1 hour ago, The Norseman said:

It's new legislation that is largely a continuation of existing policy. Happy?

Not really. The existing policy was defined to terminate. This is new policy happens to be similar or the same as the earlier policy but it is still new.

1 hour ago, The Norseman said:

I love it when you guys rag on the Republicans for not cutting spending but then, when they do, you predict calamity. Worthwhile R&D will happen regardless of how much of our tax dollars the government decides to pump into it.

"Worthwhile R&D" doesn't always show an immediate ROI, therefore no not all worthwhile R&D gets done if the private sector is the only patron.

It was the US government that approached universities about leveraging their research capabilities with public funding, not the other way around. And initially universities were reluctant, because taking government money always comes with strings attached.

In the decades following, a ton of publicly funded research - that never would have been greenlit by private sector firms - provided fertile ground for entire industries, with businesses built upon innovations that would be deemed too risky.

Even so this research spending represents a tiny portion of the budget. The ROI for America measured in GDP and defining America as the best location for talented researchers to apply their skills is what separated us.

Real spending cuts will only happen with entitlement reform. The attack on the US research apparatus by this administration is nothing more than performative BS that excites a base eager to see "elites" punished out of pure jealousy.

5 hours ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Repeating it since you didn't read it the first time:

but it'll happen slower and at the risk that another country makes discoveries that could've otherwise benefited our own economy

It will happen faster now that the government is out of the way

4 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

"Worthwhile R&D" doesn't always show an immediate ROI, therefore no not all worthwhile R&D gets done if the private sector is the only patron.

It was the US government that approached universities about leveraging their research capabilities with public funding, not the other way around. And initially universities were reluctant, because taking government money always comes with strings attached.

In the decades following, a ton of publicly funded research - that never would have been greenlit by private sector firms - provided fertile ground for entire industries, with businesses built upon innovations that would be deemed too risky.

Even so this research spending represents a tiny portion of the budget. The ROI for America measured in GDP and defining America as the best location for talented researchers to apply their skills is what separated us.

Real spending cuts will only happen with entitlement reform. The attack on the US research apparatus by this administration is nothing more than performative BS that excites a base eager to see "elites" punished out of pure jealousy.

So I assume that you are just as furious at the Democrats for opposing any reforms to entitlements, right?

Just now, The Norseman said:

So I assume that you are just as furious at the Democrats for opposing any reforms to entitlements, right?

I'm not furious about lack of retirement reform.

I'd like to see it, but my focus is deficit spending. Because irrespective of what benefits boomers or gen x or whoever receives right now, the interest on that deficit comes out of my kids' taxes.

Boomers handed us an albatross. Those who support deficit spending that would make Carter blush are voting Republican.

1 hour ago, The Norseman said:

It will happen faster now that the government is out of the way

Yea, you're not smart.

13 hours ago, The Norseman said:

It will be interesting to see how the current strong economy affects the deficit....especially since revenues are projected to improve via tariffs, regulation reduction, low taxes and some onshoring

You won’t have to wait and see. We already went through this the last Trump term. He passed the TCJA and then the deficit soared (and that was before Covid hit). The same will happen again.

6 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Boomers handed us an albatross.

Meh, suck it up. Boomers didn't enact Soc Sec / welfare. Massive defense spending was in play long before they took power as well. Hard to blame them for the 70s trouble or the 80s issues.

The huge deficits from the 2008 period can be laid at the Boomer feet in any case so you got that one.

There goes another one. Gracias left on July 1st but it wasn't known until an official from a teacher's union asked about his status. Wonder how many more have already left.

@The Norseman Yes, the entity DOGE will survive (for now) but the vast majority of people who signed on under Musk will abandon (or have already abandoned) ship over the coming months.

59 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

There goes another one. Gracias left on July 1st but it wasn't known until an official from a teacher's union asked about his status. Wonder how many more have already left.

@The Norseman Yes, the entity DOGE will survive (for now) but the vast majority of people who signed on under Musk will abandon (or have already abandoned) ship over the coming months.

Less about the people at this point and more about the process that was put in place with the agencies. Assuming they are held to account moving forward the savings should continue.

11 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I'm not furious about lack of retirement reform.

I'd like to see it, but my focus is deficit spending. Because irrespective of what benefits boomers or gen x or whoever receives right now, the interest on that deficit comes out of my kids' taxes.

Boomers handed us an albatross. Those who support deficit spending that would make Carter blush are voting Republican.

So you're not furious about a lack of entitlement reform but you're furious about deficit spending? 🤔

2 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

Less about the people at this point and more about the process that was put in place with the agencies. Assuming they are held to account moving forward the savings should continue.

