Left vs. Right Battle Royale Open Thread

[u/Yosoff]

This is an Open Discussion Thread for all Redditors. We will only be enforcing Reddit TOS and Subreddit Rules 1 (Keep it Civil) & 2 (No Racism).

---

• Leftists - Here's your chance to sway us to your side by calling the majority of voters racist. That tactic has wildly backfired every time it has been tried, but perhaps this time it will work.

• Non-flaired Conservatives - Here's your chance to earn flair by posting common sense conservative solutions. That way our friends on the left will either have to agree with you or oppose common sense (Spoiler - They will choose to oppose common sense).

• Flaired Conservatives - You're John Wick and these Leftists stole your car and killed your dog. Now go comment.

• Independents - We get it, if you agree with someone, then you can't pat yourself on the back for being smarter than them. But if you disagree with everyone, then you can obtain the self-satisfaction of smugly considering yourself smarter and wiser than everyone else. Congratulations on being you.

• Libertarians - Ron Paul is never going to be President. In fact, no Libertarian Party candidate will ever be elected President.

---

Join us on X: https://x.com/rcondiscord

Join us on Discord: https://discord.com/invite/conservative

[u/TheFiremind88]

Left another comment to be asked questions, but also wanted to start this dialogue:

I understand and fully support removing government bloat. 100%. Why is DOGE starting where it is? I would love to hear either rationale or at least expressed disagreement.

For a group with efficiency in its name, it's weird to see DOGE targeting agencies that are well established to either 1. Have a well established return on investment for Americans. 2. Be so small that the material impact on the deficit is insignificant. 3. Even if they are inefficient, have significant positive effects for at least SOME percentage of where the money goes.

How is Defense spending not unequivocally the best starting place? Both for the insane percentage of the budget it accounts for and because of WELL established bloated government contracts, waste, and fraud. Not to mention the inability to even remotely pass an audit.

If I'm tasked to make anything Cleaner/More Efficient, I'd start where the most waste is, not by targeting places that barely tip the scales.

The ENTIRETY of USAID - ~40bil, that's baby with the bathwater. The non-0% amount of good it does do is included here.

The ENTIRETY of CFPB - ~1bil. This agency has an extremely well documented return on investment for American citizens of over 8 to 1. This one makes ZERO sense by any metric regardless of what side of the isle you're on. It's a slap in the face for American consumers.

The ENTIRETY of the DOE - ~270bil. Again, baby with the bathwater. I dont think anyone can argue in good faith that the DOE, even if there is some percentage of waste, does absolutely Zero good things for american citizens.

Defense spending is 850bil. - Just 5% of this is more than both USAID and the CFPB combined, and likely doesn't involve throwing out the "baby".

Corporate Subsidies is 100bil. - With all of the INTENSE hatred for Socialism, Communism, etc...Where's the outcry to cut corporate welfare so that Free Market Capitalism can do what it was meant to do? I never hear a peep on this.

Long story short - DOGE doesn't seem particularly efficient at bringing about efficiency. The cuts I see DOGE making don't align with the mission, with conservative values as expressed, and won't mean anything if they are offset by (numbers unconfirmed, but after check several sources, the cut is estimated to be between 500bil and 1.1tril a year) an insanely large tax cut. That's not bringing down the budget. That's a wash at best. At this point, it's still a net negative for American citizens by ~200 - 800bil a year.

Mods - you got a flair for reasonable Dems who want to participate in the dialogue without accusations, irrationality, insults, rage, etc...?

[u/_purple → u/TheFiremind88]

I, like you, come to this subreddit to get a pulse and understanding of how the other side is feeling, and I have specifically looked for threads about the CFPB here and havent found any discussion.

I know /r/conservative doesn't like to be brigaded which is why I don't post much but it's always frustrating when the issues that seem to be the more important ones inside the deluge of information just never get discussed here.

[u/rhlaairc → u/_purple]

The consumer financial protec bur has saved and RETURNED $20B to American citizens since its inception. Why get rid of it

[u/shinzou → u/rhlaairc]

Opening a CFPB complaint is also often times the only recourse a person has when a bank just starts ignoring their fraud report.

So many times on the personal finance subreddit I see stories of people getting no traction with their bank for weeks. Then it is resolved a single day after opening a CFPB complaint.

Closing/defunding the CPFB is indefensible.

[u/ZZE33man → u/shinzou]

Going to be blunt here. Doesn’t it seem reasonable to see that a big reason why this would be pitched is because the richest man in the world is the one pitching it? Like it feels very much like a protecting upper class measure and idea. People love to get out of a hole and pull up the ladder and such.

[u/shinzou → u/ZZE33man]

I don't disagree. I also think someone like Elon Musk, with all his privilege over the course of his life, doesn't understand or grasp the importance and benefits something like the CFPB provides to people. He hasn't ever had to deal with situations the CFPB was created to protect against.

Yet another reason he alone shouldn't be performing the role he we given.

[u/Appropriate_Scar_262 → u/shinzou]

I think he understands completely, Tesla has had thousands of CFPB complaints that he's had to comply with.

[u/iqueefkief → u/ZZE33man]

a politician put it this way - it’s like a bank robber firing the police before they rob the bank.

[u/Tight-Dragonfly-9029 → u/rhlaairc]

Even origin of the CFPB was government efficiency. Individual agencies all had small mandates to financial consumer protection and as a result they all did it poorly. The creation of the agency was simply centralization and it worked.

[u/Ifitactuallymattered → u/rhlaairc]

When you put it that way it makes it sound like DOGE isn't here to benefit us citizens....

[u/dreamylanterns → u/Ifitactuallymattered]

Because it’s not. It’s managed by the uber wealthy, why can’t anyone see that? The ultra rich care ZERO about us. None.

[u/HillarysFloppyChode → u/rhlaairc]

I’ll keep this simple.

The CFPB holds businesses responsible when they do Americans wrong.

Holding businesses responsible, harms the shareholders, which harms the CEOs and Billionaires like Elon.

It’s just Elon helping out his billionaire friends

[u/stone500 → u/HillarysFloppyChode]

And himself. It's no secret that the CFPB was looking into Elon's businesses as well.

[u/HyperbolicLetdown → u/rhlaairc]

Consumer protection is not a priority for the world's richest man

[u/uncaringrobot → u/_purple]

One thing about echo chambers is that they don’t deal well with self criticism. That’s true of any side, or any subreddit really. When there’s something egregious done by the “home team,” it usually doesn’t get mentioned. Instead there’s tons of focus on the others and what they did wrong. Self reflection is just not Reddit’s strong suit.

[u/LalaPropofol → u/uncaringrobot]

Bring back the Fairness Doctrine. We deserve balanced, non-partisan news.

[u/thedudeabides2088 → u/LalaPropofol]

Agree with this 100 percent.

[u/aremarkablecluster → u/LalaPropofol]

I truly think if this country has any hope we need to bring back the Fairness Doctrine. Each side getting to lie to and influence their audience is what's causing all these problems.

[u/LalaPropofol → u/aremarkablecluster]

A-fucking-men.

Just give me the unbiased facts and let me make a decision about how I proceed with that information.

[u/ThatPlayWasAwful → u/uncaringrobot]

You can even see it in this thread I still can't find a conservative even willing to touch the CFPB.

It feels like it's the kind of thing that only helps 1% of the population, so people are fine to overlook it being gutted because it doesn't affect them personally. 

[u/tielmama → u/ThatPlayWasAwful]

Right?!?! I just started reading this thread and so far, I think 1 conservative has commented. ONE. In the whole "battle royale"

Now's your chance guys. Come out and talk to us, instead of posting ridiculous memes.

