I hope Musk builds tools that provide extreme transparency to every NGO and agency funded by taxpayers. Keep the lights on.

BusterAg said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

Farmer_J said:

---

Related question.

Will Republicans remove the expense saved from the next budget?

I doubt it.

---

The 2025 budget will be much lower than 2024 budget.

Balanced budget by 2028.

---

Totally cool with that as long as the balancing isn't done off the backs of the top few percent of tax payers. Everyone should pay their part of the deficit.

---

I would prefer massive entitlement reform, the complete elimination of NGO, massive cuts to foreign aid, and reasonable cuts to the fed workforce

---

Again, I support all of that but the top earners could get tax cuts and the lower earners tax increases.

Not if congress reduces the appropriations to these agencies to fit the new size of them. Set a good declining precedent of allocation for the next three years and it will be hard to hire back and politically unpalatable to increase funding enough to hire them back.

It's crucial that congress follow through on what DOGE is doing.

EO type orders can be reversed by the next President via EO, its why Presidents should always try via a LAW.

The repetitive CRs instead of budgets is helpful because it makes them start at the current amounts. It's also hard to hire a bunch of people at one time. Most of those people aren't just sitting around waiting for a gov job. The IRS hasn't gotten anywhere close to the 81,000 they said they were going to hire. I'd be surprised if they have net any new employees since that budget resolution. That's the point and the chess move by the admin - there is inertia to overcome to rehire no matter how you make cuts now.

Burpelson said:

---

EO type orders can be reversed by the next President via EO, its why Presidents should always try via a LAW.

---

This is Phase 1. You have to use EOs to expedite the demolition of the unaccountable agency structures because the Executive has the authority to manage its own branch, not Congress. Too many Congress members were in on the scam. Phase 2 needs to be improving the effectiveness of the oversight and budgeting functions of the Legislative branch.

Hopefully we never find out.

3 Toed Pete said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

Farmer_J said:

---

I see a lot of posts about how Clinton cut the federal work source by 15% when he first came into office.

Can't help but think that that was just a ruse to get rid of all the entrenched Reaganites and rehire.

---

Clinton did more to shrink federal spending than any president since.

---

After he was dragged to do it by a GOP wave midterm

---

True. In 94 Gingrich proposed the Contract With America which called for balancing the budget, among other things. That platform got the Republicans the House for the first time in 50 years. But after a successful period spending went back to normal.

---

A balanced budget will never be sustainable in a democracy without a constitutional amendment. There will always be more than 50% of the population (and therefore representatives) who want the payout now at the expense of the future. Sadly the republicans balancing the budget is actually good for democrats. It means when they inevitably get power again they have just that much MORE money to spend.

It's kind of unfortunate our forefathers couldn't foresee the level of federal governmental growth that has occurred over 250 years. Imagine explaining countries actually adopting communism to George Washington. He would have probably been more likely to believe the lizard people hypothesis.

Hopefully there won't be another D president for 24 to 30 years and we won't have to worry about it.

one safe place said:

---

Hopefully there won't be another D president for 24 to 30 years and we won't have to worry about it.

---

That's the wrong way to think about this. Democrats are thieves, yes, but thieves come in all forms and parties. If the Democrats stop being a viable political party, the thieves will just adopt a new one to do the same thing. Constant vigilance is required. Complacency is the enemy.

Presently, the Democrats are hell bent on destroying the country so the answer is yes. I'm hopeful a legitimate candidate will come forward and restore sanity to the party. It is imperative that ALL politicians take responsibility for our present situation.

Burpelson said:

---

EO type orders can be reversed by the next President via EO, its why Presidents should always try via a LAW.

---

Majority in House and Senate is very thin

e=mc2 said:

---

You're assuming there will be another Democrat president.

---

Unfortunately, there will be. I just hope it's not this decade.

Every single thing the Democrats sell sounds outstanding.

They're the equivalent of "I'll give you $5,000/month (or whatever amount from us/DC), but I get to tell you where to live, what to say, and where to go". IF you violate those terms, we have over 300,000 laws in the country I can bring to bear on you, your family, and your friends".

