No longer a mystery! Elon Musk, Ramaswamy are on the Team!

1. 86

   tsmogposted 4 months ago

   Elon Musk, Ramaswamy land Trump admin roles by The Hill (Nov 12, 2024 7:57 pm ET)
   https://thehill.com/policy/4987402-trum … -spending/
   
   "President-elect Trump has tapped tech entrepreneurs Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead an advisory group focused on cutting federal spending and reducing the size of the government.
   
   Trump announced Tuesday that Musk and Ramaswamy would lead his “Department of Government Efficiency” (DOGE), an initiative meant to “slash excess regulations, cut wasteful expenditures” and restructure federal agencies.
   
   Trump said DOGE would “provide advice and guidance from outside of government” and partner with the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
   
   “It will become, potentially, ‘The Manhattan Project’ of our time. Republican politicians have dreamed about the objectives of ‘DOGE’ for a very long time,” the president-elect added.
   
   It was not immediately clear whether DOGE would be an official part of the Trump administration or advise the White House from outside the government."
   
   Done deal! The mystery solved!
   
   Thoughts, criticisms, accolades, and/or commentary?

   replyreport
   1. 69

      Ken Burgessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Its a relief, is it not?
      
      We have all sensed a Civil War brewing, the Media has been whispering about it....
      
      And this is what it will be... very civil ... very Democratic... if allowed to pursue (without assassinations and sabotage)...
      
      The old corrupt entrenched establishment in DC ... vs ... those who were brave enough to stand up and talk against it... risking it all, wealth, life...
      
      Popcorn is Popping!!!

      replyreport
      1. 86

         tsmogposted 4 months agoin reply to this

         "Its a relief, is it not?"
         
         Not really. However, it will prove to be quite interesting to witness the 5 W's and 'how much' to the story that will unfold before us, the citizens, along with how and how much it will impact us.

         replyreport
         1. 69

            Ken Burgessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Of course it is... the alternative would have been for it to culminate into violence against the government itself, ultimately.
            
            The people sent Trump to DC in 2016 as a big FU to the way our government had been screwing us over 25 years and getting us into wars based on lies...
            
            The people sent Trump BACK in 2024 because he assembled a team of people that had the balls to say the government is F'd up and doing harm to Americans and America the Nation...
            
            So I expect RFK and Musk and Gabbard and Vance and the rest to get in their and fight against that machine... that corruption... that callous criminal unseen behemoth that overthrows nations and allows corporations to poison us and our kids for the sake of their power and profit.

            replyreport
            1. 86

               tsmogposted 4 months agoin reply to this

               Again, I find no relief what-so-ever. Get over it, Ken, those are my feelings, not yours.

               replyreport
               1. 69

                  Ken Burgessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Well fortunately, it seems that Trump and his team recognize why they were sent there... no appointment so far says that more than:
                  
                  Pete Hegseth For Secretary of Defense.
                  
                  Nice pick... has written about how he believes the Military needs to be overhauled, he is a bit politically correct for my tastes, but he is spot on.

                  replyreport
                  1. 86

                     tsmogposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                     Okay . . .

                     replyreport
                  2. 60

                     Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                     He is a media star. Someone who has proven he can carry Trump's water on air and most importantly.. look good while doing it.

                     replyreport
            2. 85

               Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

               Woo Hoo!  Trump is building a well-coordinated team. All picked to actually work together, and get the job done. But Elon and Vivek
               
               Who Let The Dogs Out! Who Let The Dogs Out!
               https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojULkWEUsPs

               replyreport
      2. 81

         peterstreepposted 4 months agoin reply to this

         Corrupt. In my humble opinion buying a "Ministry of Government Efficiency" is corruption.
         But perhaps I have a different definition of corruption.
         You give a party lots of money during an election, and afterwards you get what you asked for.
         Basically buying a part of the government.
         
         Even the name:  Department of Government Efficiency, DOGE, is a acronym for Elon Musk' s crypto currency...!!!

         replyreport
2. 71

   abwilliamsposted 4 months ago

   The Washington D.C. Swamp-Slaying Dynamic Duo... I love it!!
   