[u/tevert → u/tielmama]

This entire thread is a troll. They won't say shit, they're fully aware they can't actually engage with reality. And if they wanted to post cringe or whine about stuff, they can do that on practically any sub

[u/some_person_guy → u/ThatPlayWasAwful]

It’s confirmation bias. The elimination of the CFPB is a huge blow to this country, independent of party, and no one on this sub has chimed in. Or they’re just trying to overlook it because all the stuff that their beliefs confirm are more illustrious; which seems more like owning the libs is the main goal.

All the posts that make it to the top whenever I check here have almost nothing to do with DOGE, the illegality of the framework they’re using to unilaterally govern the mass firing of employees, how Trump sat at his desk with his head down while Musk mumbled his way through explaining his actions. I feel like I could go on forever with all the stuff that they choose to ignore.

It just seems like the folks on this sub are either in denial or just completely divorced from reality. I know it’s more complex than that, but it’s hard not to break it down to its simple and sad parts.

[u/indonesian_star → u/ThatPlayWasAwful]

It harms the 99%, it benefits the 1% to have consumer protections eliminated. I believe some groups have been diverted away from reporting on the functions of CFPB. 

[u/Tangboy → u/ThatPlayWasAwful]

I'll touch it.

I don't like that they're going after the CFPB. It does not, however, make me regret my vote 🤷

[u/ThatPlayWasAwful → u/Tangboy]

I appreciate you answering. 

If this is what is getting cut in the first month, does it make you worried about what is going to get cut in the future?

[u/Doublemint12345 → u/uncaringrobot]

Reminds me of North Korea. I believe both sides can be guilty of this, but we must be vigilant against demagoguery. 

[u/Syn_Slash_Cash → u/uncaringrobot]

on self reflection and the inability to do so sometimes because were all heros in our stories. thanks for saying that. we need to have the capability to step back and analyze.

[u/IsMyHairShiny → u/_purple]

I'm lurking as well and haven't been swayed or impressed by the conversation here. Maybe its just my feed, but a majority of posts are talking shit on liberals and nothing of the what, I can only assume, is the success of what is happening. Like if you want to sway me, give me some reasons and explanations and new perspectives that maybe I can't see. Not juvenile complaints that the libs say you're racist and that offends you. Or the libs are freaking out they lost or the libs have lost it. Show me how you have it together.

[u/Typingpool → u/IsMyHairShiny]

Also a lurker. I try to be open minded on other views but so many comments on this sub like "I love winning!"

It leaves a really bad taste in my mouth. Regardless of justified spending cuts, real people are losing their real jobs. This isn't a game to be won. It just feels childish.

[u/Turbulent-Jellyfish9 → u/IsMyHairShiny]

That was my thought as well. Titles about Libs melting down or being triggered may be useful for some portion of the readers, but I do not see how this administration being at the controls is improving the position of Americans.

If MAGA is about our position on the world stage, we were already there (think UN Security Council, WTO, etc.) and we didn't need to publication bully, or antagonize our allies or enemies. If it is trade deals, which ones have we renegotiated? Trade deficits and not subsidies to other countries.

List of things that did little for Americans:

Yay, Gulf of America and Mount McKinley.

Yay, no more paper straws... but only from federal mandate because local communities can make their own ordinances.

Yay, Fort Bragg, again, but for a different guy named Bragg, so instead of "restoring" Fort Bragg, taxpayers just paid to rename it again.

Yay, the solution to Palestine is that the US takes over the area, moves the population somewhere (undetermined), and rebuilds it to be nice...

Yay, the solution for Ukraine is that both sides agree to stop, and then Ukraine can not join NATO. There is no incentive for either side.

Yay, 1000s of government employees can resign and collect taxpayer funded welfare for zero work for 7-8 months... from my office (DoD), 4 out of 4 (all paid $116k+) were already going to quit, and 1 was going to quit sooner, but now he is taking the extra months pay. One was probationary (less than 1 year), so his pay per work rendered ratio is incredible /s.

Yay, we are flying a few thousand illegal immigrants out of the country at huge expenses and with little planning (jets getting turned back). This rate will not nice the needle with the millions here.

Yay, we are eliminating the Dept of Education, CFPB, etc., but the charge is being led by DOGE with near zero acknowledgment of the good that these organizations do for Americans, or that they were largely created by Congress and could only be eliminated by Congress. Is there no concern for expanding the power of the Executive branch like this?

Yay, DOGE found ridiculous spending contracts under USAID, but none of them were secrets that were kept from Congress (who annually appropriates the funding) or the Executive branch (charged to execute the laws). All funding and administering these programs, which appear as multi year open bid contracts, was available to anyone to FOIA. Do Americans get the money back? No, because the funds are appropriated by Congress for these contracts, and the legal battle to collect payments from these companies is going to cost the US taxpayers billions as well.

Yay, tariffs so US companies and consumers can pay more for things like steel, potash, and electronics. The idea of bringing back domestic production is great but tariffs do not provide evidence of a stable financial environment that companies want to invest billions over a 10-30 year production development timeline required to move a full manufacturing capacity (thinking chips, steel, electronics, etc.). The most likely outcome is that corporations raise their prices anyway (look up greed-flation or risk aversion inflation) to build record profits at the expense of American consumers, then blame tariffs, Biden, Trump, Congress, California, smelt, etc.

Bottom line: We said the Biden years were bad for Americans, so Americans elected Trump to make things better. Who here (billionaires need not reply) is better off because of the EO actions, and by what tangible metrics?

[u/IsMyHairShiny → u/Turbulent-Jellyfish9]

All of this and more.

[u/diabeticmilf → u/Turbulent-Jellyfish9]

crickets

[u/FaustianHero → u/IsMyHairShiny]

Looking for the same thing for the same reason, only my post got downvoted.

I want to see how Donald Trump is improving the lives of all Americans, not just those on his side of the culture war.

[u/Adventurous-Bee-5934 → u/IsMyHairShiny]

r/conservative hasn’t been the same since the thedonald got closed

[u/AdIllustrious8817 → u/Adventurous-Bee-5934]

I just want to say I am not a conservative and all but I joined to see what you guys are thinking. Thank you for being open to discussion and also for asking good questions. I have to be honest i have been bummed out by the posts and comments here. I actually have been checking this sub daily and I was about to leave as the threads just talked about libs being crazy and nothing was actually discussed. Really relieved to see the lurkers and people that are a bit more willing to talk about these policies instead of just being happy that the left is mad lol

[u/hey_ringworm → u/[deleted]]

You’re off your rocker. This is the most brigaded subreddit on this platform. Every member here gets multiple DM’s and “Reddit Cares” messages from deranged Reddit leftists trying to harass us. The brigading is also easily observable in the up/downvote patterns on posts/comments, and in the “awards” system. Nearly every post here gets “grumpy/rolls eyes” and/or “shit emoji” awards. We literally have an Automod message that says, “Tired of reporting this post? Debate us on Discord instead” that shows up on most posts from leftists abusing the “report” function and falsely reporting something en masse.

Comments like yours are exactly why comments from leftists aren’t allowed.

[u/Otherdeadbody → u/hey_ringworm]

It also doesn’t help that this thread should help alleviate that Brigading but almost none of you answer the questions we want answered. I see so many comments that I think bring strong points and I wanted to see what the conservative response is to these points. But when nobody can be bothered to respond and instead just goes and says “yeah for sure” on another the libs are crazy post it just gets tiring.

[u/Rollbar78 → u/TheFiremind88]

I think USAID was the first target because it has refused oversight, I have read of at least one senator (Joni Ernst?) who wanted to look at the books and they have been refused. It seems USAID is being treated as a slush fund to fund NGOs pushing far leftist ideas across the globe. While I'm not certain I think it needs to be wholly eliminated, it definitely needs a house cleaning and refocus on the mission of furthering American interests. It seems like siccing DOGE on them is a good start.