Naturally, the sales pitch won't say anything about the last part. All of their programs right now are something similar, and the "one world government" group has always counted on that, having watched it work successfully throughout history. The number 1 issue to meet the one world government goal.is to wipe the US out, not so much the country, but the constitution.

Once the they've created enough civil strife then they'll sell "look at this mess the (conservative of the moment) has caused, we need a new constitution with common sense that protects the poor", or something along those lines.

fasthorse05 said:

---

e=mc2 said:

---

You're assuming there will be another Democrat president.

---

Unfortunately, there will be. I just hope it's not this decade.

Every single thing the Democrats sell sounds outstanding.

They're the equivalent of "I'll give you $5,000/month (or whatever amount from us/DC), but I get to tell you where to live, what to say, and where to go". IF you violate those terms, we have over 300,000 laws in the country I can bring to bear on you, your family, and your friends".

Naturally, the sales pitch won't say anything about the last part. All of their programs right now are something similar, and the "one world government" group has always counted on that, having watched it work successfully throughout history. The number 1 issue to meet the one world government goal.is to wipe the US out, not so much the country, but the constitution.

Once the they've created enough civil strife then they'll sell "look at this mess the (conservative of the moment) has caused, we need a new constitution with common sense that protects the poor", or something along those lines.

---

All the USAID corruption exposed by DOGE shows *exactly* how it would have gone. They would have said "we need a new Constitution in order to protect democracy from disinformation and election interference." And at that point, freedom would be doomed. A few more years, and they would have pulled it off. Never ever forget that McCarthy was proven correct.

General Jack D. Ripper said:

---

How will the leftists mount a campaign? We've exposed the grift of taxpayer money going to leftist NGOs, which is then funded to media and back to the DNC. The machine appears on life support.

---

You think they care? They hate Trump and the R's so much it doesn't matter.
They're literally calling him an authoritarian for smashing the corruption. TDS is real. I'm 100% serious. It is a literal affliction that keeps otherwise smart people from thinking clearly. Couple that with a bought media that is literally a propaganda wing of the left spoon feeding opinions to an ignorant populace that they've intentionally dumbed down for the past 45 years through the Department of "Education" and you've got millions of the cast of "Idiocracy" walking around you every day.

A lot of federal positions will be filled with better people. Just because employees are fired doesn't mean all positions are fully closed. But likely a lot of functions will run with 1/4 the workforce.

Let them try. A Republican congress would have the final say.

After 12 years of Republican rule, they will forget these firings even happened. Ancient history.

BusterAg said:

---

Farmer_J said:

---

Related question.

Will Republicans remove the expense saved from the next budget?

I doubt it.

---

The 2025 budget will be much lower than 2024 budget.

Balanced budget by 2028.

---

You're overly optimistic. Johnson is still funding wasteful projects just not at USAID. GOP needs to start with gutting the "Inflation Reduction Act" and all other Biden spending as part of this reconciliation package. We know there was a huge amount of waste in 2019 with a budget of $4.4T and we're on pace for over $7T in spending in FY 2025, but Johnson's $200B/yr in savings will get us to a balanced budget in 2028.



Also, as part of reconciliation process, they're claiming $3T in tax benefits over 10 years from the tax cuts/extension, but that seems overly optimistic - it's around 5 times the projected benefits from the Tax Foundation. They miss on this then they're going to miss bigly on a 2028 budget.

Yes.

Next question.

Jack Squat 83 said:

---

Yes, with 4 years backpay.

---

Yes and 2 years after that they'ell run gov debt to $60T and bankrupt the country.

Ah the joys of ignorant, corrupt, vile liberal rule.

doubledog said:

---

Let them try. A Republican congress would have the final say.

---

Bawhahahaha, I wish but the sad fact is the left would disband congress and probably the courts. Its what communist do. Honestly unless this era of radicalism changes, war could be in our future. We are not in a good place.

