fishbane

I think you are mistaken here. The USPS had 525,000 career employees in 2023. There is no way they hired 192,000 new career employees in Dec. That didn't happen. I have seen the number 190,000 pre-career employees transitioned to career positions, but that was over the entirety of Postmaster DeJoy's term, not last year like the tweet you initially quoted seemed to imply and definitely not the month of Dec. The fact that career employees only increased by less than 30k from the start of DeJoy's term in 2020 until 2023 probably means that the 190,000 pre-career employees that transitioned were largely offset by retirements and other forms of attrition. https://federalnewsnetwork.com/workforce/2025/01/usps-offers-up-to-15k-in-early-retirement-buyouts-to-cut-mail-handler-staffing/#:~:text=During DeJoy's tenure%2C USPS has,net loss in fiscal 2024. That is the relevant portion of the article. Simply pulling out the fact that 190k pre-career employees transitioned to career positions even over the correct time frame misses the fact that overall staff and work hours decreased during the same period. The tweet and AI summaries you are relying on are misleading and/or incorrect. I've already pointed out what was wrong with the job numbers. The mail volume has not decreased by 80% as indicated in the tweet even using the number in your post - 116.5 is not 20% of 213. Though mail volume has decreased during DeJoy's service package volume is up which is bulkier per item and requires more employees per item. I get why American's may doubt the value in foreign aid and agencies like USAID, but the USPS provides a very tangible service 6 days/week. Sure it has some problems, but we get quite a lot even for $9.5 billion.

Is it not settled law that the bill of rights extends to non citizens? I thought the rights apply to persons more generally and not citizens.

But what does it say about fraud and abuse when the person leading it owns companies with billions of dollars in government contracts some of which are years behind schedule and are carrying out these moves outside of normal channels? Not and example to be followed in my mind. Space X is years behind schedule on HLS and just blew up another starship yesterday. Musk is heading up the department that is leading cuts at NASA the agency paying for HLS and the FAA the agency that has yet to conclude ita investigation of the last starship explosion.

They both say "less than a month." It appears the title was edited at some point presumably within 20 minutes of posting. I don't know what it read before that. The point is that it was widely optimistic and now this topic is a month old and DOGE is nowhere near that mark even by their own generous accounting.

Not the post topic. That said $1 trillion in 1 month. If we are going to go by Elon Musk stated goals instead wasn't that "at least $2 trillion"?

Isn't it? It's been a month since you started this thread and the DOGE website is only reporting $105 billion in savings. So if that is to be believed you were only off by a factor of about 10.

If they are discussing something so important that it is risking WWIIi then it's incredibly dumb to demand thank you from one side as Vance did.

Zalensky did not invite the media. Is the deal is important and there are significant disagreements then why invite the media to the meeting? Who set up the meeting and invited the media? Vance accused Zalensky of litigating things in front of the public for pointing out that Russia has broke previous agreements with Ukraine. Vance seemed to acknowledge it was a dispute. Why invite the media to ask questions when there is a dispute and then get upset with Zalensky for making his case by stating facts?

I think they are these are workers that have been told not to come to work for disciplinary reasons or because there is an ongoing investigation into them. The old paid administrative leave. At least it seemed pretty clear that's what they were talking about about the DHS and VA employees referenced in the article. Not sure how those numbers add to $3.1 billion.

I am sure that a deal could have been signed without a trip to Washington. What I doubt is if the deal had been hammered out to what either side thought was it's final form before the trip. The drafts that have been reported on were vague both in terms of what money the US would get from the mineral fund and what the US would provide in terms of security. Those seem like the most important parts to both parties.

I asked a question. I did not make any claims. With little doubt Trump and his administration were responsible for the media being at this meeting. I have to guess but I think Zalensky was willing to sign the mineral rights deal and is open to a cease fire, but without security guarantees of some form there is not much point in doing either. There likely was some disagreement in private before this meeting which had not been made public. I would be surprised if the problem of Zalensky wanting security guarantees and Trump only offering the guarantee that "Putin has not broken a deal with me" failed to come up. Why go through with the press Q and A on a deal with such an apparent problem? Doesn't seem like a solid idear to me. Wait until you have an agreement ready to sign. Vance added absolutely nothing to the affair. Why demand a thank you? Letting a lack of a thank you kibosh a deal to end a war doesn't jump out to me as master negotiation. I wonder if Vance will make similar demands of Putin...

Zalensky was responsible for the press being at this meeting?

