Comment by arrosenberg

Comment by arrosenberg 2 days ago

48 replies

View on Hacker News

I have common sense. They put the least serious people possible in charge of it, so of course I'm not going to take it seriously.

> I really think we're getting to a point where people are too hyper emotional and sensational about most topics which further limits real discussion and response.

Maybe, but this has nothing to do with emotion. I'm not a moron. An actual audit would be great, but would take more than the 30 days that Trump has been in office. They are lying, so I am left to speculate as to what.

> This time someone is.

Do you have any direct evidence they are doing something about it? I see several people supporting these actions that are based on emotion, but at a factual basis, it appears you are just regurgitating party propaganda.

ganoushoreilly 2 days ago

Who do you propose be put in charge? Why when the Democrats were in power weren't they put in charge before?

As for an actual audit, those have been done left and right. Audits only validate where the money is going not why.

Clearly they are doing something, budgeted spend is being cut and most notably if they weren't doing anything we wouldn't be having this discussion. We are also only a handful of weeks into the presidency. They're being very clear about what they are doing. Looking line by line at some of these cuts, I've yet to see anyone here actually debate the validity of all of the spend. Yes good programs will likely be impacted, things will be course corrected and brought back where appropriate.

It's a painful process no mater who is executing it. The only way to reduce the budgetary spend of the country is to do just that, cut spend. You start small and work your way up.

Reply View 18 replies
  • trts 2 days ago

    interesting to behold this inversion where the "conservative" side is taking dramatic and rapid action, changing things quickly, while the "progressive" side vociferously defends the status quo

    Reply View 12 replies
    • aredox 2 days ago

      The conservative side is not taking action, it is regressing things to pre-1968 norms.

      Progressives weren't defending the status quo, they were trying to improve the lives of people who were at the bottom of social order for centuries.

      Reply View 3 replies
      • trts 2 days ago

        it is hard for me to think of a more status quo candidate than Harris

        Reply View 2 replies
    • ganoushoreilly 2 days ago

      It is, the right appears to be playing the same hand the left has for years and the people are supporting it. Naturally this makes someone that has strong left leaning convictions frustrated as they come the realization that they aren't the majority and the numbers of people that support one narrative on the internet aren't a reflection of society as a whole. The bigger picture is this isn't localized, that's how you know it's a larger problem. Countries around the world are having the same discourse and results. People are done with it. Identity politics is over. Spending excess money to support these groups is over.

      Reply View 7 replies
      • aredox 2 days ago

        "Identity politics is over" says the guy supporting hyper-identity focused mysoginists.

        Reply View 4 replies
      • arrosenberg 2 days ago

        That narrative is so boring and tired, and it's ultimately why Trumpism will be short lived and fade to the dustbin of history.

        I'm not a leftist, and I mostly don't care about the groups, the right can have them. I care about things like medical research, nuclear energy and the food supply, which are all at risk because the regime's only tactic seems to be to unplug everything and see what breaks, and then decide if they even want it to work. They're not trying to run the country efficiently, they're trying to punish federal employees.

        Most people are like me - they want real solutions for housing and health, not the impotence we get from the neoliberals or the kayfabe we get from Trumpism.

        Reply View 1 reply
        • ganoushoreilly 2 days ago

          That’s the beauty of it all, we’re all along for the ride and will see. We should all hope for the best.

          Reply View 0 replies
  • aredox 2 days ago

    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.

    You are embracing those clear, simple answers. You are going to pay dearly for it.

    Reply View 3 replies
    • ganoushoreilly 2 days ago

      We’ll have to disagree. I believe the mindless waste of the past administration and their programs and narratives on things like biology were clear simple and wrong.

      Reply View 2 replies
      • aredox 2 days ago

        "There are only two sexes and genre doesn't exist" is simple and wrong. "Genre is a social construct and is a spectrum" isn't.

        Sorry you feel threatened by people not wanting to be pigeonholed into your tiny tidy restrictive categories.

        Reply View 1 reply
        • ganoushoreilly 2 days ago

          What I think is irrelevant, what is codified as the stance of the US Government is. They are acting on that assertion. I'm sorry you feel threatened by it and pigeonholed into your beliefs. This is the exact status of definition for the HHS and USG.

              Sex: A person’s immutable biological classification as either male or female.

    Female: is a person of the sex characterized by a reproductive system with the biological function of producing eggs (ova).

    Male: is a person of the sex characterized by a reproductive system with the biological function of producing sperm.

    Woman: an adult human female.

    Girl: a minor human female.

    Man: an adult human male.

    Boy: a minor human male.

    Mother: a female parent.

    Father: a male parent.
          https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2025/02/19/hhs-takes-action-p...

          You can argue what you want, but they are enacting actions against what they have defined as truth. That's the by product of winning an election, you get to make the changes you ran on.

          Reply View 0 replies
  • [removed] 2 days ago
    [deleted]
    Reply View 0 replies
theultdev 2 days ago

[flagged]

Reply View 28 replies
  • arrosenberg 2 days ago

    > Right, which is why it's still ongoing. They have a year to complete it.

    So maybe the President's special boy shouldn't be tweeting that 150 year olds are receiving Social Security payments because he doesn't understand cobol's datetime system. That only way I take these people seriously is the way I would take a toddler with a lit torch seriously.

    Reply View 9 replies
    • ganoushoreilly 2 days ago

      We don't have the data in front of us to actually prove your point one way or the other. Resulting to name calling and hyper emotional responses doesn't elicit the behavior of cooperation. Instead, engage on data and facts.

      If you said "He's making statements without any data to back up his claims" I'd respond, at this point you're correct, we do not have the data to verify. Collectively we could ask for more transparency. The result is we agree more data is needed.

      Reply View 4 replies
      • Aushin 2 days ago

        A few replies up, when presented with a clear example of the DOGE team having carte blanche access to sensitive government data, you handwaved it away. Don't accuse other people of being hyper-emotional when your own reasoning is so plainly motivated by political sentiment.

        Reply View 3 replies
    • pests 2 days ago

      While I disagree with everything going on, the cobol date time thing is just some myth everyone came up with. Go find me a single source to that claim because I can’t.

      Reply View 2 replies
  • JohnMakin 2 days ago

    So, where is your evidence that fraud of such scale is happening in the federal budget that requires unprecedented (and likely extremely illegal) access by people who are not qualified to be running a gas station IT system, let alone the entire financial and IT backend of the federal government? This is such a dishonest discussion and I suspect you types know it.

    Reply View 17 replies