jross

Trump called for the release. So.... Something else. It is okay to take time to add context. Reduce witch hunting. But do it.

We are also observing good intentions crashing into bad execution. (layoffs) It stinks for the government, just as it does for the private sector. I've lived it. The trade off is worth a leaner and functional government. The clock is ticking. Go!

Why does our beloved dictator allow Rock Lobster to speak?

The bigger picture is that local trumps global. We should address local HIV before global HIV, and address other local needs before HIV at all. It's not a zero sum game... but we don't have a surplus to spend... There are trade offs. Rapid bold change with mistakes OVER quality with no change. DOGE has chosen wisely. There will be less loud mistakes over time. It will work out.

A dimly lit room is always better than a pitch black room.

I looked into this and its inconclusive to use comprehensive data. There are some crumbs... largely the bigger answer is that what's different now is a hyperfocus and larger cancellation effort than previous.

The posted wall of receipts accounts for approximately 20% of the overall $55 billion in savings. The wall of receipts IS NOT the $55B.

What does the red box underneath say?

You’d slit the goose for more gold and then whine the eggs weren’t shiny enough.

The source of the summary matters. Anonymous Momentum Chaser claims DOGE declared 55B saved from the contracts, whereas the DOGE website does not make that claim. Then he calls DOGE lazy, overpaid, and incompetent. I see no red flags with the guy at all! /s Note that there is a contracts filter and a savings filter. I've place the values side by side. Further I opened the link for one with s substantial difference between contract and saved. It appears the math adds up as 2.1M - 1.1M is 0.9M. See for yourself. https://www.fpds.gov/ezsearch/jsp/viewLinkController.jsp?agencyID=1205&PIID=12314423C0053&modNumber=P00003&idvAgencyID=&idvPIID=&contractType=AWARD Here is one of his examples. The contract is 1B but only 200M is listed as savings. https://www.fpds.gov/ezsearch/jsp/viewLinkController.jsp?agencyID=2800&PIID=28321322FDS030130&modNumber=P00016&idvAgencyID=&idvPIID=SS001760016&contractType=AWARD The twerp is critical about hypothetical savings because he is a twerp.

Its very easy to read https://www.fpds.gov/

Trump does this sort of thing often.

seeing everything made up IS OLD. I had to teach my family how to think critically and how to be skeptic because of it. the best i’ve found is the uncut source material and my own thinking, followed by 1440 daily digest

How many contracts have you read with your own eyes? That is relevant.

Indirectly, yes. The media and technology companies are left biased.

Read the *source material with your own eyes rather than depend on what somebody tells you. *Source material the report is based on, not someone else's summary...

The red flag is that they are all right leaning. That's not reality. Not a single person from outside the USA? Nobody from CNN or MSNBC listed as major spreader of misinformation? Joy Reid, Rachel Maddow, Don Lemon, Keith Olbermann, Bette Midler? None of them? A little light on politicians as well. Not Biden?

So I also asked and Grok 3 said As of today, February 23, 2025, there's no definitive, universally agreed -upon list of the "top 10 misinformation spreaders in the world" based on real-time global data. However, drawing from trends and past research--like the Center for Countering Digital Hate's Disinformation Dozen and recent World Economic forum reports... So naturally when I opened the Disinformation Dozen report... it list three people I've never heard of which match your list. Joseph Mercola RFK Jr Ty Bollinger Sheri Tenpenny And the other names? Look no further than NewsGuard, New York Times, CNN, PolitiFact, and Brookings...

Now, do you know what is influencing that answer? The center for countering digital hate. That sounds good right? Except it’s completely biased to the left.

Did the momentum chaser not answer the last two?

I dared to discuss savings in public recently with two acquaintances. Two of us were thrilled, almost giddy. The third brought up that a family member is four years away from a pension, and chose not to take the payout. He said that people on a probational period were let go. Then he explained that when you get a promotion to management or a different job family, you’re put on a probation period and so some good people can be been impacted. We talked about how that sucks for his family member, but we gotta do this for the future, even if pensions are impacted. We agreed we would rather see any savings put to pay down the debt. Not easy, but necessary.

If a contract has already paid out 100k, and is cancelled, preventing the possibility of a max payout of 10M over three years, is that savings? How often were these max payouts fulfilled historically? Is cancelling contacts and or deciding not to extend… performed at a different rate now than before?

You are welcome. You seem like someone that wants to get the facts correct.

@Le duke Where did the $5000 number come from? Answer: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PTossggcz4_xV82LSv1DE9knYuPq-MG6/view 20% x 2 trillion saved, paid out across 79M tax paying households.

interested