If this isn't by far the best value for money for the taxpayer I am sure DOGE will cancel it and apply the savings to the national debt.

This is laughable dumb. Musk has been lying and pushing vaporware for well over a decade all whilst his support swung from one political party to the other. When the SEC went after Musk in 2018 after he falsely tweeted that he had secured funding to take Tesla private at a premium was that because he supported and voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016? Did the SEC go after him more recently for failing to disclose his purchase of twitter shares in a timely manner because he supported Trump? If the enforcement actions follow him regardless of who he supports it might just be because he is breaking the law and openly posting about it on the internet.

I don't think Ono would have expected Gilman to be there when he made the trip. Flo put out a video of him wrestling with Jordan Conaway up the other day. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKoGJw8LGSQ

That's up at 165. Who knows what his training situation was like between OSU and now. Parco's leaving too. He could be a NQ at 149 or 157. Is he transferring? Probably a better option. Still have to replace Parco.

I am familiar with the concept. Not sure it applies. He often gets in trouble for stuff he says openly at public product release events or tweets about. It wasn't the result of some massive targeted invesitagion that resulted in the SEC looking into him. He for whatever reason tweeted that he had secured funding to take Tesla private at rather large premium over market price. Huge swings in the stock price followed and surprisingly Tesla was never went private. It's like when he called the British diving expert that rejected his Space X built mini-sub for the cave rescue that "Pedo guy" on twitter." Musk initially apologized only to tweet months later "You don’t think it’s strange he hasn’t sued me? He was offered free legal services.” Eventually after that tweet he got sued. He's just minding his own business and trouble finds him...

No tax on tips would encourage more businesses to try ans incorporate them. I wouldn't want that. Is this really a partisan issue. Who wants to see more tablets at checkout that are going to "ask you a question?"

Couldn't he be a fit at 157? Iowa loses Teemer after this year.

On what basis?

51% of voters say Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion departments are needed in government. You think that was rigged too?

With the condoms mix up I wasn't trying to justify it as an unnecessary cut vs a necessary one it was more to point out how DOGE is proceeding in such a careless manner that they do not realize what they did not even notice the difference. I don't know how anyone can conclude whether or not what they did was wise at this juncture. I would find it impossible to grade their actions as positive being even they don't seem to fully realize what all they have done. It may work out to be far less than advertised. Making mistakes on how much is being saved is the same as making mistakes on how much is actually being spent. Government agencies that can't pass an audit is a problem that any serious undertaking to eliminate fraud, waste, and abuse must tackle. DOGE hastily posting misleading and inaccurate savings further obfuscates actual spending levels from the public.

The crack team at DOGE initially reported USAID spent $50MM on condoms sent to Gaza. Trump and his officials thought it was wasteful to send this to Palestine and implied it was likely misappropriated by Hamas to buy bombs because they have no use for condoms. The condoms were sent to Gaza, but it was Gaza the Providence in the country of Mozambique where over 10% of the adult population has HIV... DOGE are cutting things they don't understand in a chaotic and disorganized manner. That ain't efficiency. A bunch of workers in the Department of Energy were hastily let go. Turns out many had important positions managing warheads and disposing of nuclear waste. Now they are trying to hire them back. https://apnews.com/article/nuclear-doge-firings-trump-federal-916e6819104f04f44c345b7dde4904d5 That isn't removing fat so much as cutting off your own foot only to then realize your folly and then have to try and reattach it. No one is complaining about cancelling unnecessary WinZip licenses, superfluous subscriptions, or stopping payments to actually dead or nonexistant people. Not many would complain about trimming the federal workforce in a well thought out and organized manner but why do it in a way that antagonizes those managing our nuclear weapons?

Conservatives have fewer complaints about overspending when it's a Republican in office doing it. Liberals complain less about budget cuts when Democrats are carrying them out.

Sparty its not just that the wrong person is doing it, but they are doing it in a disorganized and chaotic manner which in turn makes it less likely to realize the desired result. The fact that Elon Musk was given the task all but guaranteed this is how things would play out. I think your metaphor throws out the baby with the bath water. Appleseed isn't just throwing around his seed, it's the US taxpayers' and at the same time he owns his own apple orchard and runs a shady roadside fruit stand. Meanwhile Appleseed calls USAID's apples a ball of worms and shuts down the entire agency. However USAID gets their apples by buying $2 billion annually in apple seed and other agricultural products from US farmers to distribute as aid across the globe. So some of the people most hurt by the USAID cuts will be... American farmers.