It's an ideological scam. A con - Trump empowers Musk by ordering agencies to cooperate with Doge
"Why Trump big stick tariffs, and so many executive orders when if he went through Congress to get things done his objectives would be more durable, and he would be better able to argue their merits. Ezra Klein's view. But if he went to Congress he would fail. So Trump acts like a king. Because it makes him look strong. Because he is too weak to be a president he acts like a king. That's mostly a paraphrase of Ezra Klein's words here .. [...]Bannon, "All we have to do is flood the zone." Our enemy is the media who are dumb and lazy. They can only focus on one thing at a time. "All we have to do is flood the zone." https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175782137 [...]U.S. government officials privately warn Musk’s blitz appears illegal https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175781335 ... How Trump plans to seize the power of the purse From Congress https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175780838"
President’s order notes agency heads ‘will undertake plans for large-scale reductions in force’ with some exceptions
Marina Dunbar Wed 12 Feb 2025 10.09 AEDT
Elon Musk gives remarks in the Oval Office of the White House, on 11 February 2025. Photograph: Aaron Schwartz/EPA
Donald Trump handed Elon Musk even more control over the federal government by preparing an executive order requiring agencies to cooperate with Musk’s so-called “department of government efficiency” (Doge), when told to cut their workforces and limit the hiring of replacements.
The White House order, titled “Implementing the President’s ‘Department of Government Efficiency’ Workforce Optimization Initiative”, said the goal is to “restore accountability to the American public” and that “this order commences a critical transformation of the Federal bureaucracy. By eliminating waste, bloat, and insularity, my Administration will empower American families, workers, taxpayers, and our system of Government itself.”
The order notes that agency heads “will undertake plans for large-scale reductions in force and determine which agency components (or agencies themselves) may be eliminated or combined because their functions aren’t required by law”.
Elon Musk defends government role and dismisses conflict-of-interest concerns – video
It also said that agencies should “hire no more than one employee for every four employees that depart from federal service” and “shall not fill any vacancies for career appointments that the DOGE Team Lead assesses should not be filled, unless the Agency Head determines the positions should be filled”.
Exceptions are planned for military personnel and agencies dealing in immigration, law enforcement and public safety.
Trump and Musk are encouraging federal workers to resign in return for financial incentives, though a judge is currently reviewing the legality of the orders. Administration officials said more than 65,000 workers have opted to take the buyout option.
The X owner reportedly said that there are some good people in the federal bureaucracy, but that they need to be held accountable, and referred to Doge as an “unelected” fourth branch.
“The people voted for major government reform and that’s what the people are going to get,” he said. “That’s what democracy is all about.”
Musk also described himself as an open book despite criticism towards his lack of transparency in reshaping the federal government. He joked that the scrutiny was like a “daily proctology exam”.
“Your tax dollars need to be spent wisely, on things that matter,” Musk said, in defense of Doge. Earlier this week, the Trump administration tried to cut billions of dollars in medical research funding, before being blocked by a judge a few days later.
---------- [Insert: Musk’s Cuts Get Harder from Here. What Might Stop DOGE’s Wrecking Ball. By Casey Burgat Feb 12, 2025, 12:41 pm EST [...] How major will that reform be? Judging by Musk’s more than questionable legal sweep through government so far, it would be only natural to expect large additional cuts. But as aggressive as DOGE has been to date—which has literally shuttered federal agencies without congressional approval—Musk will soon struggle to keep up his blistering pace.
DOGE’s early cuts focused on a relatively easy target: foreign aid. Cutting domestic spending in any meaningful way will be much more challenging.
DOGE was created by executive order with the stated goal of “modernizing federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity.” Its authority to make expansive cuts has been called into question by Democratic lawmakers, federal employee unions, and federal judges. The agency wasn’t authorized or funded by Congress, and Musk was neither nominated by Trump nor confirmed by the Senate to run it. Instead, he operates under the designation of a “special government employee,” a temporary role that exempts him from the usual disclosure and confirmation rules that apply to department heads.
So far, DOGE’s less-than-traditional governing arrangement hasn’t stopped it from using power no one but Trump granted. [...]DOGE’s targeting of USAID first was no accident. Musk struck where he almost certainly knew resistance would be weakest.
