Started By
Message

re: Elon: DOGE probably won’t find $2 trillion in federal budget cuts

Posted on 1/9/25 at 8:57 am to
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476983 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 8:57 am to
quote:

Not everything is about you.

Then stop derailing the thread. Desantis has nothing to do with this thread.
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
140573 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 8:58 am to
quote:

No, I said his strategy was poor and I was proven right.


You can't applaud Thomas Masses and Chip Roy right now on one hand and bemoan Matt Gaetz on the other. That would be hypocritical.
Posted by TheBoo
South to Louisiana
Member since Aug 2012
5520 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 8:58 am to
quote:

Somewhere in the $1.7T discretionary spending

That's convenient for you.

This post was edited on 1/9/25 at 9:33 am
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476983 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 8:59 am to
quote:

You can't applaud Thomas Masses and Chip Roy right now on one hand and bemoan Matt Gaetz on the other.


Thomas Massie and Chip Roy were literally fighting the guy Gaetz got in as SOH

So yes, yes I can.
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
140573 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:00 am to
quote:

Thomas Massie and Chip Roy were literally fighting the guy Gaetz got in as SOH


But they are on the same page in terms of spending which seems to be what you support.
Posted by TenWheelsForJesus
Member since Jan 2018
11379 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:01 am to
quote:

And yet, people still identify MAGA/AF as "small government" and celebrated DOGE like it was going to fix our debt/deficit issues.


So, you're here to attack MAGA for believing that DOGE will eliminate $2t, but in the same breath, you also say they are not for small government.

You do realize those 2 arguments don't jive, right?

You're in here celebrating how there won't be as much savings while simultaneously trying to pretend that you, and not the people who want $2t cut, are the real small government conservative.

If you were half as smart as you think you are, your posts wouldn't be riddled with embarrassing logical inconsistencies. Like all the other simpletons, you think only you can dictate which policies are "small government."
Posted by wackatimesthree
Member since Oct 2019
13525 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:04 am to
quote:

Not legally


Why are we legally obligated to employ needless workers?
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476983 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:05 am to
quote:

But they are on the same page in terms of spending


You wouldn't know that from the results of his strategy and that's the whole point.

Again, I criticized his strategy and said that it would do nothing positive and possibly negative. That was proven correct. The person he got in place ended up having the same fights as the person who was replaced... I believe spending even more and sending even more to Ukraine. That replacement also got zero appropriations bills in front of Congress.

Explain to me how the strategy was effective with those results
This post was edited on 1/9/25 at 9:06 am
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
63416 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:05 am to
quote:

Wont' come close to $2T. Probably won't come close to $1T.
>
Trump already took everything off the blue ring off the table. The brown ring isn’t optional. That only leaves the teal ring, but it’s only $1.7 Trillion. The odds of cutting DoD and discretionary by more than 50% is… zero.

People don’t want to hear it. But the blue ring has to be cut. Even if it is “your money”. You ain’t getting it back.
This post was edited on 1/9/25 at 9:07 am
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
63416 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:08 am to
quote:

Prorate the balance of the cut to $2T across the board.
You including SS and medicare?
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476983 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:08 am to
quote:

, you're here to attack MAGA for believing that DOGE will eliminate $2t, but in the same breath, you also say they are not for small government.

The hypocrisy of what they say and what they do when action actually has to be taken is the larger point, yes.

quote:

trying to pretend that you, and not the people who want $2t cut,

They never wanted that money cut just like MAGA never wanted the money cut either.

This is the beauty of "populism". Say whatever the people want like it's Middle School, school council and you're promising a free vending machine in the lunch room, without any ability to do it or sincerity in actually wanting it.

Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476983 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:09 am to
quote:

Why are we legally obligated to employ needless workers?


There are actually laws creating civil service protection for federal workers, or a lot of federal workers not 100%, and other regulatory laws like the APA that have to be followed. You can't just wave a pen and say I'm firing all these people.
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
140573 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:11 am to
quote:

Explain to me how the strategy was effective with those results


To be honest I think vacating McCarthy's seat was personal retribution for Matt Gaetz because of the way McCarthy smeared Matt's friend congressman Madison Cawthorn who did not win reelection because of McCarthy.
This post was edited on 1/9/25 at 9:11 am
Posted by Jake88
Member since Apr 2005
79993 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:12 am to
What was it that Rand Paul found when his office put out the 2 trillion in waste report last month? Start with that.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
With populists, expect populism
Member since Jan 2004
476983 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:12 am to
quote:

To be honest I think vacating McCarthy's seat was personal for Matt Gaetz

It 100% was

Emotional thinking is not rational thinking and that is a perfect example

quote:

because of the way McCarthy smeared Matt's friend congressman Madison Cawthorn who did not win reelection because of McCarthy.

I imagine this was part of it but there was a lot more, however a lot of people don't like Gaetz because he's your typica arrogant l career politician nepo baby
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
63416 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:12 am to
quote:

How do you get the populous onboard with the idea of cutting things if you don’t start somewhere?
This is an excellent question to be asking. Unfortunately the thing that need to be cut… people think is “their money”. Everyone wants cuts… for others, but themselves. So short of some radical shift toward personal responsibility or perception change to understand the government doesn’t have “your money”… it will take a crisis to see any real change. Sadly.
Posted by Gifman
Clearwater Beach, FL
Member since Jan 2021
18897 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:12 am to
quote:

SlowFlowPro


quote:

Then stop derailing the thread.


Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
63416 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:18 am to
quote:

To be honest I think vacating McCarthy's seat was personal retribution for Matt Gaetz because of the way McCarthy smeared Matt's friend congressman Madison Cawthorn who did not win reelection because of McCarthy.
”American first!”
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
140573 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:19 am to
quote:

I imagine this was part of it but there was a lot more,


Yes. The entire setup by Greenberg was probably part of it.
Posted by GeauxGutsy
Member since Jul 2017
5973 posts
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:20 am to
CNBC
Jump to page
Page First 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 11Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram