11 ms·

That CS student was Luke Farritor -- now part of the infamous DOGE team.

by Erwin 2y ago

ksenzee 2y ago
[flagged]
SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
I get the ideologues here being mad… but I don’t get mad to the point where people need to pretend this guy isn’t highly intelligent. Doesn’t it make it better that there are really sharp people on the “DOGE” team. Shouldn’t people be more mad at dummies doing it?
- ryeights 2y ago
  Who is saying he isn’t intelligent? And can’t smart people do bad things?
  - SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
    Are things you disagree with bad by definition or assumption? Or because you were told… because unless you have a front row seat, everything you know is because someone else already parsed that info for you.
    - pavel_lishin 2y ago
      > unless you have a front row seat, everything you know is because someone else already parsed that info for you. Taking this to its logical conclusion, it is pointless for us to discuss anything we're not actively doing.
      - SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
        Interesting idea. Perhaps you could also investigate the motivation of the people who tell you how to feel and what to think? Along those lines… how many were receiving say, USAID themselves?
        pavel_lishin 2y ago
        I'm not sure who you're having a conversation with, but I don't think it's me.
  - briandear 2y ago
    What’s bad about finding waste? Many appropriations are expired yet still keep getting paid out. That’s crazy. The liberal media echo chamber is preventing people from using common sense. When media and congressional democrats literally call us “Nazis” — it’s hard to take any of it seriously. “Trump is a fascist” If that’s true, he’s the first fascist in history to attempt to make the government smaller. Apparently being interested in free speech and smaller government and reducing waste, fraud, and abuse is fascism. The people screaming loudest about USAID for example huge hypocrites, or have a very short memory: https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/press-release/icymi-washington-post-exposes-democrats-hypocritical-flip-flop-on-usaid-reorganization/ https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/press-release/icymi-washing... https://x.com/tracking_doge/status/1888032469699498379?s=46 https://x.com/tracking_doge/status/1888032469699498379?s=46
    - Moomoomoo309 2y ago
      The problem with it is that if you're claiming Musk gives a rat's ass about free speech, there are many, many examples that disprove it. He has literally banned people on X or taken away their checkmarks or added checkmarks to people because he didn't like what they had to say. He's not a free speech absolutist, he constantly censors people who say things he doesn't like. In theory, DOGE isn't a bad idea, but you look at the implementation, and you look at the moves Musk has made to remove his enemies from their positions, and you look at the things they won't touch - their goals align more with making the billionaire class richer than anything relating to free speech or reducing waste. Musk lies constantly, with and without reason. I personally think he's so used to it, he can't help lying at this point.
      - SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
        [flagged]
    - atombender 2y ago
      People are upset partly because the new administration is taking the law into its own hands, and partly because it seems to be acting without any planning or research, and seems to be going about it recklessly and without concern for consequences. Regarding USAID specifically, it was set up in the aftermath of the Foreign Assistance Act by John F. Kennedy, and as an agency it was later established as law by Congress. Trump cannot legally shut down USAID without another act of Congress, and he cannot legally redirect its funds, which have already been appropriated. The administration is well within their right to change how the funds are allocated, but so far the stated intention has been to shut off all foreign aid, not change what aid is provided. The fact that Warren Christopher etc. wanted to get rid of USAID 27 years ago is irrelevant, since that plan was never adopted and did not call for shutting off foreign aid, so it's not comparable. It's just misdirection. It's also difficult to take arguments for "government waste" seriously in the case of USAID. First, the agency has a tiny budget of around $50B (2023), 16x less than Medicare, or around 0.8% of the entire state budget. Secondly, it was explicitly set up to give away money. Waste is its raison d'etre! Reports show its admin overhead being around 7.7%, which is very low for an aid organization. It's pretty clear that USAID isn't cut because of waste, but because the Trump administration wants to stop giving aid to poor foreign countries. However, they're not so inclined to say that out loud. It's also a self-own because USAID is an important soft power tool. It's one of the ways the US can project a positive image on the world, something it has been very good at since the post-war period.
- xhevahir 2y ago
  It's good that smart people are involved if we take it at face value that they're trying increase "government efficiency," as opposed to, say, dismantling the welfare and regulatory state; if the latter are their aim, and if we don't want them to accomplish such a goal, we should not be cheered to learn that they're such clever lads.
  - generalizations 2y ago
    > dismantling the welfare and regulatory state Pretty sure that's exactly what the US voted for in the last election, considering that was pretty explicitly promised. I think most of the US is cheering them on as they do it.
    - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
      That's what 49.8% of the voters voted for. So not really "most" for any reasonable meaning of the term "most".
      - briandear 2y ago
        People don’t elect presidents, states do, and states elected Trump with a 312 to 226 electoral vote margin — so the states overwhelmingly voted for Trump. The purpose of the United States federal government is very strictly spelled out — and the 10th amendment makes it very clear that powers not expressly mentioned in the Constitution are reserved for the states. The U.S. is a republic, not a democracy.
        seanmcdirmid 2y ago
        Electoral votes don’t support a president’s agenda, people do. Being underwater already at the beginning of his term means the other politicians that have to work with him (who also have to get elected) are more under pressure not to. That’s why not having the support of most voters is relevant in Trump getting things done. Grand parent basically said this guy has a mandate from the American people and he really doesn’t. Heck, it was big news that his disapproval rating is almost the same as his approval rating now, the most popular he has ever been but still not liked by most Americans.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- flir 2y ago
  I'm not mad I'm just disappointed. So much potential and he dropped out of school to become a Thiel/Musk minion.

That CS student was Luke Farritor -- now part of the infamous DOGE team.

by Erwin 2y ago

That CS student was Luke Farritor -- now part of the infamous DOGE team.

ksenzee 2y ago

[flagged]

SV_BubbleTime 2y ago

I get the ideologues here being mad… but I don’t get mad to the point where people need to pretend this guy isn’t highly intelligent. Doesn’t it make it better that there are really sharp people on the “DOGE” team. Shouldn’t people be more mad at dummies doing it?

ryeights 2y ago
Who is saying he isn’t intelligent? And can’t smart people do bad things?
- SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
  Are things you disagree with bad by definition or assumption? Or because you were told… because unless you have a front row seat, everything you know is because someone else already parsed that info for you.
  - pavel_lishin 2y ago
    > unless you have a front row seat, everything you know is because someone else already parsed that info for you. Taking this to its logical conclusion, it is pointless for us to discuss anything we're not actively doing.
    - SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
      Interesting idea. Perhaps you could also investigate the motivation of the people who tell you how to feel and what to think? Along those lines… how many were receiving say, USAID themselves?
      - pavel_lishin 2y ago
        I'm not sure who you're having a conversation with, but I don't think it's me.
- briandear 2y ago
  What’s bad about finding waste? Many appropriations are expired yet still keep getting paid out. That’s crazy. The liberal media echo chamber is preventing people from using common sense. When media and congressional democrats literally call us “Nazis” — it’s hard to take any of it seriously. “Trump is a fascist” If that’s true, he’s the first fascist in history to attempt to make the government smaller. Apparently being interested in free speech and smaller government and reducing waste, fraud, and abuse is fascism. The people screaming loudest about USAID for example huge hypocrites, or have a very short memory: https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/press-release/icymi-washington-post-exposes-democrats-hypocritical-flip-flop-on-usaid-reorganization/ https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/press-release/icymi-washing... https://x.com/tracking_doge/status/1888032469699498379?s=46 https://x.com/tracking_doge/status/1888032469699498379?s=46
  - Moomoomoo309 2y ago
    The problem with it is that if you're claiming Musk gives a rat's ass about free speech, there are many, many examples that disprove it. He has literally banned people on X or taken away their checkmarks or added checkmarks to people because he didn't like what they had to say. He's not a free speech absolutist, he constantly censors people who say things he doesn't like. In theory, DOGE isn't a bad idea, but you look at the implementation, and you look at the moves Musk has made to remove his enemies from their positions, and you look at the things they won't touch - their goals align more with making the billionaire class richer than anything relating to free speech or reducing waste. Musk lies constantly, with and without reason. I personally think he's so used to it, he can't help lying at this point.
    - SV_BubbleTime 2y ago
      [flagged]
  - atombender 2y ago
    People are upset partly because the new administration is taking the law into its own hands, and partly because it seems to be acting without any planning or research, and seems to be going about it recklessly and without concern for consequences. Regarding USAID specifically, it was set up in the aftermath of the Foreign Assistance Act by John F. Kennedy, and as an agency it was later established as law by Congress. Trump cannot legally shut down USAID without another act of Congress, and he cannot legally redirect its funds, which have already been appropriated. The administration is well within their right to change how the funds are allocated, but so far the stated intention has been to shut off all foreign aid, not change what aid is provided. The fact that Warren Christopher etc. wanted to get rid of USAID 27 years ago is irrelevant, since that plan was never adopted and did not call for shutting off foreign aid, so it's not comparable. It's just misdirection. It's also difficult to take arguments for "government waste" seriously in the case of USAID. First, the agency has a tiny budget of around $50B (2023), 16x less than Medicare, or around 0.8% of the entire state budget. Secondly, it was explicitly set up to give away money. Waste is its raison d'etre! Reports show its admin overhead being around 7.7%, which is very low for an aid organization. It's pretty clear that USAID isn't cut because of waste, but because the Trump administration wants to stop giving aid to poor foreign countries. However, they're not so inclined to say that out loud. It's also a self-own because USAID is an important soft power tool. It's one of the ways the US can project a positive image on the world, something it has been very good at since the post-war period.
xhevahir 2y ago
It's good that smart people are involved if we take it at face value that they're trying increase "government efficiency," as opposed to, say, dismantling the welfare and regulatory state; if the latter are their aim, and if we don't want them to accomplish such a goal, we should not be cheered to learn that they're such clever lads.
- generalizations 2y ago
  > dismantling the welfare and regulatory state Pretty sure that's exactly what the US voted for in the last election, considering that was pretty explicitly promised. I think most of the US is cheering them on as they do it.
  - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
    That's what 49.8% of the voters voted for. So not really "most" for any reasonable meaning of the term "most".
    - briandear 2y ago
      People don’t elect presidents, states do, and states elected Trump with a 312 to 226 electoral vote margin — so the states overwhelmingly voted for Trump. The purpose of the United States federal government is very strictly spelled out — and the 10th amendment makes it very clear that powers not expressly mentioned in the Constitution are reserved for the states. The U.S. is a republic, not a democracy.
      - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
        Electoral votes don’t support a president’s agenda, people do. Being underwater already at the beginning of his term means the other politicians that have to work with him (who also have to get elected) are more under pressure not to. That’s why not having the support of most voters is relevant in Trump getting things done. Grand parent basically said this guy has a mandate from the American people and he really doesn’t. Heck, it was big news that his disapproval rating is almost the same as his approval rating now, the most popular he has ever been but still not liked by most Americans.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
flir 2y ago
I'm not mad I'm just disappointed. So much potential and he dropped out of school to become a Thiel/Musk minion.