Hawaiian

What happened to "read only" access. Are those red flags about unfettered access proving to be valid?

Judging from the comments section on some news outlets I would say not most, but many don't understand economics. Even some of my "informed" friends seem confused about the subject.

Read the lyrics to the song. I did not say it was a good idea, but only poking fun. Up to you if you want to interpret it as approval.

I do. There's a lot of fat to be trimmed.

Personally, I don't admire the three you mention with their obscene wealth. However, America doesn't have a complete monopoly of mega rich. Some other countries come to mind like India, France, Thailand, Mexico and China. What about the poor in those countries?

Where did I say income inequality is fine? America is a democratic republic and not a communist dictatorship. Our government has no authority to seize the assets of these mega rich and distribute it to the less fortunate. We also have laws regarding the organization of labor unions. Again, they cannot be imposed on any entity by force. What do you suggest that doesn't violate the U.S. Constitution? While some fall through the cracks, there are myriad of state and federal programs that provide help to poor Americans. By the bleeding heart way, how much do you contribute to NGOs that also help the less fortunate? Talk is cheap!

Maybe not the whole shebang, but most likely an equity stake

Where did I say it was a good idea?

The decision made by the newly appointed Secretary of the Treasury to give "read only" access is being challenged. Guess we will have to wait for a legal opinion to see whether this is legal or not.

As you said DOGE is not an official department authorized by Congress, but an advisory board established by EO. I do do not know how it is funded and would be interested to know. Not having "department" status, Musk's office is not in the White House.

Is this the nonsense you are referring to? https://federalregister.gov/documents/2025/01/29/2025-02005/establishing-and-implementing-the-presidents-department-of-government-efficiency

No. That would be poison and not medicine. You have a habit of demonizing successful capitalists. Why is it their fault that the U.S. government has an addiction to uncontrolled, wasteful spending. If the feds followed their game plan we wouldn't be so deep in hole. They are successful because they haven't spent more than they make. Is that too complicated for you to understand? You make no sense when you question whether Musk will make it worse. Make what worse?

Don't know. I don't live there.

Depends how you define improvement. If we do not take the medicine now the future looks rather bleak as the disease will become terminal.

Agree. Those that defend illegal immigrants by justifying that they contribute more than they cost the taxpayers are playing with loaded dice. There really are no accurate figures.

If you want to see anarchy and an outright rebellion, freeze Social Security, tax refunds, etc. Business and employers can retaliate by stop paying the various sales taxes and employees withholding. Then all hell will break loose. Then what? Don't worry. Never happen.

Not a silver bullet, that's for sure, but least it's a start to identify where the "hidden" money is going to. With it's massive budget, the DOD needs to be given an alternative where cuts are to be made or Congress will do it for them. Like you say, the vote buying addiction has to be stopped.

If they are so hilarious why do you continue your gnashing and bashing? Have you have forgotten how to laugh? Why, are you not amused?

The Treasury Secretary has given representatives of the Department of Government Efficiency full access to the federal payment system, providing them a tool to monitor and potentially limit government spending.

IIRC we had AN posters doing the reporting for both Biden's and Trump's "shortcomings." And they still are, some with repetitive rants.

Jim Dandy, in this case CP, to the rescue.

And it's also no secret that every news outlet is biased in one way or another, some more so than others.

Probably because the liberal media was reluctant to broadcast facts, real facts.

Who's crying now?

Say again.