Foreign aid has long been an easy scapegoat. [...] Eliminating or significantly reducing funding for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, or subsidies for farmers and industry won’t be so simple. These programs have what academics call “policy constituencies”—voters, donors, and employers who depend on them and will mobilize fiercely to defend them. While foreign aid can easily be painted as wasteful spending because of its intangibility, domestic programs can be seen, felt, and relied upon by everyday Americans. That makes them much harder to take away.
Consider ethanol subsidies, a lifeline for corn farmers in Iowa. These subsidies ensure a steady demand for their crops. Any proposal to slash them triggers immediate backlash from farmers, agricultural lobbies, and elected officials from farming states, regardless of party affiliation. If Musk and DOGE attempt to gut these programs, they will face a swift and furious pushback. The same is even more true for Social Security payments, even in deep-red states, where millions of seniors rely on these benefits. Even the staunchest fiscal conservatives tread carefully when it comes to cutting programs that their own constituents depend on.
Unlike foreign aid, domestic programs have entrenched defenders who vote, donate, and organize. If Musk and Trump push too hard, Republican lawmakers will feel the heat. Their own political survival instincts may well kick in before their constituents start jamming their phone lines with complaints. They may not push back publicly, but privately, they will work to steer Musk and DOGE toward different, less politically toxic targets.
On Tuesday, hundreds of people rallied outside the US Capitol to protest the orders and support federal workers. Similar protests have been going on across the country on a nearly daily basis since Trump took office.
Note Trump yells from the rooftop other countries don't meet NATO targets, but, hey, what about the US falling way below other countries in the foreign aid target sphere.
And don't forget foreign aid is a minuscule part of federal spending:
As Trump tries to slash US foreign aid, here are 3 common myths many Americans mistakenly believe about it Published: February 6, 2025 12.11am AEDT [...] 1. The U.S. spends too much on foreign aid. 2. The U.S. spends more than its fair share on foreign aid compared with other countries. 3. Corrupt governments squander U.S. foreign aid.
What is foreign aid?
Foreign aid consists of money, goods and services – such as training – that government agencies provide to other countries. Foreign aid falls into two broad categories: economic assistance and military – sometimes called security – aid.
Economic assistance includes all programs with development or humanitarian objectives. That tends to include projects related to health, disaster relief, the promotion of civil society, agriculture and the like. Most U.S. economic aid dollars come from the State Department budget, including spending allocated by USAID, which has operated as an independent agency since the Kennedy administration.
On Feb. 3, Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared that he was serving as USAID’s acting director, indicating that the agency was no longer independent of the State Department.
While U.S. taxpayers have long spent just a few bucks each on foreign aid every year, the impact is profound, saving millions of people from hunger, averting the worst of natural disasters such as droughts and flooding, tackling life-threatening diseases such as tuberculosis and malaria, and more.
Myth No. 1: US spends too much on foreign aid
The United States consistently spends only about 1% of its budget on foreign aid, including military and economic support. The 2023 aid managed by USAID totaled about US$40 billion. [...] Myth No. 2: US spends more than its fair share [...] The United States spends very little on foreign aid relative to the size of its economy, particularly compared with other rich countries. The U.S. spent about 0.24% of its gross national income on overseas development assistance in 2023. By comparison, Norway, the top contributor by this metric, gave 1.09% of its gross national income in overseas development aid that year. The United States ranks toward the bottom of OECD countries, close to Portugal and Spain, by this measurement.
GRAPH
In 1970, the United Nations General Assembly agreed that “economically advanced countries” would aim to direct at least 0.7% of their national income to overseas development assistance. Although developed countries have repeatedly mentioned this target in agreements and at summits since then, very few countries have reached that goal. In 2023, only five countries met the 0.7% target.
The OECD average was just 0.37% in 2023 – far higher than the 0.24% the U.S. provided that year.
Myth No. 3: Corrupt governments squander US aid [...] In fact, according to the Congressional Research Service, between 2013 and 2022, most U.S. foreign assistance bypassed governments altogether: NGOs received 24% of the money, for-profit companies 21%, multilateral organizations 34%, and other organizations, such as universities, research institutes and faith-based organizations, 7%.
When the political scientist Simone Dietrich researched this question, she found that the United States outsources a lot of its foreign aid to NGOs. This is especially the case with the support it provides countries with bad governance and rampant corruption such as Sudan and Sri Lanka, which could be likely to squander or swipe those funds.
To be sure, corrupt governments sometimes do squander U.S. foreign aid. But it is important to understand that most aid never enters the coffers of those corrupt governments in the first place.
Even without Trump’s proposed cuts, US fails to lead
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