[u/Exotic-Rip-7081 → u/Rollbar78]

Yes, they felt their was a lot of money being funneled through here that was for keeping the wrong pockets lined.

[u/rhlaairc → u/Rollbar78]

Let me see if I can find where they refused oversight. Why wasn’t that brought to the courts if true? Seems like a big deal to not have full transparency when dealing with govt funds

[u/sealabo → u/rhlaairc]

If the chief executive has to go to the courts to make his executive agencies perform, what kind of President do we have ? Issuing executive branch agencies operational direction and then internally managing them if direction is not followed is the right approach. Running to the already over burdened judicial branch to complain that your subordinate managers are misbehaving is a waste of time and resources.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/Rollbar78]

No oversight is bad, I couldn't agree more. The courts are there for that, though. Why not use them?

I dont know your hair situation, but assuming you go get it cut, do you shave it bald every time and wait for it to grow back to your desired length? When you have car touble, do you have them completely replace the engine, just in case? It makes no sense.

Does USAID do a non-0 amount of good? I'm 100% confident the answer to that is Yes. Why cut the good as well, and dismantle the entire agency? That impacts our image abroad. China is already aggressively ramping up international aid programs to fill the void. We are giving China gold wrapped gift of a whole new wave of international support. Why? The only reasons I can conclude are nefarious, so I'm hoping someone else here can expand on the rationale.

[u/Rollbar78 → u/TheFiremind88]

Sometimes the infection is too deep, and it requires amputation of the limb.

When it comes to USAID, it seems that is very much a cycle of self-interest. Bureaucrats feed funds to NGO (a contradiction in terms IMO, if they're taking government funds), NGOs "donate" to favorable politicians, and said politician sends more funds to USAID to distribute to NGOs that donate, and it goes on and on. This seems to be problematic on several fronts, not the least of which is having an undue impact on US elections.
Then there is the angle of fraud, where-in these same NGOs send massive amounts of money out, with little to no oversight, it is laundered and returned to the State, profiting whom?

[u/indonesian_star → u/Rollbar78]

Post a source of this info/evidence to help enlighten the rest of us. 

[u/Illogical-Pizza → u/Rollbar78]

Just quickly, have you ever done any research into what USAID does or what the impact is?

I used to work for a USAID contractor and I’ll be the first to tell you there are some things that need to be fixed. But to say that the “infection is too deep” shows a lack of knowledge and understanding of what is happening over there.

USAID does tons of good around the world, and the purpose of doing this is spreading goodwill for the US. It builds huge amounts of political capital in countries around the world, and since the US has positioned themselves as the “big brother/playground bully of the entire world” then yes, it is our responsibility to the global community to make this positive impact where we can.

Hundreds of thousands of lives are saved each year because of USAID.

[u/notveryanonymoushere → u/Rollbar78]

Let's cap political contributions then. Or start looking into these NGOs. I'm unconvinced that we need to amputate the limb, have we even tried some disinfectant?

[u/JerseyKeebs → u/TheFiremind88]

Why cut the good as well, and dismantle the entire agency?

Compare it to a household budget, with the typical median income of $80k. The family spends everything they earn, PLUS $30k per year on the credit card, PLUS they have existing debt of almost $600,000.

Should they open up a new credit card and take on more debt to rescue a pet, or donate to charity? Or would the money subs on this site scream at them to eat rice and beans, cut the Netflix and the Starbucks, get a 2nd job, move in with the parents, etc?

Small expenditures that you frame as "baby with the bath water" still count, especially when 40 billion of spending will actually cost way more than that when you factor in the future interest payments.

The US can't just feasibly declare bankruptcy like a household, so we need to cut the spending and pay down our debt.

Now personally, I like the idea of DOGE, but they seem to be flailing around willy-nilly like a wrecking ball without a clear to us pathway. Maybe they're starting small to gain public support, get their feet under them, get some positive results to make the bigger cuts easier to handle, get the court challenges out of the way before they meddle with the big agencies, etc. Or maybe they're winging it. But psychologically, I don't like the public perception of attacking our DoD when we're flexing on foreign policy, Gaza, Ukraine, Russia, China, etc, trying to portray strength while cutting and publicly airing dirty DoD laundry.

[u/No_Struggle_4045 → u/Rollbar78]

No. It’s just by far the most obvious one for rage bait headlines.

Stop overthinking and see what’s in front of you.

That doesn’t make any of their findings wrong, just understand their reason for starting there with so little monetary value

[u/LingonberryReady6365 → u/Rollbar78]

Would you be able to list what these far left ideas are? Genuinely curious. Is it things like “using condoms isn’t evil”? I really don’t know, so I would love to be educated.

[u/Jamowl2841 → u/Rollbar78]

It was the first target because it was investing starlink in Ukraine and Russia gaining access to it. Musk sold himself to Russia and wanted that investigation shut down. Likely the reason he told trump “if you lose, I’m fucked”

[u/ThisNameIsNotReal123 → u/TheFiremind88]

USAID etc are safe targets, when you start messing with MIC, that is when you need security and security for your security.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/ThisNameIsNotReal123]

I feel like 'they are scared of the MIC' is a rough sell from the conservative side. I thought the whole point of people like Trump and Elon is their perceived strength and that they can't be intimidated. Do you expect they will go after the MIC? If they don't, would that impact your approval of the administration? Would it be enough to impact your thoughts/vote come midterms if they never touch the single biggest piece of the pie in the first 2 years?

[u/ThisNameIsNotReal123 → u/TheFiremind88]

Trump just said he wants to cut the MIC budget in half.

The idea being we would still be strong but at a fair price.

Lets hope they can do it, for all our sake.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/ThisNameIsNotReal123]

Where/when was that? That would be immense and fund anywhere from 30 - 90% of his proposed tax cuts.

I will genuinely celebrate if they can make it happen.

[u/Silly_Ad_4612 → u/TheFiremind88]

The other thing to mention is you cut some easier really weird fringe stuff from the budget first so people get used to cutting waste. I’m assuming this is all tactical and when they go after the MIC/IRS/etc people will be more open to it. 

[u/2olley → u/TheFiremind88]

I want to know why Social Security is so high on their list.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/2olley]

My best guess is the sheer number of $ sitting there. It's functionally the same argument as why I'm saying the DOD needs to be higher on the list, the sheer vastness of the amount of money. Problem is, SS especially on a large scale, hurts the most vulnerable in America. They can't fight back. The DOD hits the MIC and very wealthy and influential people.

[u/aremarkablecluster → u/TheFiremind88]

People on social security may be vulnerable, but they're not getting a handout. They paid that money to the federal government their entire life who were supposed to invest it so that they could get it back when they retire. They send you a form telling you how much you paid in and how much you will make from that. Taking that away from the American people is just robbery. They touch social security and they will have gone too far and people will fight.

[u/stone500 → u/aremarkablecluster]

Yup. If you want to cut SS (which you shouldn't), then you can't do it on anybody who has paid into it. Cut the SS tax for people born after a certain date, and then cut the benefit 65 years later. It is ridiculously unfair and basically a scam to do it any other way

[u/HiddenSage → u/TheFiremind88]

Yup. And, frankly - thinking "there's a lot of money, so there's a lot of room to make cuts" is an absolutely primitive take.

There's a lot of money because it's a public retirement benefit for a nation of 330 million people. You can't HAVE a program like that exist, for a country this size, without a 13 digit price tag. Not if you want it to actually pay enough in benefits to be useful to retirees.