   I am SO excited, and it isn't even Christmas yet!

   replyreport
3. 88

   Venkatachari Mposted 4 months ago

   It was foreseeable. They got their share of the fruits. I rather hoped that Musk would head the  Ministry/Department of Automic Energy and Electronics, something like that, of great importance.

   replyreport
4. 86

   tsmogposted 4 months ago

   Elon Musk pledges ‘maximum transparency’ in new DOGE role, complete with suggestion box and leaderboard for worst examples of government waste by Fortune (Nov 13, 2024)
   https://fortune.com/2024/11/13/elon-mus … ite-house/
   
   "Elon Musk plans to turn his newly appointed role slashing U.S. government bureaucracy into a game.
   
   Appointed to run the newly created “Department of Government Efficiency”, or DOGE, the Tesla CEO aims to make the experience both transparent and interactive by enlisting the help of the American taxpayer. This would include a virtual suggestion box as well as ranking some of the worst examples of federal waste.
   
   “We will also have a leaderboard for most insanely dumb spending of your tax dollars,” Musk posted. “The entertainment value will be epic.”
   
   I just may get it on that. But, hey, what is the motivating factor? Will our taxes receive a credit if our suggestion is used and saves 'X' dollars? There has to be a prize, right? Can't wait to see the rules posted and get the online address to play that will be bookmarked.
   
   I speculate there just may be not only gamers getting into the fray, but the new rising AI fanatics. An epic and brilliant idea to crowd source solutions. Similar to voting one might say. But, can federal employees play?
   
   Thoughts, criticisms, accolades, and/or commentary?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Is this not a huge conflict of interest?  I mean influence over the federal government can be (will be)  extraordinarily lucrative for Musk. 
      
      "His companies were promised $3 billion across nearly 100 different contracts last year with 17 federal agencies."
      
      His entanglements with federal regulators are also numerous and adversarial. His companies have been
      Involved in at least 20 recent investigations or reviews, including over the safety of his Tesla cars and the environmental damage caused by his rockets....
      
      I'm guessing that investigation/regulation of Musk's companies disappears and his new position will enrich Musk even more.
      
      That's what 100 million dollars buys.
      
      https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/20/us/p … racts.html

      replyreport
      1. 82

         GA Andersonposted 4 months agoin reply to this

         Your opposition demands the assumption that Musk has nefarious motives for his 'beneficence.'
         
         What if he doesn't? What if he really does have our best interest at heart? What if the thrill of his life is chasing his stated goals? What if the richest man in the world is satisfied with his wealth and is focused on accomplishment instead of increased wealth?
         
         What if this 'weird guy' really is a good guy with good intentions?
         
         His past profile (behaviors and directions) says his motives are just what he says. Look what he's done with his money—as the richest man in the world; no mansions, no yachts, no gold-plated toilets . . .
         
         What indication is there that he's lying and just wants more power and money? Whatcha got?
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 86

            tsmogposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            "Whatcha got?"
            
            Time . . .

            replyreport
         2. 60

            Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Oh yes, the ultimate corporate tycoon in charge of government spending and regulation? 
            
            Musk acknowledged during a virtual town hall event October that the massive cuts he hopes to enact would bring "temporary hardship" to ordinary Americans. Lol, really?
            
            He has also cast his push to gut federal regulations as an "existential" issue, claiming that "humanity will never reach Mars" unless "we get rid of the mountain of smothering regulations."
            
            So he essentially is telling me that I'll have to endure  "hardships" while he pursues abolishing regulation that hinder his businesses?   Limit his income? No thanks.
            
            One of the functions of government regulations is to protect the American people. I think we all depend on these regulations to protect our air, water, workers, children's safety, and so on.  "Cutting red tape" is shorthand for getting rid of the safeguards that protect us in order to benefit corporate interests. For me, our problem is that corporations capture of so much of our public policy, not this lie that corporations are held back by too many rules.
            
            His own businesses have regularly run afoul of the very rules he will be in position to attack in his new position.
            
            Is he a good guy? I don't know I guess that remains to be seen.  But honestly I think he is America's first oligarch.   
            
            His companies have billions of dollars in contracts with the federal government. Now, with his extraordinarily close relationship with  Trump, he stands to enrich himself even further to a level incomprehensible to most of us.

            replyreport
            1. 86

               tsmogposted 4 months agoin reply to this

               I remember when working in a gas station in the 70's we poured anti-freeze/coolant into the sewer drain. Today you have to capture it and it is picked up by a hazmat service. Is that the type of regulations you are speaking of?

