Lets see how long it takes them to turn US Treasury Bonds from their AAA+++ (or whatever) status down to D.
This needs to be bigger news on the mainstream channels, but you know it wont be.
I’m so tired of this shit.
“Lost”… yeah, “lost” it in their bank account.
IN A MONTH.
4 years of months left to go.
Maybe next time people can get off their fat fucking asses and vote. Or, if you did vote, maybe vote more intelligently next go around.
I was wondering why we haven’t seen any actual data on how they’ve saved the US money yet. The answer is likely that they didn’t.
What are the odds that they saved the US money and kept it a total secret rather than to brag about it.
So low that I think this is a smoking gun that they failed to do so. We now know it didn’t work out because they are quiet.
@fake_meows @Polderviking they cut loads of things that are a small (comparative) expense that bring in, or save, a lot of money, or support the economy. Like the national parks and USAID, and *all science*. Those new expenses won’t be realised for a while but in the mean time they’re paying off sacked staff left and right, paying the DOGE team, and fighting legal rulings. It’s a ridiculous way of going about anything.
All of the receipts on the stupid DGE website so far have been lacking any and all context, which makes their “savings” worthless without more accounting. Okay, so they cut $1bn from one program by cancelling it, but what if that $1bn that was being spent was generating a return of investment down the road? Then they cut a service that actually ended up costing the taxpayers less than the alternative, which then needs to be recouped somehow.
I compare it to a mayor slashing the police budget because crime is at an all time low - completely ignoring that the cause of the crime being low was a well-funded police force. Shortsighted idiots should never be in charge of money.
Yeah, its a circular economy. So for example, all your federal workers spend, save, invest and pay taxes in the country.
I think this a good small example: https://www.nasa.gov/news-release/new-report-shows-nasas-75-6-billion-boost-to-us-economy/
NASA budget is about $25B
That money (which is respent in the national economy) adds $75B to GDP. 3:1 multiplier effect.
So by finding NASA by $25B you get most of it back again in taxes AND you get all the jobs, services, technology etc. Its a huge list of benefits that is basically paying for itself. That’s 300,000+ jobs and $10B in more downstream taxes…that counts against the $25B budget…it is really a net $15B tax spend to bring in $75B in GDP increase.
If you cut this program, you shrink the overall economy, drop.GDP AND lower future tax revenues. So when the money these programs spends is multiplied out through the economy in a circular way, the high price tag is a useless / pointless way to analyze the value of the return. You need to have the full systemic analysis or you’re just doing damage…
This is every government program. My own small business I can track higher sales when SSI checks go out. The grocery store lines are longer and all the seniors are lining up to get groceries when the checks arrive…
And even if you “save money”, what would you turnaround and do with it if not fund NASA and social security? Do they have a better idea? What else do we need that money for?