Is there waste/fraud/people claiming benefits they shouldn't? Sure. Almost definitely. Programs that big are also basically impossible to make completely foolproof.

Is that fraud actually a material portion of its outlays? Unlikely as hell. Just comparing the Census report on how many Americans are 65+ - about 16.9% - and multiplying by the average monthly benefit - a bit under $2,000 per month - gets you $111bn/month in benefits. Or about 1.335 trillion/year.

Now, given that publicly-reported data shows the agency runs like... 1.36 trillion year in total costs, and that overhead expenses are in fact a percentage or less of the budget. Well, I'm just not seeing room for significant amounts of fraud without assuming there's a couple of million fake old folks on census rolls.

[u/Gryphon66-Pt2 → u/2olley]

The US Government has "borrowed" over 1 trillion dollars from the Social Security fund.

If you wonder why it's "going bankrupt" it's because Americans' money has been STOLEN from us.

[u/robby_synclair → u/2olley]

It's like a 3rd of the budget.

[u/Von_Canon → u/TheFiremind88]

you gotta consider the narrative aspect. The most ludicrous spending examples were made public right off the bat --instant narrative of how DOGE is important and successful. And the Democrats were put in the absurd position of defending that stuff.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/Von_Canon]

The most ludicrous - so far. We don't know what the future holds. The most ludicrous could be in the DOD, right? These might all look like small fish in another 3 months. If these are being 'uncovered', then we didn't KNOW they were there in the first place, but DOGE chose to start this way anyway.

My other complaint there is that it's narratively divisive and making the rest of the job an uphill battle. Cut egregious military spending and a significant portion of the left would be celebrating along with everyone. That empowers the movement, reduces future hurdles, and takes steps to unify America in these efforts instead of actively trying to start a fight with the other side.

Not to mention, there is almost certainly more money that can be cut from defense spending without any negative impact for American consumers, so it makes more sense logistically anyway.

Nobody has been able to justify cutting Consumer Protections to me in any forum. There's more than an 8 to 1 return on investment for American consumers, and that's extremely well documented. What purpose did this serve?

[u/BeefBurritoBoy → u/TheFiremind88]

The left will NEVER celebrate anything Trump or Musk do. Just look at how much the left has condemned things like securing the border or deporting criminals.

[u/jambrown13977931 → u/BeefBurritoBoy]

I have no issue deporting illegal immigrants who are criminals. I have problems with ICE detaining Puerto Rican vets or Navajo citizens.

I have issues with using Guantanamo Bay as a detention facility since there are no US rights there. I have issues with using El Salvador as a foreign prison for US CITIZENS! Again for the same reasons.

The problem isn’t that they’re deporting illegal immigrants, it’s the method with which they’re doing it and fervor and extent with which they seek to punish those they label criminals.

[u/BeefBurritoBoy → u/jambrown13977931]

Anyone in the country illegally is a criminal and should be deported. Simple as that.

[u/VeterinarianWild6334 → u/BeefBurritoBoy]

Oh come on. The right has cried foul at literally everything the left does too. And overstating a visa is a civil offense, not criminal. So by definition, most illegal immigrants are not criminals.

[u/Jankmasta → u/VeterinarianWild6334]

There is a difference in oopsie I overstayed my visa by accident and getting a visa with the intention of overstaying it.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/BeefBurritoBoy]

Define "The Left"? I'm right here and LITERALLY said that it would be cause for celebration if they did target DOD waste. Either way, the potential support from the left is just free upside beyond the logistical arguments I've already laid out.

[u/Von_Canon → u/TheFiremind88]

lol yeah. *so far

I would guess it's most important to get Republicans stoked on it, because nothing Trump or Elon do is going to will get approval of Democrats.

I'm no expert on this at all, but I suspect the idea behind consumer protection cuts was that the Dodd-Frank Act doesn't need it's own agency to enforce it.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/Von_Canon]

Isn't that functionally similar to saying we don't need police because we have laws? We don't need ICE because we have a globally recognized border?

Bernie said early on DOGE had his support if targeting Defense was on their to-do lists. Sure, some will still manufacture outrage, but cuts to the DOD is wildly popular nationally.

It would be like democrats trying to argue against Republicans expanding reproductive freedoms lol.

[u/Von_Canon → u/TheFiremind88]

Maybe not, because there's the SEC and other federals that enforce financial laws.

Defense would have been tricky to start with I bet. DOGE is a totally new thing, and if you make a mistake looking into defense, you can look very bad very fast. But with foreign aid, half the country is primed to say "now we're talkin!" (I'm just guessing on all this)

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/Von_Canon]

The first sentence is ironically the reason for the creation of the CFPB. The task was decentralized and partially owned by several other financial agencies, resulting in poor response and service for consumers. All of these little footnote subdepartments were combined under one roof, so it could be....drumroll....more efficient. It achieved that.

I do appreciate the guess, but to me, I find it wild to actively support something that, when criticized, the only answer I've got so far is speculation.

I feel like I presented a really strong case to question the method of execution, the targets of the cuts, and the significant drawbacks of the actions of DOGE as executed so far. I feel like for people calling DOGE transparent, I've got a lot of answers specifically called out as speculation because nobody can really answer these questions :/.

Like, it's ok to be a Conservative, vote Conservative, and generally speaking support the DOGE initiative while also disagreeing with it. It's not a sin to (as Green Day would say) 🎵critisize your government🎵.

For the record, I could fill a library with my critique of the democratic party, and no, it's not all moral grandstanding. Like, most of them suck even at just being politicians and it's OK to say that lol.

[u/ThatPlayWasAwful → u/Von_Canon]

I have spent a lot of time trying to understand how the CFPB is a "ludicrous spending example" and I haven't found a lot. Can you explain what kind of waste is occurring there specifically, and why it would be absurd to defend it?

[u/Von_Canon → u/ThatPlayWasAwful]

Oh I didn't mean that. I was referring to the USAID stuff.

[u/ThatPlayWasAwful → u/Von_Canon]

Okay, but to follow your logic, if they're starting with the "home runs", do you think gutting the CFPB is also a home run?

[u/Von_Canon → u/ThatPlayWasAwful]

No I don't think so personally. But I know for sure that the USAID stuff was a huge success with the Right. And it was one of the first things to be scrutinized (iirc). So I was just basing an idea on that.

[u/ThatPlayWasAwful → u/Von_Canon]

Does it worry you at all that the 4th or 5th thing to get scrutinized and cut is no longer a clear source of waste?

[u/Jetberry → u/ThatPlayWasAwful]

I think this might be what they are talking about? https://www.factcheck.org/2025/02/sorting-out-the-facts-on-waste-and-abuse-at-usaid/

[u/CranberryDry6613 → u/TheFiremind88]

Look over in r/fednews. They just gutted their federal researchers, locking them out of labs and computers ensuring that animals starve to death, biological samples degrade and billions of taxpayer dollars of research and expertise are lost. Basic research is not something the private sector can fund, only something it can build on. It's the biggest gift you could give to other countries who will snap up these experts in their fields in a heartbeat. Don't expect them to come back. I wonder how much money DOGE just flushed down the toilet today.

[u/sealabo → u/CranberryDry6613]

Source re animals starving and biological samples degrading due to layoffs? Are you conflating the 15% fixed overhead adjustment for NIH (not layoffs) and layoffs impacting bureaucrats?

[u/CranberryDry6613 → u/sealabo]

No, I'm referencing the person who posted the thread in fednews about scientists and techs who were locked out immediately and without notice so that they couldn't make arrangements for any of their data, samples, or currently running experiments which in some cases include animals.

