The $21.7B Blunder: Analyzing the Waste Generated by Doge [pdf]

(washingtonpost.com)

48 points | by cratermoon 14 hours ago

4 comments

  • fxtentacle 10 hours ago
    20b losses for taxpayers

    2b in reduced liabilities for Elon‘s companies

  • ChrisArchitect 10 hours ago
    Why is this a Washington Post hosted PDF and not an article somewhere....

    Sen. Blumenthal's website release perhaps:

    https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/07/...

    PDF: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/li...

  • hunglee2 13 hours ago
    [flagged]
    • sitkack 12 hours ago
      Working As Intended
    • java-man 13 hours ago
      With the same result, I am afraid.
  • avoutos 7 hours ago
    The net savings are probably positive. DOGE's stated savings are 199B, so that would leave 177.3B in savings.

    If DOGE is overstating savings, I doubt they are doing so by 900% which is what it would take for savings to dip into negative territory. Either that or losses are severely understated, but again if so probably not by enough.

    • hedora 4 hours ago
      When I stopped paying attention to their bull, they were overstating by way more than 90%. The article cites a study saying DOGE’s overstatement was about 90% of the total number in the end.

      Also, the analysis in the study is conservative, and does not include follow on effects due to obvious immediate economic damage from the cuts (which seem to have been chosen to maximize damage to the economy).

      $21.7B net cost is probably too low if you include that. If you value the programs that were eliminated at $0, the net cost was still in the billions.