Process? All they did was go in with a big chainsaw and chop. That isn't a process mate. I think you have completely misunderstood what just happened if you think they've installed some great process.

4 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Process? All they did was go in with a big chainsaw and chop. That isn't a process mate. I think you have completely misunderstood what just happened if you think they've installed some great process.

Yup. A relative of mine worked for the government for 20+ years, was a senior level manager. He’s a conservative Republican who voted for Trump in 2016. He said trying to work with the DOGE people was annoying as hell as they didn’t have a clue, and basically added a bunch of nonsense work to his plate that took away from the ACTUAL work they do. He took the buyout and left.

3 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

Meh, suck it up. Boomers didn't enact Soc Sec / welfare. Massive defense spending was in play long before they took power as well. Hard to blame them for the 70s trouble or the 80s issues.

The huge deficits from the 2008 period can be laid at the Boomer feet in any case so you got that one.

Boomers tied new benefits to wage inflation in '77, ensuring that when they started receiving benefits they'd benefit greatly from wages outpacing inflation for the better part of their careers.

As new beneficiaries boomers are getting far larger payouts than previous generations adjusted for inflation.

11 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

Yup. A relative of mine worked for the government for 20+ years, was a senior level manager. He’s a conservative Republican who voted for Trump in 2016. He said trying to work with the DOGE people was annoying as hell as they didn’t have a clue, and basically added a bunch of nonsense work to his plate that took away from the ACTUAL work they do. He took the buyout and left.

Sounds like just about any external consultant outfit that comes into a company to drive efficiency.

3 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

Boomers tied new benefits to wage inflation in '77, ensuring that when they started receiving benefits they'd benefit greatly from wages outpacing inflation for the better part of their careers.

As new beneficiaries boomers are getting far larger payouts than previous generations adjusted for inflation.

I will violently agree that Boomers didn't fix anything and in fact added greatly to the deficit problem but this narrative that everything in the deficit is entirely and solely at the feet of Boomers is silly.

20 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Process? All they did was go in with a big chainsaw and chop. That isn't a process mate. I think you have completely misunderstood what just happened if you think they've installed some great process.

They gave the agencies savings targets and started publicly tracking their progress....which continues today.

19 minutes ago, The Norseman said:

They gave the agencies savings targets and started publicly tracking their progress....which continues today.

Setting targets is hardly a "process". They didn't need an entire new organization to do that. Their immediate success was 100% due to injecting an aggressive set of highly energetic and empowered individuals into the machinery and giving them carte blanche to rip things out. The last thing one can expect from that mission is any sort of lasting set of policies.

This was a one time shot mate. Take the minor savings and the fun you had owning the libs for a bit and move on.

59 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

He said trying to work with the DOGE people was annoying as hell as they didn’t have a clue, and basically added a bunch of nonsense work to his plate that took away from the ACTUAL work they do.

You mean hiring a bunch of inexperienced people was a really bad idea? Nobody could've predicted this.

keep wondering, when will doge look into congress?

1 hour ago, DrPhilly said:

I will violently agree that Boomers didn't fix anything and in fact added greatly to the deficit problem but this narrative that everything in the deficit is entirely and solely at the feet of Boomers is silly.

I don't believe I argued that. But I will say that in their dotage, they are absolutely adversaries to any sort of reform that would make social security less of a burden on the future generations.

11 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I don't believe I argued that

Perhaps all that was needed was some clarification which I believe we accomplished. I think we are in agreement.

fwiw you said "Boomers handed us an albatross". In any case, my reply was more a reaction to years of comments in here from several posters which I should have pointed out.

Every problem in the US ever can be traced directly back to boomers, and at least 75% of them to DrPhilly directly. This is known.

8 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Perhaps all that was needed was some clarification which I believe we accomplished. I think we are in agreement.

fwiw you said "Boomers handed us an albatross". In any case, my reply was more a reaction to years of comments in here from several posters which I should have pointed out.

Sadly we have more than one albatross.

Entitlement reform is multifaceted.

2 hours ago, The Norseman said:

Sounds like just about any external consultant outfit that comes into a company to drive efficiency.

No. An external consultant that comes into a company to actually drive efficiency doesn't add layers of useless paperwork and "reporting" to their plate that takes away from their actual work. That makes them less efficient, not more. And now, thanks to DOGE, his department lost a great manager (that they are still paying through September), and he'll be replaced by someone who isn't as good at what he does. And he's hardly the only one with a story like this.