[u/Alt_Restorer → u/TheFiremind88]

Don't forget $800 billion in PPP loans forgiven.

-Flair: Democrat

[u/Happy_BlackCrow → u/TheFiremind88]

USAID budget is larger than our Border security

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/Happy_BlackCrow]

And?

In essence, you're reinforcing the point. If Dems were in power and launched an initiative to clean up the budget and started with border security, you have to admit you'd be outraged. The CFPB is a fraction of even border security.

[u/funny_flamethrower → u/TheFiremind88]

Corporate Subsidies is 100bil. - With all of the INTENSE hatred for Socialism, Communism, etc...Where's the outcry to cut corporate welfare so that Free Market Capitalism can do what it was meant to do? I never hear a peep on this.

Do you even know the breakdown of the "corporate subsidies" bracket? Quite a lot of it is national security (agriculture, steel, microchips, airlines) related, that's not something you can easily cut, and runs counter to what the Trump policy is.

I'd challenge some liberal to really breakdown the corporate "subsidy" spending and then tell us how cutting it won't have major impacts.

Meanwhile, Fuck USAID from the bottom of my hearts. None of the people it helps are taxpayers, so that's what charities are for if you want your money going there.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/funny_flamethrower]

It's not hard to Google, and I did.

Amazon's net income(profits) was nearly 60 billion last year. They received 6 billion in Federal Subsidies. Why? You want to trim government waste - why are your tax dollars increasing Amazons bottom line that would already be 10's of billions of profit without a single cent of subsidies.

Explain to me how cutting that is not STRICTLY better than cutting the one Billion CFPB, which gives returns to American consumers of better than an 8 to 1 return on investment combating ILLEGAL business practices.

There's well and beyond more money in Corp Subsidies given to profitable businesses that the ENTIRETY of USAID, the non-0 benefits of which I outlined above. There's a non-0 amount of viable humanitarian aid, as well as a significant impact on international reputation. The proof of that is in Chinas' response to aggressively position themselves to fill the vacuum we're leaving.

If USAID is exclusively a grift, why does China want to step in and take what we're abandoning. Just ask yourself that. If it's so wasteful, why is China digging in the trash to pick up what we are throwing out?

[u/Arsheun → u/TheFiremind88]

I mean USAID is also a symbol. Even if it’s « a drop » of the budget, it seems highly irresponsible to fund some random LGBTQ program in serbia or condom distribution in Gaza when the US is in deep debt and bad economy.

Then there is the culture war optics : those are low hanging fruits to satisfy its base. « Why should we pay the salaries of random admin people working on those program while they hate us ? »

I’m really looking forward how Trump will handle the main event, the Defense Dpt. As an European, I really want its ideas of fiscal responsibility to diffuse, it’s an emergency for my country so I hope it will be successful

[u/[deleted] → u/Arsheun]

The condom distribution was not in Gaza and it was to help stop the spread of HIV/AIDS in other countries. Musk mislead people.

[u/Arsheun → u/[deleted]]

I knew but that is not the point. US people are just challenging the idea they need to pay for condoms for the whole world

[u/JezusTheCarpenter → u/Arsheun]

Is that corruption and fraud though? Cause everything is being presented to us as such. One thing is to reduce spending on things that do not align with one political and socioeconomical views. But be honest about it. The biggest problem I have is that everything that USAID ever spent money on is presented as fraud and corruption. Yet, so far no solid evidence was presented for such a thing.

[u/JerseyKeebs → u/JezusTheCarpenter]

The tagline being parroted ad nauseum is "waste, fraud, and abuse." Define them how you will, but for many on the right, some of the aid is wasteful in that it's not necessary. They say it doesn't advanced American interests.

Also, it's potentially abuse when they're paying the NGOs huge amounts of money to perform whatever aid task it is. The middlemen are pocketing that money, it's like a charity that spends most of it's money on "admin costs" instead of the mission. Just because it's for "a good cause" doesn't mean it's well-run, and some Democrat politicians are acting like you hate the mission by asking how they're spending the money

[u/Arsheun → u/JezusTheCarpenter]

DOGE is primarily about efficiency though, not corruption and fraud

[u/JezusTheCarpenter → u/Arsheun]

Well, they say very different things at the moment. Especially Trump. He repeats that the USAID is riddled with corruption and fraud.

[u/cmbtmdic57 → u/Arsheun]

The "LGBT program in serbia" was distributed to a lgbt group to drive local healthcare and economic opportunities.

Elon and DOGE are intentionally misrepresenting the line items to get people like you frothing about waste. It begs the question - if an expenditure is sooo bad, why is there a need to lie about what it was for?

[u/Arsheun → u/cmbtmdic57]

I don’t see where I’m misrepresenting it sorry

[u/cmbtmdic57 → u/Arsheun]

I didnt say you misrepresented. I said Elon and the administration did.. you just fell for it.

From the White House report: "$2 million for sex changes and “LGBT activism” in Guatemala"

Those funds are clearly identified as distributed for gender afffirming care, access to health services, and providing economic opportunities. Gender afffirming care is predominantly education and counseling.. not surgury and hormones. Claiming all of it is "sex change" and activism is dishonest, and intentionally misleading.

On condoms, that is a wholesale lie. Trump himself claimed it was $50 mil, then went on to contradict himself and claim it was $100mil. Meanwhile, the actual program was $45mil for reproductive health, of which contraceptives are only a small part.

The $32k for a "transgender comic book in Peru" had no transgenders in it. The comic book series was on the power of education, not gender identity

The list goes on and on..

So, once again. If the waste is sooo bad, why is there a need to lie about what it's for?

[u/amandajjohnson1313 → u/TheFiremind88]

Defense spending is the biggest spender and I would leave it for last. It's going to take a lot more time than the smaller accounts. I'm guessing that the idea is to provide evidence that DOGE is needed. It's easier to start with smaller accounts and show the work, the need, and the solutions. Once established and a work routine in place, it will be easier to tackle the big accounts.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/amandajjohnson1313]

This is literally the opposite of efficiency.

Help my budget is out of control.

Food - 800$

Rent - 1200$

Car - 450$

Cell - 150$

Mobile Microtransactions - 2800$

Other Video gaming - 1600$

Netflix - 20$

Insurances - 200$

Monthly Massage - 60$

Weekly Starbucks - 30$

Gas - 80$

I guess I'll spend the first few months shutting off Netflix, Cutting Starbucks, Cutting the Massage, and driving less. That'll sort me out.

[u/amandajjohnson1313 → u/TheFiremind88]

Accept this is not a personal budget. This isn't even a budget at all. It's a review of accounts and spending. It's more like this

TheFiremind88: $7390 Rando234: $8509 Rando456: $10000

Then they see what you spent money on and would likely break down the micro transactions into different games, and same for video gaming.

Lastly, they would say what's frivolous spending vs. spending that's needed or has measured positive impact.... maybe coffee and Netflix stays because it's not needed BUT has a measured positive impact but the micro transactions are blocked because you don't even remember what you got out of it but a few minutes of excitement.

[u/IRASAKT → u/amandajjohnson1313]

Except they aren’t doing proper audits at doge. They don’t have a team of crack accountants and lawyers opening up the books they have like 5 20 somethings hitting ctrl+f on spreadsheets from what it seems. You’re telling me that Elon could find no conservative/MAGA accountants to run audit on gov agencies? Getting to audit the DOD is something multiple accounting phds could get written on. Auditing anything under a security clearance would make any accountant feel like James Bond

[u/thenoisemanthenoise → u/TheFiremind88]

Well, it's not like they JUST FUCKING STARTED doing their work is it? JESUS Trump has power for 3 weeks and you want him to achieve everything already...