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  Yes, exactly.   And the fact that Musk's companies have been involved in a number of environmental issues related to wastewater and air pollution.
                  
                  Review of state and federal records by NPR, including some obtained through a freedom of information request, shows how SpaceX has  ignored environmental regulations With each of its launches, records show, the company discharged tens of thousands of gallons of what regulators classify as industrial wastewater into the surrounding environment.

                  replyreport
         3. 69

            Ken Burgessposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Musk is world's better than the Looney Tunes collection we have had running the show the last 4 years...
            
            Most people know, already, without hindsight, that this is the worst Administration we have had for America, other than one or two, that did even more harm... like Buchanan or Wilson... who vie for worst of all time.
            
            [edit] In other news:
            
            Thune won in a secret-ballot vote of 29-24, beating out opposing candidates Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Rick Scott, R-Fla.
            
            Nice thing about that, it looks as if Trump has a solid 24 base of Senators to work with, being able to twist some arms of the other 29, should enable him to mitigate the impact of the RINOs and sellouts that will resist real change.
            
            The insiders still plan on fighting to cling to power and limit Trump's impact, obviously.

            replyreport
   2. 82

      GA Andersonposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Here's a related direction:
      
      DOGE (Office of Government Efficiency) Meets Sen. Lankford's 'Federal Fumbles.
      
      Caveat: What follows is a biased presentation by Sen. Lankford. But, the important question is whether the points made are essentially true. The arguments of validity are, at this point, secondary.
      
      Somebody should give Musk the Senator's phone number.
      
      
      This is what Americans see. Very few think about the "5 Ws," or have the time to do so. Help them out Tsmog.
      
      GA

      replyreport
      1. 86

         tsmogposted 4 months agoin reply to this

         That was some great researching for a rebuttal(?), though I am starting to have doubts if you know what the 5 W's and 'how much' is, GA. At first I thought you were trying to sell me a book without a link to Amazon to get credit for it like in a HP article. BTW . . . I won't proclaim I know what Americans think, but I can speak for myself. I take the innovation of DOGE seriously. You can accept that or not. As said, with respect, SIR, I await the online address to submit my entries to the game.

         replyreport
         1. 82

            GA Andersonposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Now, obstinance is trying to raise its head. To use Cred's word, I'm feeling that you're seeing my responses to you as adversarial.
            
            They're not. My X blurb wasn't a researched rebuttal, It was to your point of the 'Ws" (should I get Google to list them and pretend to know them (do you really think I don't?)).
            
            For instance; I bet at least a few of the Senator's examples weren't specifically federally directed, but were instead local decisions on block grant usage. Discovering the Ws would clear that up. I'm not claiming to know. Hence the caveat. But, it seems logical that a mechanism for evaluation would be a good thing.
            
            Here's another instance: The Senator also spoke of the Omnibus spending bills Congress has been using for funding budgets. His key point, to paraphrase, is that the bill contains thousands of pages of line items that none of us know about. They don't read it or vet it; they just accept it (after the committee fights, of course). Wouldn't it be a good thing to have a non-political (but certainly ideological) evaluation? The Ws of how that happens would answer a lot of questions. But nobody gets them.
            
            GA

            replyreport
            1. 86

               tsmogposted 4 months agoin reply to this

               Okay . . .
               
               A little rambling . . .
               
               I am the first to admit over expenditure, waste, and bullshit should be cut from our government just as much as me going for fast food instead of making a PBJ and sticking to my personal budget. I do question the prominent wisdom that will be exercised with the cost of jobs not only of government workers, but civilian.
               
               I can't fathom how many will be effected. In other words, how many will be in the unemployment lines? How will swift cuts to government affect the economy? Will there be a decline in growth? Maybe only a short drop?
               
               I have questions some may say are unwarranted, yet they exist. To tell me not to worry Trump knows what he is doing is folly in my eyes just as much as when they told me don't worry Biden knows what he is doing.
               
               And, I appreciate your personal criticism of me. I learned!

               replyreport
               1. 82

                  GA Andersonposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  First, and a most important point to clear up; none of my comments, about any of this stuff, was meant to say 'don't worry.' Especially not 'don't worry about Trump, he knows what he is doing.'
                  
                  The difference this time is that I like the messages of his picks. For now, that's all we have; messages signaled by leadership choices. I am hopefully optimistic that 'this time' will be different. It might work. But I'm not reaching for any champagne yet.
                  
