Government Efficiency (9 Viewers)

Users who are viewing this thread

RobF

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
1,310
Reaction score
4,001
Location
Warrington, UK
Offline
I think this topic deserves its own thread, both to discuss generally the topic of government efficiency, and specifically the so-called 'Department of Government Efficiency' and the incoming Trump administration's aims to "dismantle Government Bureaucracy, slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures and restructure Federal Agencies".

The announcements have been covered in the The Trump Cabinet and key post thread, but to recap, Trump has announced that Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy will work together on a not-actually-an-official-government-Department of Government Efficiency, which is intended to work with the White House and Office of Management & Budget to "drive large scale structural reform, and create an entrepreneurial approach to Government never seen before," with the 'Department' to conclude its work "no later than July 4, 2026."

Musk has previously said that the federal budget could be reduced by "at least $2 trillion", and Ramaswarmy, during his presidential campaign, said he would fire more than 75% of the federal work force and disband agencies including the Department of Education and the FBI.
 



good.

this is like when you get your water bill and its 5x normal and think you have a leak.

Instead of calling a plumber to run video inspection to find the break, you hire a crew to rip out every single pipe in walls and underground.

Meanwhile you complain about not having any running water.

its insane
 
I have to say, Wired has been killing it lately - I bit the bullet and subscribed, just because they've been so solid. They don't appear to have gift articles though.

 
Real question, aren’t there court orders in effect that should prevent them from altering code? Weren’t they limited to “read-only”?
 
Real question, aren’t there court orders in effect that should prevent them from altering code? Weren’t they limited to “read-only”?

I think that is correct - but it only had to do with certain systems (payment systems at Treasury, for one).

I think this is an existing software product owned by the government - and they aren't editing it as it is being currently used (it isn't), they are editing it for some new future use. Sort of like taking a product off the shelf in the storage room and re-tooling it for a new purpose.
 
I think that is correct - but it only had to do with certain systems (payment systems at Treasury, for one).

I think this is an existing software product owned by the government - and they aren't editing it as it is being currently used (it isn't), they are editing it for some new future use. Sort of like taking a product off the shelf in the storage room and re-tooling it for a new purpose.
That seem scary.

I'm not an election denier, but don't think for a second Musk would not use all of the data he's sorting through to help win elections in the future.
 
Oh, yeah, not suspicious at all. 🤦‍♀️

“After the original procurement document attracted widespread attention, NPR reported that the Trump administration appeared to have quietly edited the document, changing the phrase "armored Tesla" to the more generic "armored electric vehicles" without explanation. Eventually, the item vanished from the State Department's procurement document.”
 

They're dummies who are utterly unqualified to work in government. They'd rather just break sheet than try to actually fix it.

Just a quick note that the RTO executive order has caused upheaval for thousands of workers who were specifically hired to remote work or telework, even prior to Covid. Even those who worked from home because of reasonable accommodations requests have all been rescinded and they're using up all of their sick leave because they're literally unable to do their jobs on site.

The blanket RTO order was one of the worst policy decisions made so far and has disrupted entire offices. Trump and his lemmings don't gave 2 sheets about government employees.

I really hope a class action suit can force a roll-back of that policy because it makes zero allowances for those who previously had valid reasons for teleworking and remote working.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

General News Feed

Fact Checkers News Feed

Back
Top Bottom