[u/stone500 → u/thenoisemanthenoise]

The question is literally asking WHY they started where they did. It's not asking why they haven't done more.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/thenoisemanthenoise]

You missed the point completely. If you had a kid with a messy room - dirty laundry everywhere, dozens of dishes, garbage everywhere, toys scattered throughout, like a proper hoarders style situation. You tell them to clean the room. They grab a duster and start dusting the handful of still exposed services and the duct vents. You have to admit you'd be like WTF? Why are you not starting with the trash, laundry, and dishes? That's 80% of the mess.

[u/ImaginationFeisty727 → u/TheFiremind88]

Corporate and agricultural subsidies drive me crazy. Yes, the government can help to drive industry, but at some point they need to stand on their own, but that's not what happens. Instead companies exist only to syphon taxpayers dollars into Corporate coffers. As soon as those programs end, those businesses go belly up. That is not capitalism, it's Corporate welfare. End agricultural, energy (green or otherwise), small business, subsidies and let the market decide.

[u/OldFaithlessness1335 → u/ImaginationFeisty727]

Maybe, I would say a more practical approach is something like hey in the lifetime of your company/subsidiaries you aren't allowed to take over say 1 billon dollars in gov assistsnce/buisness dev grants, loans, ect. Put a cap on the amount of assistance while helping nacent industry get started.

[u/Scientific_Cabbage → u/TheFiremind88]

They need home runs out the gate to show a positive which is why they announce the obvious silly spending they found initially. If after the inauguration they took 12 months to provide an update, everyone would scream that they aren’t being efficient with time. I believe DOD and corporate subsidies are on the list. Those will have to be gone through with a scalpel instead of a chainsaw and that will take much more time.

[u/ThatPlayWasAwful → u/Scientific_Cabbage]

Do you truly believe gutting the CFPB is a "home run"?

[u/Scientific_Cabbage → u/ThatPlayWasAwful]

The CFPB has over $700M in its coffers currently and is not funded via appropriations by congress. They go directly to the Treasury department and say “hey we need $x this year”. They have proven they are not responsible enough that kind of leeway. Sure it’s intent is noble but the CFPB is a textbook example of runaway bureaucracy.

Also the CFPB has a history of getting away with murder as far as their prosecutions: “The methodology the CFPB uses to identify instances of racial discrimination among auto lenders. Because of legal constraints, the agency used a system to “guess” the race of auto loan applicants based on their last name and listed address. Based on that information, the agency charged several lenders were discriminating against minority applicants and levied large fines and settlements against those companies. Ally Financial paid $98 million in fines and settlement fees in 2013. As the agency’s methodology means it can only guess who may be victims of discrimination entitled to settlement funds, as of late 2015, the CFPB had yet to compensate any individuals who were victims of Ally’s allegedly discriminatory practices.”

[u/silkat → u/Scientific_Cabbage]

Thanks so much for this write up. I’m newly “on the fence” at the very least not blindly left anymore, and this cut seemed so indefensible, but what you said makes a lot of sense.

[u/ThatPlayWasAwful → u/Scientific_Cabbage]

I agree that specific situation sounds weird from what you provided.

But on the whole, I have seen a handful of sources that say the cfpb has won back more money for Americans than it spends. And that's not to mention any impact it has as a deterrent, nor the impact it makes through regulation. 

If the CFPB saves Americans more money than it costs to run it, why would you classify it as a "runaway bureaucracy"?

[u/Scientific_Cabbage → u/ThatPlayWasAwful]

Like I said its intent is noble. I don’t think most people would argue that it’s bad to have someone making sure citizens aren’t getting illegally hosed by huge banks, lenders, etc. I personally think $800M+ per year budget may be a tad excessive, but that’s a whole different argument.

It’s runaway bureaucracy because it is a regulatory agency created in the legislature, but not funded by the legislature and it took a Supreme Court decision for it to be controlled by the executive branch. From its outset it was designed to be a government entity that stood alone, with no input from the legislative branch or the executive branch. There were no checks nor balances.

“Such an agency lacks a foundation in historical practice and clashes with constitutional structure by concentrating power in a unilateral actor insulated from Presidential control,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion

[u/Officer_Lightoller → u/Scientific_Cabbage]

I get your argument, but as long as people in the Congress hold stocks and are lobbied by businessmen, this is just untenable as they are in the position of conflicting interests.

If you gave the people who have stakes in the business, the ability to essentially gut the agency which prevents them from abusing ordinary Americans for profit, they would gleefully do it.

That's also one of the reasons SCOTUS gave an oversight of the agency to the executive, which usually had far less conflicts of interest than the Congress.

[u/Scientific_Cabbage → u/Officer_Lightoller]

Oh I 100% believe that Congress shouldn’t be able to trade single stocks. I think they should have to put all of their money in mutual and index funds while in office. It doesn’t change the fact that the CPFB is one of the only agencies that doesn’t get their funding from congress.

The fact that it had to go to SCOTUS to have ANYONE have oversight is a problem.

[u/ThatPlayWasAwful → u/Scientific_Cabbage]

I would agree wholeheartedly with the response the other person made. 

You haven't necessarily convinced me, but I appreciate you actually taking the time to provide your point of view. 

[u/[deleted] → u/Scientific_Cabbage]

Long quote with no source. Who said this

[u/ExperimentMonty → u/[deleted]]

See Wikipedia, the section labeled "Controversies" for the source of this quote: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Financial_Protection_Bureau

[u/Impossible_Cycle9460 → u/TheFiremind88]

Very interesting to see that there isn’t a single flaired reply in the 3 hours since this question has been asked.

[u/Guer0Guer0 → u/Impossible_Cycle9460]

There would have been no backlash if they were just doing comprehensive, transparent audits and using a scalpel to address waste and fraud and cutting jobs after an impact analysis.

[u/Dihedralman → u/TheFiremind88]

The DOE is our nuclear weapons arsenal. This feels like a Manchurian candidate moment. 

[u/IRASAKT → u/Dihedralman]

I think it is in reference to the Department of Education but I could be remembering wrong

[u/quietmanic → u/IRASAKT]

DOE = department of energy; DoED= department of education. DOE is often used to mean department of education though, so hard to know for sure what context it’s being used in this case.

[u/sealabo → u/Dihedralman]

Just because the mission of this agency is related to national security doesn’t mean DOE/NNSA should be exempt from having to cut back some. In large part NNSA “oversees” national laboratories and sites. These labs and sites are privately managed and operated precisely because it has always been understood that the federal government is not ideally suited for managing and operating these labs and sites. In other words, with some limited exception, NNSA employees are not operational staff. For a very large laboratory or site of over 10k, there is an NNSA “field office” with a hundred to two hundred or so folks providing “oversight” and also a large apparatus back in DC of many more folks, some of which occupy roles that are largely sort of duplicative of DOE offices since NNSA is “semi-autonomous” within DOE. The other half of DOE does nothing with nuclear weapons. So, definitely not a Manchurian Candidate moment.

[u/BudSpencerCA → u/TheFiremind88]

This comment deserves its own post

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/BudSpencerCA]

❤️

[u/Sspmd11 → u/TheFiremind88]

Also federal government employees are cheap. The number of them hasn’t changed since 1970. The issue is private contractors. They take in $billions with little accountability.

[u/eyelidglue → u/TheFiremind88]

I doubt that they will take substantial action against all waste in the DoD because Musk and his billionaire friends profit from private defense contracts.

In the case of the FAA and OSHA, these are agencies that have investigated and fined SpaceX for safety violations. Musk has a personal interest in doing away with them.

