, and you'll be happy." You can argue in practice it's terrible (subjective, no one really cares about your opinion). But it's hard to argue its GOAL is to be small.

>that is utopian

So, a useless definition? I'm sure dictators think they run a utopia.

But your defiinition runs counter to my research and readings. Neoliberalism often refers to this blend of liberal social policies but capitalistic-centric economic policies. Being small isn't inherent to neoliberalism.

>subjective, no one really cares about your opinion

>Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: GSA Eliminates 18F

#490

Post by johnnyanmac »

thelastgallon wrote: post #206
jedberg wrote: post #130

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.

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.

A shame because it's on your paystub. You can see exactly how many taxes are deducted on every W-2 paycheck.
Post reply on HN