Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Government Spending

To Succeed at Cutting Government, Musk and Ramaswamy Must Take on Entitlements

When it comes to cutting waste, fraud, and abuse, what's lacking is not ideas but the political will to act on them.

Eric Boehm | 11.13.2024 12:30 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
A picture of an AI-created image Elon Musk posted on X of the new Department of Government Efficiency | Vuk Valcic/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom
(Vuk Valcic/ZUMAPRESS/Newscom)

Possibly the biggest pile of waste in the federal government is the amount of "improper payments" made every year by the Medicare and Medicaid programs. In 2023, for example, those mistakes cost taxpayers more than $100 billion.

This is worth noting for two reasons in the wake of the news that President-elect Donald Trump has asked Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to head up a new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Despite the name, the DOGE looks to be more of an unofficial advisory board that will work with the White House's Office of Budget and Management (OMB), and Trump says it will help "drive out the massive waste and fraud which exists throughout" the government's $6 trillion budget.

First, it's not as if there is some secret knowledge to be uncovered by the DOGE when it comes to fixing the rampant inefficiencies of the federal government. Those Medicare and Medicaid overpayments are documented annually, for example. The Government Accountability Office and various inspectors general file regular reports. The Congressional Budget Office maintains a list of things that could be cut to reduce the deficit. Various members of Congress—most prominently, Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.)—periodically publish lists of silly, wasteful, or dubious government spending.

What's lacking, in short, is not ideas but the political will to act on them.

The amount of political will is going to matter, because that is very relevant to the second point: Unless Trump is willing to set aside his promise not to touch America's entitlement programs, the DOGE will be unable to follow through on its mandate.

Again, look at those improper payments made by Medicare and Medicaid. The $101.4 billion of improper payments the two entitlements made in 2023 accounted for 40 percent of all improper payments across the entire government that year, according to the GAO. That same GAO report suggested a simple change in how Medicaid bills some of its services that, if implemented, could save $141 billion over 10 years.

That should be the lowest of low-hanging fruit for any serious government-wide antiwaste effort—but it is off-limits as long as Trump refuses to consider any changes to entitlement programs.

The same problem pops up when you start looking at other big swings that the DOGE could take. Seven of the top nine suggestions made by the Congressional Budget Office's annual report on "options for reducing the deficit" involve changing elements of America's three federal entitlement programs. Capping Medicaid spending, increasing premiums for Medicare Part B, or reconfiguring how Social Security benefits are paid to wealthier Americans each could save hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade. None will be possible as long as entitlement reform is off the table.

All of this is a function of the federal government's fiscal reality: Entitlements are the biggest and fastest-growing segment of the budget. This year, so-called "mandatory spending"—primarily Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, along with a few other government-funded health care programs—will cost nearly $4 trillion, while all discretionary spending will total less than $1.8 trillion.

Musk has promised $2 trillion in spending cuts, but he could propose eliminating all discretionary spending—good luck zeroing out the Pentagon—and would still fall short of that goal. It is impossible to be serious about fiscal reform while promising not to touch the entitlement programs.

That's why the question of political will matters. If the DOGE is going to be something more than a meme-ified version of Tom Coburn's Congressional Pig Book, it will have to break through the political opposition that has stymied countless other efforts at cutting government spending. Pointing out the waste, fraud, and abuse is relatively easy. Getting Congress to cut programs that feed public cash to constituents and contractors is harder. Entitlement reform is orders of magnitude harder still.

Of course, libertarians should welcome any discussion about cutting government, and personally I wish Musk and Ramaswamy the best of luck in this endeavor. If nothing else, the project is sure to be "extremely tragic and extremely entertaining," as Musk has promised.

Still, it seems prudent to withhold praise until the DOGE has put forth some ideas and indicated how it believes the White House and Congress will accomplish those things. As long as Trump remains adamant about maintaining the status quo for America's entitlement programs, the DOGE's bark is likely to be more fearful than its fiscal bite.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Kids Are More Anxious. What If We Gave Them Independence?

Eric Boehm is a reporter at Reason.

Government SpendingEntitlementsTrump AdministrationElon MuskVivek RamaswamySocial SecurityMedicaidMedicareGovernment WasteDOGE
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (155)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Chumby   8 months ago

    End them all. Immediately. Fuck you boomer pyramid schemers.

    1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

      Do you want grandma to die?
      Oh, wait, she died already.

      1. Chumby   8 months ago

        Covid killed her because YOU didn’t wear a face diaper. Heartless bastard.

      2. Spiritus Mundi   8 months ago

        You sure, pretty sure she voted for Harris.