                  BREAKING NEWS EDIT: Oh hell. 10 minutes after posting this reply I see the news that Pres. Trump has named Matt Gaetz as AG. I don't like that message.
                  
                  Primarily that is because I don't believe most of the campaign rhetoric. I don't think there will be a 'mass deportation' as described. I don't think it is possible. I think the deportation event will be one of steps, but at least there will be steps. I think the 'mass beaurocratic purge' will also be a purge by steps. No immediate 50% energy bills, no immediate grocery price slashing, etc. etc.
                  
                  Folks are screaming over the hyperbole and we all know better.
                  
                  To another point, stubbornness is riding me like a jockey (titter, titter  ;-)  ). What personal criticism did I give? Did I use "adversarial" in the wrong context?
                  
                  GA

                  replyreport
                  1. 86

                     tsmogposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                     "First, and a most important point to clear up; none of my comments, about any of this stuff, was meant to say 'don't worry.'"
                     
                     It wasn't implied or so I thought.
                     
                     "What personal criticism did I give?"
                     
                     Probably, none. Or, perhaps its meaning. I was hinting at constructive criticism with the adversarial portion of the aforementioned comment. In other words, I took a step back and read what I wrote and pondered it related to 'me, myself, and I" hence I learned.

                     replyreport
      2. 60

         Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

         "This is what Americans see. Very few think about the "5 Ws," or have the time to do so. "
         
         These things are a drop in the bucket.  Any waste of taxpayer dollars should be scrutinized but this misses at least one huge abuse in Trump's prior administration...Billions in taxpayer dollars thrown at farmers in order  to fix the  problem he created with his tariffs.   Will taxpayers be forced to foot this bill again

         replyreport
         1. 82

            GA Andersonposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Yes, they are a drop in the bucket, but they are barometers of the problem.
            
            Was the Trump insertion necessary for your point? I can agree with you that Pres. Trump's farmer 'bailout' was the cost of a mistake (or a casualty of a trade war?). Was it all the president's fault? I can't say, I don't remember the 'Ws'  ( ;-) to Tsmog) of the situation.
            
            GA

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Willowarborposted 4 months agoin reply to this

               "Was the Trump insertion necessary for your point?".
               
               It came to mind immediately, especially since it looks like he is poised to repeat the mistake.  He had plenty of economists who warned of the negative impacts of tariffs last time and most definitely even louder this time. 
               
               I don't like Musk's talk of impending "hardships"  for the American people either, do you?

               replyreport
               1. 82

                  GA Andersonposted 4 months agoin reply to this

                  No, I don't want hardship either, but the most honest answer is a cliche that I see as a general truism.
                  
                  GA

                  replyreport
5. 60

   Willowarborposted 4 months ago

   Well golly gee folks...
   
   Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have already started recruiting for President-elect Donald Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency on X — but job seekers apparently need to cough up a subscription to the social media platform to apply.
   
   A premium subscription to Musk’s social media platform currently sets a user back between $8 and $16 a month in the US.
   
   One user added, “To DM DOGE on X, you need to be verified. To be verified, you need to pay a subscription. Ultimately, Elon wins both ends.”
   
   Cool?
   
   https://nypost.com/2024/11/15/us-news/e … one-catch/

   replyreport
   1. 81

      peterstreepposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Everyone is deleting their X account and have gone to Bluesky.

      replyreport
6. 60

   Willowarborposted 4 months ago

   Didn't someone say something to the effect of the danger lies in giving the keys to democracy to those who will profit from destroying it?

   replyreport
   1. 85

      Sharlee01posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have partnered in a government initiative to improve U.S. efficiency, particularly in areas like data transparency, government operations, and regulatory reform. Their efforts aim to streamline processes and utilize innovative technologies for better service. Ramaswamy has expressed a focus on removing inefficiencies in government, while Musk brings his expertise in technology and business innovation to the table, offering a more business-minded approach to governance​.
      
      They are not receiving a paycheck and are essentially functioning as a think tank, reporting directly to Trump, who will ultimately make the decisions. So, it might be best to wait and voice your concerns only if something inappropriate arises.
      
      It seems like you're consistently worrying about things that never materialize—like your concerns over Project 2025. As of now, the facts show those concerns were unfounded.

      replyreport