DOGE
- Thread starter acesfull86
- Start date
[tw]1893424961026486389[/tw]
Notably the email does not say anything about an assumption of a resignation. The funniest outcome would be Elon trying to actually consider it as such because he tweeted it. But I suspect that won’t be the case and a bunch of people will just now believe that DOGE trimmed the workforce by letting people resign instead of send him 5 bullet points.
Notably the email does not say anything about an assumption of a resignation. The funniest outcome would be Elon trying to actually consider it as such because he tweeted it. But I suspect that won’t be the case and a bunch of people will just now believe that DOGE trimmed the workforce by letting people resign instead of send him 5 bullet points.
All he is doing is getting people into space/mars and revolutionized electric cars.
The left turning on musk is amazing to watch.
I mean, only the richest people in our society would go to Mars via Musk and only a couple steps of wealth below that can enjoy his revolutionary cars so it’s not a great comparison, but like **** Rockefeller too.
The other things were public services. Public services used to distract from his insane wealth and often involving stealing artifacts from developing countries, because **** Carnegie, but still public services. Elon’s companies are a better analogy to Carnegie’s steel. It has value, but it’s not libraries and museums for the poor.
Electric cars and slightly better rockets are more important to humanity as a whole than US steel in the 19th century? Might be time to put down the Kool-Aid, friend.
I don’t fail to see the potential value of EVs but until we actually see a dramatic reduction in the cost of the vehicles, sustainability of the batteries and effective infrastructure for charging these vehicles, it’s not a more important development than Carnegie’s steel company. Regardless, a for-profit EV company selling luxury vehicles to the upper middle class isn’t as important to humanity as say, steel for the transcontinental railroad. Carnegie was not selling the steel out of the kindness of his heart and I’m not placing moral values on either here, but one thus far has had a far larger impact. We’ll see if Tesla manages to reach that level, but I’m not holding my breath here.
No, I still believe that. But I am actually compelled by the Conservative argument that energy consumption demand is going to remain whether the US is in the fossil fuel production game or not. Yes, we can lower emissions domestically, but if the oil is still flowing and being imported, we’re just outsourcing the profit of those emissions. As such, I think the driver for sustainable energy alternatives needs to be through demand rather than supply. Continue to invest heavily in renewables, but through research and development that will drive down the cost of that energy. There are barriers to entry on the consumption of these goods that are being treated as barriers to entry in the typical production sense, and we’re cutting off our own hand economically to not do the thing we’re trying to do. Oil consumption will decrease if and only if there are easy to use, affordable options for consumers.
If Tesla were going to save the planet, their money would be going into making their product more affordable rather than investing heavily in autonomous driving. I do not think Tesla has any obligation to do this, and making your popular luxury vehicle more user-friendly is an effective use of resources, but let’s not pretend he’s actually saving the Earth. That was what “liberal” Elon wanted to do to save the world. Now “based” Elon understands it’s through tax cuts and low national debt. It’s almost like liberals are constantly duped by the wealthy or something. Maybe something to look into as a political movement.
[tw]1893671034953289921[/tw]
So this is the part where I’m supposed to believe that the only plausible explanation for opposition to performative and redundant busy work is the protection of fraudulent employees? DOGE is really good at dialing up the accusations of very nebulous and unexplained fraud whenever they don’t have specific contracts to point to cancelling.
So this is the part where I’m supposed to believe that the only plausible explanation for opposition to performative and redundant busy work is the protection of fraudulent employees? DOGE is really good at dialing up the accusations of very nebulous and unexplained fraud whenever they don’t have specific contracts to point to cancelling.
Then just ****ing establish direct and basic protocols for assigning work and evaluating performance. Run it down each department from the top-down and make the mid-level managers do their ****ing jobs. Lazy government employees aren’t just naturally occurring phenomenon, they had to be allowed to do it. Just use basic performance management with the people who know the department but be aggressive if you must.
This is asking a couple million people to send an email to a small team of people who likely have no idea what they’re looking for and will presumably need to be compensated for doing so. It’s not a problem to actually have employees be accountable to work. But this is a publicity stunt.