        1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

          Twice!

        2. DesigNate   8 months ago

          How sad is it that Harris had all those dead people voting for her and still lost?

          1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

            They ghosted her.

    2. SQRLSY   8 months ago

      "End them all. Immediately."

      Agreed! In spades! The LARGEST (and moist expensively expansive) looming entitlement of all, though, is ALL of the right-wing wrong-nuts who want to PUNISH-PUNISH-PUNISH all of the un-Muricans via VAST tariff-taxes and endless armies of border goons, and snatchers and deporters of hard-working illegal sub-humans!!! Ya know, parasitical morons everywhere with boots and guns demanding "papers please" are a HUGE drag on the economy!

      Right-wing wrong-nuts, PLEASE put yer dicks and clits BACK in yer pants and take a look in the mirror, about entitlements!!! YOUR PervFected Lusts for YOUR entitlements to sneering self-righteous "us good, them bad" unrelenting TRIBALISM is gonna put us ALL in Trump's Dump!

      1. Eeyore   8 months ago

        All the olds - red and blue - love themselves some entitlements.

      2. 5.56   8 months ago

        I FEEL YOUR PAIN, LOSER.

    3. Eeyore   8 months ago

      Boomers need immigrants to maintain the ponzi.

      To keep the ponzi alive for GenX - I suggest a massive cloning campaign. Tax the clones to pay for grandma.

      1. SQRLSY   8 months ago

        Too true! Tax the robots also! Especially the IMMIGRANT robots!

        (Good jerbs for good MURICAN robots!)

  2. Eeyore   8 months ago

    Firing everyone who works for a letter agency will help. You have to start with a heavy dose of dewormer if you ever want to recover from your parasitic infection.

    1. One-Punch_Man   8 months ago

      Crude you don't want me to have a job! (NASA). Everyone in government works for a letter agency. They love they letters.

      1. Eeyore   8 months ago

        Is it a job, or is it a white collar welfare program?

        1. Tom   8 months ago

          I retired from the federal government in 2008. Even back then it had become a welfare program for Blacks, Hispanics and women. DEI ruled. I'm sure it's much worse now.

    2. Rossami   8 months ago

      It would help but I'm not sure how significantly. The letter agencies are all "discretionary spending" and even aggregated together are only a minor fraction of the total government budget.

  3. Eeyore   8 months ago

    Your can't eliminate waste and fraud from a system like Medicaid. It is impossible. The only option is to eliminate it.

  4. Sometimes a Great Notion   8 months ago

    Repeal FICA programs. End the Great Society and the New Deal.

    1. SIV   8 months ago

      And repeal the whole "Progressive Era".

      1. TJJ2000   8 months ago

        ^THIS +10000000000000.
        That UN-Constitutional building of a [Na]tional So[zi]alt Empire.

  5. msdemeanor   8 months ago

    Won't happen.No political will.

    1. Eeyore   8 months ago

      Lots of political will. Lots of opposing political will that is.

  6. TrickyVic (old school)   8 months ago

    A new department? Can POTUS do that? Where does the budget come from?

    1. Eeyore   8 months ago

      Write an executive order that every department has to hire musk as a binding arbitration consultant and they have to pay him from their budget.

      Same way DEI consultants get 6 figure checks.

      1. Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

        Musk will likely do it for a dollar per year. And I doubt he will waste taxpayer money lavishing himself. Seriously, the maximum government salary doesn’t even add up to his annual tip money.

    2. Eeyore   8 months ago
  7. sarcasmic   8 months ago

    Didn't Trump promise to not touch entitlements?

    1. SQRLSY   8 months ago

      Right-wing wrong-nuts can't and-or won't see that shit. Prepare for massive tax cuts and no spending cuts = = massive inflation!

    2. Idaho-Bob   8 months ago

      When did you start caring about what Trump says?

      1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

        Oh yeah. Look at what he did last term, not what he says. He didn't cut entitlements. Shoot. Does that mean ignore what he did and focus on what he says? I can never tell which to do since you defenders change your minds so often.

        1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

          Poor sarc.

          1. Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

            I think the least week has featured a lot of Sarc pouring.

        2. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

          When McCain save ACA?

          https://www.nbcnews.com/health/obamacare/mccain-hated-obamacare-he-also-saved-it-n904106

          One of your beloved neocons you pine for?

          1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

            You voted for him.

            1. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

              You're pathetic sarc.

              Nothing ever of substance from you.

              You are literally the maddow of this comment board. Biased narrative bullshit without thought.

              1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

                You voted for McCain and you're attacking me because the voices in your head say I pine for him. Go to a doctor.