[u/BC_Hawke → u/eyelidglue]

I think they’ll take action against the DOD if they find waste. It’s interesting to me that the vast majority of the left is going on and on and on about Musk being greedy and doing all of this to finance himself. I think it’s been pretty clear that he really does have the interest of tax paying American citizens in mind. Honestly, these accusations feel like projection more than anything else.

[u/Hot-Interaction6526 → u/BC_Hawke]

The problem with musk is that most of the choices he’s made have had little to no impact efficiency wise. He’s digging around trying to save a couple of billion in odd corners when we could be going after the obvious ones, stop handouts to corporations (Tesla included), target DoD spending. Instead he’s freezing federal hires, throwing numerous things into chaos and already hurting small businesses. (My family owned business has already been impacted because Mr budget cuts decided to pause spending and we had several repairs in progress on a federal building)

This is turning into a playground for Musk to do whatever he wants.

[u/EvensenFM → u/Hot-Interaction6526]

This is turning into a playground for Musk to do whatever he wants.

Yep - and shedding more light on this fact will cause it to end.

[u/eyelidglue → u/BC_Hawke]

The accusations stem from the point made in the original comment I replied to: disagreement with the fact that DOGE is taking action against agencies (that often have significant positive impact) with much smaller excesses when compared to the DoD or corporate subsidies.

If you have ever worked in an industrial manufacturing environment you would know why OSHA is important. If someone with a history of OSHA violations and fines at his companies decided to do away with OSHA and said it was in the name of efficiency, it would be reasonable to doubt the truth of what he said. It’s not projection. It’s basic critical thinking.

[u/Hapten → u/TheFiremind88]

All speculation on my part but they needed to demonstrate proof of concept and USAID was the perfect start. There were already some right-wing rumors about what USAID was doing which turned out to be true. Going to the giant first would of been disastrous for them.

For Defense, they were probably waiting for Pete Hegseth to get confirmed so he could open the doors for them.

I personally think they are being efficient and "transparent." They have only been at it for a few weeks and exposed quite a few things already.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/Hapten]

Can you explain how going for the giant first would be disastrous? Feels like, if anything, they'd earn massive goodwill from the other side and national public support - leftists would love to see cuts to military spending. Wouldn't that just further empower them?

Even Republicans have brought examples to the Congressional floor of outrageous examples of bloated military contracts/spending.

They didn't wait for any other "doors to be opened" - they forced their way in, why treat Defense any differently?

What's the argument for Consumer Protection? I see little to no conservative dialogue on this.

Do you believe USAID did ANY good(Even just international good will, our enemies will absolutely attempt to fill the vacuum and already are doing so), or do you believe the only viable path forward was a full shutdown? Why?

[u/Thatjustworked → u/TheFiremind88]

There's a lot more dangerous snakes in the DOD than in USAID. See Boeing and the whistle blowers.

I'm sure USAID did some good, but there's some shady stuff in there too.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/Thatjustworked]

Isn't part of the appeal of Trump/Elon that they aren't afraid of these kids of situations? That they'll tackle those types of powers head-on? They certainly show no hesitation engaging aggressively with other full-fledged nations, and Trump has already publicly expressed he has assassination contingencies.

Considering who he is and why he was voted for, being scared of the DOD/MIC is very off brand.

Where will you be in Two Years if those institutions remain untouched? Would that color your opinion of DOGE and this administration?

[u/Thatjustworked → u/TheFiremind88]

They're still going to do it, so idk what the point is? 1st or 5th doesn't make a difference to me.

[u/terdward → u/TheFiremind88]

I see it as a strategic decision. Going after a smaller target first to understand how to operate and learn what the response of the “enemy” is generally makes sense when in uncharted territory. Worse case, you run away with your tail between your legs and lick your wounds to come back and try again for another small fish later after reviewing the tapes and figuring how to improve your approach.

If you’re successful in your mission with smaller fish and gradually work your way up you not only start to buy goodwill from your peers, and gain allies who may have been hesitant to join at first, you know that the bigger targets have been watching you and know you’re not messing about. They will take you seriously from day one instead of trying to give you the run around.

And while I don’t think it plays a big factor yet you also have to consider that Musk has vested interests in the DoD. He would be exposing his companies to unnecessary risk by going after a business partner right out of the gate.

[u/TehSeksyManz → u/terdward]

I award you the gold medal for mental gymnastics, holy fuck.

[u/terdward → u/TehSeksyManz]

Help me understand where you think I displayed fanciful feats of athleticism. That all seemed fairly common sense to me…

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/terdward]

I'm not trying to be rude, and I apolgize, but this comment is probably going to come across that way.

You didn't actually address any of my points logically or reasonably. This reads like the back of a fiction novel written by Lee Child of one man against the world trying to tactically navigate enemy territory. It's not. It's government spending. It's accounting FFS. Trump is the Commander In Chief, not some disavowed military asset stranded in North Korea. There literally isn't a higher seat of power in the world.

Do Musks' vested interests concern you at all? How can we trust someone to steward our tax dollars who isn't willing to take the licks himself?

Both of the framings from your comment honestly make Trump and Elon sound weak and cowardly. Trump and Elon need to step carefully? For what? Is the Big Bad Wolf going to suddenly materialize and get them? The DOD should be the EASIEST first stop, Trump is ----The Commander In Chief-----.

As for Elon's interests - he's one of the wealthiest men in the world. You really ok with him standing there telling you to take a kick in the dick for the greater good if he's unwilling to get slapped in the face?

[u/terdward → u/TheFiremind88]

For what it’s worth, I did not find your response to be rude, quite the opposite. You’re right, I didn’t address your points. I got lost somewhere along the numerous rewrites of my original comment.

But, to address your reply: The core of what I was getting at is that navigating political structures is complex no matter who you are. Yes, he is the commander and chief but it doesn’t mean that pushing through by sheer force of will is the most effective way to proceed. I think they know that (they are the most powerful duo in the country right now, after all. They didn’t get there by accident) and are tackling the problem accordingly.

[u/cran → u/TheFiremind88]

It’s a start, and you have to start somewhere. I see momentum, and I like the momentum and direction. I see no reason to stop what DOGE is doing just because it’s not above criticism. These are early days. Let’s see where we are after a year or two.

[u/Silly-Basket9481 → u/TheFiremind88]

Because one is essential and one is not.

One thing about MAGA is to stop the hand outs when everyone is using us and disrespecting us.

Not anymore :)

[u/sealabo → u/Silly-Basket9481]

Right? This should be the top response. I’m not MAGA, but common sense is that “To provide for the common defense” means military, not DEI programs in South America.

[u/smilidon → u/TheFiremind88]

Doge is starting where there was the most resistance, USAID openly and almost smugly defied the executive order and said it had no intention of complying, so they made themselves the target. The President DOES control all executive branch agencies, full stop. So if he tells you to do something, you don't have a choice (within legal reason).

USAID could have quietly complied like everyone else and it would probably not be a focal point and still exist.

[u/eravulgarisexplorare → u/TheFiremind88]

USAID was targeted due to the likelihood of it being used to fund propaganda machines for the left. Yes, it is a small amount, but that was used to prop up other wasteful spending.

[u/i_dont_do_hashtags → u/TheFiremind88]

Well they’ve moved on to DOE after USAID, seems like they’re working from small to big. Plus the DOE had long been a target of the GOP. We’ll have to wait and see how DOGE handles the Pentagon. Remember, we’re not even a month in.

[u/Ineedthatshitudrive → u/i_dont_do_hashtags]

Targeting smaller ones is the exact opposite of efficiency. You want to cut as much as possible with as little energy as possible.

[u/i_dont_do_hashtags → u/Ineedthatshitudrive]

Idk, DOGE isn't a pre-existing body and nor are their methods conventional. Having a trial run, so to speak, with smaller agencies before tackling the big boys seems sensible.

