jross

Matt unfortunately looks like a sleezy car salesman, making anything good a surprise.

GAO does have wasteful spending callouts and a lot off calls to increase revenue. 40+ items on operations (link) FRAUD: GAO estimated total direct annual financial losses to the government from fraud to be between $233 billion and $521 billion, based on data from fiscal years 2018 through 2022. (link) Reduce Duplication, Overlap and Fragmentation, Achieve Savings, and Enhance Revenue (link) 30 items on taxes. (link) Small Business Owners: Each year, sole proprietors—like gig workers, social media influencers, and trade workers in business for themselves—underreport income that leads to about $80 billion in unpaid taxes. (link) High Income - improve tax audits (link) 1 item on budget and spending (link) Military Spending - DoD service contracts are not managed effectively (link) All priority GAO recommendations are available here https://www.gao.gov/reports-testimonies/recommendations-database?processed=1&priority=1&topic=all I found zero service or program cut indications in about 200 title reviews. One had Covid statements about the government and companies requiring vaccinations, along with compliance charts by age. Nothing in there about the ethical risks though. Hmm.

At the end of the day, I don't care if Musk (or Pelosi) makes billions (or millions) if the country cuts trillions in spending.

What a self-damning statement from the GAO. --------- Yet nobody on the streets know you exist and anybody can identify waste in the Government.

Nope and these people's situations are not close to the same.

LOVE THIS TRANSPARENCY

Really there must always be one person in charge for things to get done. Putting two people in charge is certain that only the most agreeable things get done. Putting too many people in charge ensures nothing gets done. I don't expect anything to get cut at all. I wish it though!

DOGE is Connor, GAO is Jeremy.

Joe Rogan is more entertainment than news. Now some of his discussions do make the news. Apparently AM radio shows have a larger audience than I'd suspected. Note that there is no scientific measurement though... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-listened-to_radio_programs

Harris was not cutting spending... Clinton had a plan to cut spending -- and had an economically conservative approach.

@VakAttack - Your Musk comment about gov contracts reminds me of that time when Trump happily took credit for tax write-offs.

I'll just tag your name next time as a better means to avoid filling a page with a large quote. Moderation was changed due to principles (by design), not because of layoffs.

But before Musk and his brother could cash in on their first big venture, the bootstrapping brothers had to rough it by living in their small office. “We showered at the YMCA and we were so hard-up that we only had one computer,” Musk said in 2014. “The website was up during the day and I was coding it at night, seven days a week, all the time.” https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/19/how-elon-musk-founded-zip2-with-his-brother-kimbal.html --- Musk says. “He (Dad) was irrelevant. He paid nothing for college. My brother and I paid for college through scholarships, loans and working two jobs simultaneously. The funding we raised for our first company came from a small group of random angel investors in Silicon Valley.” https://web.archive.org/web/20240104225617/https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/elon-musk-the-architect-of-tomorrow-120850/ --- And the comment about Tesla is bananas. You give zero credit for what he did for Tesla!

Streamlining operations is not why advertisers cut back, and the product is better. So much better, I am now a paying premium member.

NEWS: Agnostics are becoming believers as the divine force rumored for parting seas looked at the bureaucracy and said, 'Let there be less!'

The county said the 32-hour workweek has attracted a host of new talent: Applications have spiked 85.5% and open positions are being filled 23.75% faster, while more employees are staying in their jobs — separation (employees quitting or retiring) dropped by 48%. And 84% of employees said their work-life balance was better. https://www.removepaywall.com/search?url=https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/13/economy/four-day-workweek-washington/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/12/business/four-day-workweek-survey/index.html

Without using data, I'd say Fox is mainstream. AM radio is alternate news. FM radio would seem to have more traffic than AM radio. AM radio sports is probably much higher consumed than talk radio. Its possible that church talk is higher than conservative talk in some rural areas. X is a platform to access links to mainstream news but largely offers alternative news and citizen journalism. Pew Survey Results say Fox is mainstream. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/05/07/broad-agreement-in-u-s-even-among-partisans-on-which-news-outlets-are-part-of-the-mainstream-media/

Interesting PEW Research (center media bias) survey results from March 2024. Users state the social media platforms are mostly liberal, with X having moved from mostly liberal to balanced. https://www.pewresearch.org/2024/06/12/how-americans-navigate-politics-on-tiktok-x-facebook-and-instagram/

https://online.maryville.edu/blog/what-is-mainstream-media/

The issue with tackling misinformation is about finding a middle ground. Some on the left are fine with the idea of someone deciding what counts as misinformation. They are willing to take the risk that this power might be misused for the greater good. On the right, there's a big concern about this power being abused. They've recently (and repeatedly) seen examples where censorship has been unfair, secretive, and biased, especially in politics and health issues. They argue for freedom of speech and worry about any authority that could censor legitimate criticism or alternative views under the guise of fighting misinformation.

Here is an attempt to put views onto the concepts. Thoughts? Both the left and right oppose bigotry and prejudice.

On abortion, those who lean firmly right believe the fetus is a person with the natural right to life. The mother is driving the car, while the unborn child "fetus", as a passenger, still has rights. Given this belief in personhood, it’s bewildering that so many abortions— even after viability— result in intentionally ending a pregnancy without a life-threatening reason. It’s also confusing that if a pregnant mother loses her baby in a holdup, the criminal can be charged with the unborn child's murder. Yet, a mother's elective choice to terminate the pregnancy is seen as within her rights, regardless of the fetus’s personhood. I’m not looking to argue the morals of abortion, but rather to understand if the left believes the value of a fetus is whatever the mother decides. If that’s the case, it would explain many of the common compromises.

Sure it might seem like division, however, its more about understanding. For example, I prefer subsidized education tied to performance: students with good grades would have their education covered, while those with poor grades would need to pay back some or all of the costs. And I like no-tuition college where students work for their education. It’s progressive to subsidize costs, while conservative to tie it to performance. I'm moderate right on education.

Why is it that you cannot define a progressive left? How does the progressive party define itself? https://progressives.house.gov/the-progressive-promise

Really these are smart ideas and its too late now.