                1. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

                  When did I vote for mccain?

                  Please cite.

                  Now I do have citations of you yearning for the old gop prior to Trump.

                  1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

                    You voted for Obama?

                    1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

                      Ideas™ !

                    2. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

                      Lol. No.

                      Now provide the cite.

                    3. Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

                      Why does it matter to you Drunky? Your hobo ass doesn't even vote at all.

                  2. chemjeff radical individualist   8 months ago

                    Of course Jesse voted for McCain. He wasn't going to let the Kenyan Muslim Marxist win, now, was he?

                    1. Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

                      You’re so desperate. Not a single real argument from you. Just drunken impotent rage. You don’t even vote at all. And you’re too much of a pussy to do anything else. Like the way you hide from me after your pathetic threats.

    3. Zeb   8 months ago

      I will be very surprised if anything gets done about entitlements. Even if Trump can be convinced, I don't see congress doing anything because they want to keep their jobs.

  8. Spiritus Mundi   8 months ago

    Sullum assures me these things aren't happening.

  9. Uncle Jay   8 months ago

    "To Succeed at Cutting Government, Musk and Ramaswamy Must Take on Entitlements."

    ...and find ways to stop the runaway spending.
    Eliminating needless, useless and expensive bureaucracies, ending grants, subsidies, foreign aid, pulling out of NATO as well as the UN would be a good start.
    Then investigate where all this "lost" federal money went.

  10. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

    All you idiots saying "End SSA Medicaid FICA etc" are blowhards. Anyone can say that. None of you have proposed a transition scheme. No transition would be accepted which simply cut the pensions and health insurance.

    You're just virtue signalling bloviators if you have no transition plan.

    1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

      Chase did.

      1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

        Chase transitioned?

        1. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

          Yeah, from DNC loser to LP loser.

        2. Chumby   8 months ago

          From a man to a lesbian though, right?

      2. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

        Describe it, then. No details, just the general outline. My bet is anything he said was so vague it was meaningless. Prove me wrong.

        1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

          You bet that something without details is vague? I bet you're right.

        2. sarcasmic   8 months ago

          END MANDATORY INVESTMENT LIKE SOCIAL SECURITY
          No person shall be obligated to enter into any financial arrangement, savings program, social program or insurance scheme. Individuals subject to prior compulsory Federal programs shall be offered an equitable, voluntary exit.

          There is no politically correct way to say this; Social Security is a Ponzi scheme where payroll taxes from current employees are directly transferred to benefit recipients. Taxpayers are not paying into some national retirement fund that reinvests its proceeds to generate profits and fund their future retirement. They’re directly paying the benefits of current recipients, a scheme which becomes less and less viable as the portion of the population aging into retirement continues to grow faster than the number of workers in the workforce.

          As far back as as 2005, nearly 70% of younger workers – those between 18 and 29, favored being allowed to divert at least a portion of their payroll taxes into the stock market and other investment vehicles. This makes sense as, over longer periods of time, an index fund that performs averagely compared to its peer funds would still generate a higher rate of return than the 4.6% that SSA actuaries claim as that program’s rate of return, a rate that grows closer to zero as the program grows nearer to insolvency.

          We will end that failing Social Security program, and other social programs, and allow the market to provide better solutions. Of course, we understand that there are currently individuals who depend on these programs, and/or are near retirement and are dependent on them. For this reason, we will arrange for these programs to be phased out over a period of time, to avoid harm to those who currently need them to simply survive, while giving plenty notice to others to arrange their affairs accordingly.

          In addition to allowing employees to spend their hard-earned dollars on the retirement investment of their choice, I would also work to increase the contribution limits on Health Savings Accounts, which don’t come close to covering the average cost of healthcare per individual of $13,493.

          AS PRESIDENT:

          We will end the failing Social Security program, and other social programs, allowing the market to provide better solutions. Of course, we understand that there are currently individuals who depend on these programs, and/ or are near retirement and are dependent on them. For this reason, we will arrange for these programs to be phased out over a period of time, to avoid harm to those who currently need them to simply survive, while giving plenty notice to others to arrange their affairs accordingly.

          https://votechaseoliver.com/economy/

          1. Commenter_XY   8 months ago

            That has details? Where?

            We will end that failing Social Security program, and other social programs, and allow the market to provide better solutions.

            Does Chase have a clue about annuities, and how they work?

            sarcasmic, c'mon man. That is an aspirational statement he put out there. Not a plan.

            1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

              He had more details in interviews. He wanted to keep benefits for people who mathematically can't save for retirement, and pay for it with the employer contribution to the payroll tax. Phase it out.

