Elon Musk to head Trump's Gestapo.

[Ceiling Cat]

Trump selects Elon Musk to lead government efficiency department

Musk and ex-presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy to head up Department of Government Efficiency (Doge)

www.theguardian.com

Trump is attempting to place inexperienced and unqualified individuals in crucial government positions, such as Attorney General, Director of National Intelligence, Secretary of Homeland Security, and Secretary of Defense. This strategy seems designed to protect him from legal accountability while allowing him to maintain control in the event of another insurrection-like incident. For now, Elon Musk has been appointed to lend legitimacy to his new Department of Government Efficiency (Doge), though Musk has stated his tenure will be brief. The future leader of this department could be a harsh, cost-cutting figure, enabling Trump to use it as a tool to target and investigate anyone who opposes his regime.

The Department of Government Efficiency, or Doge, could potentially turn into a coercive force, pressuring government employees to conform to Trump’s narrative. This new agency might become a form of internal repression, driving public servants to align with his agenda or face severe consequences. However, this strategy could backfire. If cuts and budget slashing lead to widespread dissatisfaction, other government departments may resist by slowing down their work, engaging in "work-to-rule" tactics, or even openly rebelling against the administration. This could ultimately undermine the very system Trump is trying to control and lead to his downfall.

 

[Jubee]

Neuralink chips for everyone's brain - we want to help you. We must listen to Elon, he's a "smart man", the wealthiest man according to the media, we need to listen to him, green vehicles only!
Wonder what the function was that night?

 

[Jubee]

 

[Skoob]

Nothing wrong with having experienced successful business owners provide consulting to the government to make things more efficient.
Better than lifelong politicians accustomed to just squeezing taxpayers when they need more money to make up for their lack of good fiscal management.

 

[jalimon]

The richest men is Buffet who currently has 285 billion in cash in the bank. (By the way when Buffet is not investing... be worry).

Musk has a value of over 300 billion but X will crash, Tesla is so much over valued, Space X should lose government fund with Musk involvement in government (obvious conflict of interest). The only company that should continue to grow is SkyLink, but will it be enough to compensate?

As a reminder Bill Gates still has a short on Tesla... a 500 million short!

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

The government is not a business.
It is a service.
Putting billionaires in such a government is the anti-thesis of being anti-elite which was Trump's entire vibe.
But of course we already knew that was a lie.

 

[Skoob]

The government is not a business.
It is a service.
Putting billionaires in such a government is the anti-thesis of being anti-elite which was Trump's entire vibe.
But of course we already knew that was a lie.

Government is very much like a business and should be managed as such. Otherwise, mismanagement could lead to negative impacts on the public.
When government gets too big it becomes less efficient and ultimately doesn't serve the people as well as it should.

People who run businesses know that. They can share valuable experience in efficiency.

Who would be better?

 

[Frankfooter]

Wondering why DoFo wants starlink in Ontario?

 

[Skoob]

The richest men is Buffet who currently has 285 billion in cash in the bank. (By the way when Buffet is not investing... be worry).

Musk has a value of over 300 billion but X will crash, Tesla is so much over valued, Space X should lose government fund with Musk involvement in government (obvious conflict of interest). The only company that should continue to grow is SkyLink, but will it be enough to compensate?

As a reminder Bill Gates still has a short on Tesla... a 500 million short!

Careful...Frankfooter will work DoFo into this thread...

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Government is very much like a business and should be managed as such.

No it shouldn't.
Businesses exist to generate profit for shareholders.
This isn't remotely what governments are for.

 

[jalimon]

Government is very much like a business and should be managed as such. Otherwise, mismanagement could lead to negative impacts on the public.
When government gets too big it becomes less efficient and ultimately doesn't serve the people as well as it should.

People who run businesses know that. They can share valuable experience in efficiency.

Who would be better?

A government needs to be lead by consensus. And with leaders that are capable of taking décisions against their own will.

Something a businessman (or women) would never do.

 

[Skoob]

No it shouldn't.
Businesses exist to generate profit for shareholders.
This isn't remotely what governments are for.

Do governments manage making money?
Do governments need to manage spending money?
Do governments manage employees?
Do governments manage policies?
Do governments manage investments?
Do governments need to appoint leaders for portfolios?
Do governments need to market services to the public?
Do governments need to make informed decisions on all the above?

Now tell me again why governments are not remotely like businesses?
I'll wait...

 

[Skoob]

A government needs to be lead by consensus. And with leaders that are capable of taking décisions against their own will.

Something a businessman (or women) would never do.

Do governments manage making money?
Do governments need to manage spending money?
Do governments manage employees?
Do governments manage policies?
Do governments manage investments?
Do governments need to appoint leaders for portfolios?
Do governments need to market services to the public?
Do governments need to make informed decisions on all the above?

Now tell me again why governments are not remotely like businesses?
I'll wait...

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Now tell me again why governments are not remotely like businesses?

They don't do any of that with the intent to make profits for shareholders.
They are not businesses.

 

[JuanGoodman]

They don't do any of that with the intent to make profits for shareholders.
They are not businesses.

at least they need some kind of oversight

whenever taxpayers money is involved and politicians and bureaucrats are allowed to operate without supervision

there will be excessive over spending on bonuses and salaries

CBC is a perfect example

 

[Skoob]

They don't do any of that with the intent to make profits for shareholders.
They are not businesses.

Making profit means you are managing your finances well.
Everything on that list is what businesses and government actually do.

Why would you not want someone who has experience in all those areas to consult with the government to make things better?

You seem to have missed the point.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Making profit means you are managing your finances well.

"Managing your finances" is a vague statement.
Making profit means targeting your services to a certain profitable segment.
None of these business strategies apply to governments who serve all citizens equally at a massive scale.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

at least they need some kind of oversight

whenever taxpayers money is involved and politicians and bureaucrats are allowed to operate without supervision

there will be excessive over spending on bonuses and salaries

CBC is a perfect example

I thought that oversight is the congress who authorize the budget.

 

[JuanGoodman]

I thought that oversight is the congress who authorize the budget.

we can all use a helping hand

 

[NotADcotor]

Careful...Frankfooter will work DoFo into this thread...

Hey, it would be nice to give the Jews a break from the non stop back to back 2 minutes of hate.