People mistake the impact/issue. Sitting on the other side of the table, the reality is that most of the impact isn't simply the fired federal employees and reorganization, but the tremendous impact on the other, much larger NGO and contractor world. This can't be simply 're-hired.'

Not after the public realizes we can do without them, OP.

Let's hope we don't have to worry about that for a long time or even better… ever.

I still read posts on Facebook and other social media platforms about how horrible Trump is and that Elon is going to steal our Social Security, etc. Some that I grew up with in a small, rural, conservative town. They are still getting fed talking points by the unions and coworkers. Remember how thin the actual vote was, despite a clown of a candidate on the other side.

Also, how many of those that voted D actually pay any significant taxes? Do they care if the spending is cut? All this "carnage" is going to create another group of TDS victims I fear. Get a young, "clean" guy and promise that half of the population more free stuff and come up with a new talking point besides "Nazi, threat to democracy, felon, facist, etc" and sway enough independents to elect another D and start all over again.

I'm old and cynical. I sure hope this is the beginning of a new era in the USA and we never go "woke" again...just for the record.

rocky the dog said:

---

Government employees...

---

It be like that on Sundays at the office. Phones are quiet and the real challenge is what to have for lunch.

They spent the better part of 2 decades building their slush fund and their political deep state machine

If Trump can tear enough of it down there is no way they can rebuild in a 4 year presidential term.

Jeeper79 said:

---

Farmer_J said:

---

I see a lot of posts about how Clinton cut the federal work source by 15% when he first came into office.

Can't help but think that that was just a ruse to get rid of all the entrenched Reaganites and rehire.

---

Clinton did more to shrink federal spending than any president since.

---

This is absolute horse***** He didn't do a damn thing.

Here is him complaining about "cuts" (there weren't any; it was a decrease in the rate of growth) and talking about a "7 year plan" to balance the budget -- well after he'd be out of office -- when Congress did it almost immediately:



Here he is in 1997, after reelection, trying to wreck a budget Congress has already balanced. Increadibly, he's talking about some spending increases. Again, his "plan" was to balance the budget well after he left office, which meant not at all. In fact, we ran surpluses during this time and virtually all of his second term but not because of him.



Then, the ******* actually took credit for a balanced budget that he had zip to do with:



DON'T YOU DARE talk about Clinton's "efforts" with a balanced budget unless stating, truthfully, there were none.

Jeeper79 said:

---

Farmer_J said:

---

I see a lot of posts about how Clinton cut the federal work source by 15% when he first came into office.

Can't help but think that that was just a ruse to get rid of all the entrenched Reaganites and rehire.

---

Clinton did more to shrink federal spending than any president since.

---

Before or after he lost 40 years of Democrat control of the House?

hoopla said:

---

Is there anything to prevent them from doing this?

---

Of course they will. This is the problem with ruling by EO. We need to codify as much as we can into law in these next two years to make it more difficult on them. Clock is already ticking.

Jack Squat 83 said:

---

Yes, with 4 years backpay.

---

Oh **** no. 4 years? I suggest 12 years... so abandon that ****ing democrat math. lol

Jeeper79 said:

---

Farmer_J said:

---

I see a lot of posts about how Clinton cut the federal work source by 15% when he first came into office.

Can't help but think that that was just a ruse to get rid of all the entrenched Reaganites and rehire.

---

Clinton did more to shrink federal spending than any president since.

---

Hilarious. Clinton wanted to ram thru socialized medicine in his first two years and put Hillary in charge of making it happen. He was so unpopular in the first two years that Dems lost the House for the first time in 40 years. To his credit, Clinton correctly interpreted the massive beatdown as a mandate to NOT do what he wanted to do and instead go along with the Republicans.

Here is the problem that I see. If this much corruption is going on at the Federal level then it is also going on at the STATE level (including Texas). Who is going to expose all of the state abuse? The other thing that pisses me off, why haven't the REPUBLICANS that are in office, been exposing this BS. They should have been screaming at the top of their lungs to inform the public, that is their job!!!!!!! I think is really time to drain the swamp including all of the Republicans and start over with a new set of politicians.
Mr Aggieterri