              1. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

                Got a link to one of those interviews, like a searchable transcript? I'm not interested in listening to hours of audios or videos to find the few seconds of nuggets.

                1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

                  No transcripts, sorry.

                  https://wordsandnumbers.libsyn.com/episode-386-chase-oliver-2024

                  https://mightyheaton.com/the-political-orphanage/chase-oliver-the-libertarian

                  1. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

                    Odds if you listen and no actual details exist?

              2. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

                Please cite.

                From your description he wants to replace a system with a new system. Not end a system.

                1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

                  How many stupid pills did you eat this morning? Because you're peaking right now.

                  1. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

                    Oh. So he didn't propose a new system that you just described. Got it.

                    You truly are retarded.

                  2. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

                    Ideas™ !

            2. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

              The only thing in its favor is actually recognizing SS and Medicare are a problem. But that's been LP creed since day zero.

            3. chemjeff radical individualist   8 months ago

              So much concern trolling. I love that Chase Oliver is held to a far higher standard than not just Trump but any other candidate.

              "Where's Chase's 500-page plan for ending Social Security? Huh? That proves he's not a serious candidate!"

              "Wait, Trump said he's going to create a new department that will cut $2 trillion in government waste? That sounds like a totally feasible plan! Let's do it!"

              1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

                Yup.

                1. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

                  Nope. Lying sarc, earned the nickname the old-fashioned way.

              2. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

                So much concern lying. Show me where I said anything about any candidate, other than saying at least Chase recognized the problem.

                Lying Jeffy, earned the nickname.

                1. chemjeff radical individualist   8 months ago

                  Fuck you. Was I responding to your comment? No.

                  the point is, people like Jesse and Commenter_XY (but mostly Jesse) wrote post after post about how Chase was an unserious shallow candidate, when they were actively pimping for a candidate who was even more shallow and less serious when it came to detailed policy positions. It was all concern trolling. They were holding Chase up to a ridiculously high standard relative to everyone else running because it was just concern trolling.

                  1. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

                    What, I need an invitation? Where was your invitation?

                    Wholly fucking stupidity. Get a fucking grip.

                  2. Commenter_XY   8 months ago

                    Oh please, Chase Oliver was the very definition of an Unserious Candidate. The LP used to be seen as irrelevant, now they are seen as irrelevant and buffoonish. Thanks Chase. Good job.

                    In contrast, President Trump was, well, the President for four years. And was just convincingly re-elected, with a unified Congress.

              3. DesigNate   8 months ago

                That tends to happen when you're ice skating uphill.

          2. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

            Found the fly in the soup.

            we will arrange for these programs to be phased out over a period of time

            That's not a transition plan. It's no more helpful than all the bloviators here saying "Shut them down."

            "We will arrange" is better than 5 minutes of Kamala word salad, and that's it.

          3. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

            And what was his plan to get Congress to do this?

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   8 months ago

              What was Trump’s plan to do anything?

              You are just concern trolling. You don’t give a shit about plans.

              To this day you still think Trump signing an EO means he accomplished deregulation. That is even less of a ‘plan’ as Chase Oliver has.

              1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

                Why did he do so much better in the election?

      3. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

        Please cite his actual plan to get Congress to do so.

    2. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

      I suppose I should propose a transition plan, if I'm castigating everyone else for not proposing one.

      The DJIA has a ten year ROI of 10%, the S&P 500 is 13%, in very round figures.

      If a pensioner were to take a lump sum payment to get the same pension, he'd need ten times the annual payout. But lump sums have value beyond the ROI since they can be inherited or spent directly. So build an auction site for lump sum buyouts; lowest ones get bought out.

      This obviously requires spending more short term money to save long term. Some whiz bang accountants can work up various scenarios to see which pay off best. Could some of the money come from buying out young people who wouldn't collect their lump sum for 20-30-40 years? I don't know; I don't know enough about accounting and don't know what younguns would think was worthwhile; seems to me, if you're 30 and been paying payroll taxes for 10 years, and expect to keep paying for 40 more before retiring, the prospect of not paying payroll taxes now and collecting some small lump sum that same 40 years later would be pretty darned attractive.

      There are has to be some safeguard for fools who squander their lump sum and come crying to Uncle Sugar for welfare. Perhaps you can't get your lump sum until your auction bid includes one year of real time logging of your investment skills. Perhaps all lump sums are transferred as locked-in index funds which can't be changed for five years.

      I also don't know what affect there would be from putting all those lump sums into the stock market. Would it raise stock prices artificially high? Depress them? Flood the market with scammers?