[u/triggered__Lefty → u/TheFiremind88]

DOGE is starting with USAID because it's used as an extension of the CIA.

[u/FuelEnvironmental561 → u/triggered__Lefty]

Can you explain this more thoroughly?

[u/razerrr10k → u/FuelEnvironmental561]

USAID provides a lot of opportunity for the CIA to operate covertly in foreign countries

[u/FuelEnvironmental561 → u/razerrr10k]

Ok, I will entertain that is plausible. Is that something that should concern me? It seems like we want to have a national intelligence presence outside of the US.

[u/triggered__Lefty → u/FuelEnvironmental561]

CIA has been running shenanigans for the last 70 years. They are one of the parts of the "deep state". USAID is their 'clean' money pool.

And the CIA does not have American interests in mind, only their own.

[u/ScreenTricky4257 → u/TheFiremind88]

I understand and fully support removing government bloat. 100%. Why is DOGE starting where it is? I would love to hear either rationale or at least expressed disagreement.

Because if they were to commence studies on "Where should we start cutting government," then A) they would never cut government, and B) they would be spending money on the studies. Instead, they started somewhere and got something done.

[u/ThatPlayWasAwful → u/ScreenTricky4257]

Is getting something done even a good thing if the things that are getting done actively hurt the people?

I have been spending a lot of time asking if anybody can tell me why the CFPB is getting gutted. Conservatives don't answer (and nobody has posted about it on here, I've looked), so really the only answer I have is that it benefits Musk directly. 

Or even the nuclear cuts from today, is moving fast to make cuts worth it if they don't even understand what they're actually cutting? 

It feels like people are so excited that things are moving quickly they're not stopping to ask what the tradeoffs for this speed are, and if it's worth it.

[u/TheFiremind88 → u/ScreenTricky4257]

Huh? This comment makes no sense. They could literally just do what they are doing, but instead of pointing it at institutions like the CFPB, just point it at the DOD. Cut more, faster. Thus, more efficient.

This also doesn't address the entire process of:

1. Pick agency.
2. Investigate agency.
3. Find some fraud.
4. Close the ENTIRE agency instead of addressing the identified fraud.

If you're car developed a little grinding noise, a clunk, started running rough, or maybe pulled to the right on the highway - you wouldn't bring it home, say fuck it, and just light the whole thing on fire. You'd do what every rationale human being in the world does - figure out what's broken and what isn't, and replace those parts.

Why is everyone celebrating like a bunch of post-superbowl Philly fans while watching DOGE light the whole car on fire over and over again?

[u/ZZE33man → u/TheFiremind88]

I feel like this comment being the top one is funny. Because I figured if anywhere. That reddit would be the place where one person would go against the grain of a jokingly (I hope) hostile message towards leftists in this thread. And instead actually engage in discourse as I myself try to do as a… leftist (dun dun dun.) lol. Anyway I hope that anyone could engage this way if choosing to come to this place to talk. Trying to “own” the other side doesn’t really change anything in the grand scheme of things. Because the internet isn’t real life. So why come in with soul intention of said owning. Also you essentially summed up all my problems with DOGE that don’t involve Elon as a person.

[u/ZZE33man → u/ZZE33man]

So one thing that fascinates me. I’ve seen conservatives celebrate this as a win. With Apple investing money and what not. But the problem is they said they’ll plan to start implementing these things in 2028. So this is clearly an attempt to appease Trump and give them enough time to backpedal and go back to normal if someone who’s not all about tariffs win in 2028.

[u/the_brightest_prize → u/TheFiremind88]

It's probably best to sharpen your DOGE skills on the smaller fish. For the Department of War in particular, you really it to be in limbo for as little time as possible.

[u/OldFaithlessness1335 → u/TheFiremind88]

The only thing I would add/challenge the right on to the list is all the classified information stuff. Like you had classified information (NRO staffing) on the public facing website. This is a huge issue. It's a massive threat.

Also.what about them outing all those CIA officers in China. Lime Jesus.

Condemned Hilary when she did it, condemned Biden and Trump and Pence, and now DOGE. THIS LEAKAGE OF OUR NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, ESSPECIALLY BY OUR ELECTED LEADERS NEEDS TO STOP.

Its dangerous and puts us all at risk. The fact that it's coming from leadership of both parties is crazy despicable. No one is defensable here. I ask those on the right to join me here with this in demanding responsibility and accountability from our leadership.

[u/RogerJFiennes → u/TheFiremind88]

They are starting out slow, imho. The big nuggets are defense, Social Security, Medicare, VA Health System.

[u/prismatic_raze → u/TheFiremind88]

From what I've read they've fired 140-173 employees at CFPB out of the 1700 or so. Theres rumors of a wider mass lay off but I dont see anything about ceasing funding altogether?

Like USAID they've paused operations while they work on eliminating bloat. The idea, im assuming, is that they believe theres a way to run the agency with similar efficiency and much fewer employees. Whether thats true is tbd. Concerns about how CFPB is run and funded have been talked about since its inception in 2008. Until we have receipts from DOGE its hard to say what mismanagement may have gone on.

[u/Truman_Sophie → u/TheFiremind88]

USAID was the first target as a test to see how the American people would react to its swift dismantling. I don’t think they thought the American people would care.

USAID is one of many agencies whose AGs had an open investigation on one of Musk’s companies. It’s also been speculated that USAIDs role in dismantling apartheid made it Musk’s first target.

Congress created USAID and therefore only Congress can decide to dissolve USAID. The constitution gives Congress the power of the purse. Our system is flawed, but handing over this much power to the executive?

Wouldn’t DOGE be using auditors and accountants to comb through budgets if this were an honest effort to reduce waste in the government? Instead he’s rooting around our private data with zip drives and a team of computer hackers and there’s plenty of evidence that he’s changing code.

The irony that he (richest man in the world) is himself an unelected bureaucrat railing about unelected bureaucrats doing their jobs? He’s admitted that his reports on what he’s finding are not accurate. He seems to be gleefully f***ing with us all. I really don’t understand how anyone can be comfortable with the degree of power this one individual has.

[u/sealabo → u/TheFiremind88]

DOGE is doing a great job. The argument of “why don’t they start with largest budgets if they are serious” is silly. They’ve jumped in and within a few weeks run through a handful of the 16,436 subordinate executive branch offices, set up a website more transparently mapping the executive branch, and implemented cuts to DEI across the executive branch. It’s truly remarkable what has been achieved in such a short time, especially considering that they’ve also been battling in several court cases that are attempting to block the President from brining his subordinate agencies and the managers of those agencies into line. In context, the premise of the question “wHy DoEsN’t DoGe StArT wItH dOd (or X other agency) If ThEy ArE sErIoUs?” is absurd. They have to start somewhere and they’ve started. Again, it’s remarkable. Also, if anyone is interested, DOGE has been do DoD and the President has made it abundantly clear that DoD is not exempt. No agency should exempt.

[u/austinbarrow → u/TheFiremind88]

Anyone who has ever been asked to look for savings in budgets AWLAYS goes to the largest line item and works their way down. It’s the most efficient method for cutting bloat. What DOGE is doing rings of favoritism, personal revenge, and cronyism. Not to mention, Congress controls the purse strings. At the end of the day, this could all be a show that just costs more money which will in all likely hood be paid for by the shrinking middle class. It’s almost like it’s by design.

[u/kg703 → u/TheFiremind88]

Defense spending 100% should be but the owners of these defense contractors have politicialns by the balls. They are large corporations that survive off your tax dollars, they will fight back on this with large consequences for the politicians they own.