Hacker News Reader

Comment by bediger4000 | Hacker News Reader

26 pointsbediger40008 comments

This article is indirectly saying something critical about a certain someone with a wide following of non-digital and digital beings, so I wouldn't expect it to stay up very long.

Applying the logic of the article to itself, what existing vendor with cozy arrangements would want to let someone with Extensive Monetary assets anywhere near the prize?

The article makes a good point about healthy skepticism; let that be omnidirectional.

There are absolutely vested interests that would want to stop any new players from entering and would try to stop that from happening. One benefit of existing processes is that there is usually at least some degree of visibility or accountability in the legacy procurement processes that would make their efforts visible. A non-department “department” like DOGE has no such transparency, as is obvious by the fact that there’s been no vetting of its current operations, not even the suggestion of congressional oversight, and no mention of the fact that it’s run by government suppliers with obvious conflicts of interest.

The plain conflict of interest of current suppliers is obvious.

> One benefit of existing processes is that there is usually at least some degree of visibility or accountability in the legacy procurement processes that would make their efforts visible.

"...at least some..." is a fine fig leaf for covering the naughty bits, yes.

As Jonah Goldberg noted: "Complexity is a subsidy".

One can only hope it a coincidence that a common synanthrope belongs to the family Muscidae

I disagree with the article. DOGE is not about changing procurement regulations; it's about gutting environmental, safety, consumer protection regulations, drastically cutting the safety net and other programs popular with Democrats ranging from mass transit to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

I don't disagree on the actual policies, but I have an even darker view. People expect a return to the T1 strategy of making the rich richer. However, that was targeted to a low-power-grip environment, where the goal was re-election. The T2 strategy will be to make everyone poorer (except the rich.)

The T2 goal is to switch to autarchy. It's accomplished with the stick, not the carrot. The blueprints are Venezuela and Argentina. Trash everything and blame the opposition. Claim that the only solution is to trash everything further. Incarcerate opponents, and pretty soon the remaining opponents shut up or flee the country.

Once there is no opposition left to speak of, switch to the Russian model and to the carrot again.

Well written and concise. I'll keep the link and send it to the surprisingly many people that still think oligarchs like Musk, Vivek and Trump really have the interest of the people in mind and that DOGE is not a grift.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com