      The problem is the Ponzi nature of SSA and Medicare. SSA was intentionally created that way by FDR's brain trust to make it impossible to undo once it has been in operation for a year or two.

      1. Chumby   8 months ago

        No transition plan needed. End it. Trying to get socialism right is that road paved with good intentions.

        1. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

          "End it" is as useful as saying "Breed pigs with wings."

          1. Overt   8 months ago

            "We'll figure out how to pay for it" isn't much better.

            1. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

              I at least offered suggestions. "End it" is not a suggestion. What are your transition ideas?

              1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

                Normally, you start out wearing dresses……

          2. Chumby   8 months ago

            Stop taking the money out of paychecks. Stop making payments. Fire all of the staff. End it.

            1. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

              Smear glue on the wing roots. Smear glue on the shoulders. Attach. Pigs fly.

              1. mad.casual   8 months ago

                As long as you put enough powder behind the pigs, SSA staffers, or both your issues will be resolved.

          3. Red Rocks White Privilege   8 months ago

            The irony of Social Security is that one of Dubya's better ideas was to provide people with the option of treating it like a Thrift Savings Plan, which is really just a 401k for government employees. You put in what you want, the government matches it up to a specified amount, and you draw from it when you decide to retire.

            1. ElvisP   8 months ago

              That was an another hare-brained idea by Bush. Diverting Social Security contributions for a 401K-style plan would have depleted SS funding even faster, resulting in the inability to pay current retirees. Also, the government couldn’t “match” your contributions - there was no funding source to do so. My solution is to just let SS run out naturally over time, where benefits would be cut across the board by 20% in 2034 and would likely reduce further in the out years.

      2. Overt   8 months ago

        This is too clever by half.

        If we set a horizon of 30 years, we can get out of this. Begin by pushing back the retirement schedule. So people within 5 years keep the existing retirement age. The next 5 years pushes by 2, then the next Cohort pushes by 2, etc. At 20 years you are not ever eligible. (NOTE: Pinning retirement age to life expectancy alone would make the program solvent for several decades at least).

        This tapers the people using the program. As the program bleeds out, the cost of the program reduces and taxes can be lowered appropriately. Obviously, the longer we wait to begin this transition, the better this will look.

        Medicare can be handled similarly, except by transitioning payments into HSAs. If everyone were given an HSA, it could be a place where we deliver our taxes, and then for the truly unfortunate (if we must have welfare) they can get block disbursements instead of giant managed welfare systems.

        1. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

          They can keep my last 20 years of payments if they just let me opt out now.

          1. Chumby   8 months ago

            The frotting above reminds me of Mike Hihn’s 9-9-9 plan.

            1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

              Snort!

              1. Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

                ‘Smirk’

            2. Dillinger   8 months ago

              moar bold, please?

          2. sarcasmic   8 months ago

            You’ve only been paying in for 20 years? You talk like you’re pushing 60. That means you didn’t work until you were 40. That explains a lot. Professional student with terrible grades.

            1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

              Ideas™ !

            2. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

              I thought I was a tall well groomed cop.

              It is amazing how retarded your mind is lol.

              You are amazingly wrong in every single aspect of your posts.

              I'm curious, as I know you're closer to 60 than I am, how does a 60 year old talk?

            3. Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

              And you STOPPED paying in when your alcoholism made you unemployable. Probably many years ago.

              So you don’t work, you don’t vote. You have no family, except for the ex wife and daughter who are just alcoholic delusions. All you do is get drunk and post here.

              Do you have any value whatsoever?

          3. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

            I'd have gone for that too. I bet a lot of people would.

        2. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

          See? Coming up with another vapor ware plan isn't that hard, and is at least a plan, unlike Chase or all this "End it" bloviating. If you got it from somewhere else, I'd like to see more detail.

    3. chemjeff radical individualist   8 months ago

      I agree that just yelling "End Entitlements" is pointless. Not only is there a less than zero chance that any type of sudden repeal will pass, it is simply nihilistic - it completely denies that there are people right now who depend on Social Security/Medicare, because their government made a promise to them. What will happen to them?

      Anyway, I think the closest libertarian-type solution that we can expect to achieve in any near term scenario is one that has actual empirical support, since it already exists - Singapore.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Provident_Fund

      Now, the Singapore CPF is actually a combination fund that covers not just retirement but also health care and housing. For purposes of this discussion, I'm only talking about the retirement part. I am not at all advocating that this approach should be used for health care or housing.

      But the basic idea, is like a Roth IRA inside a government account. It is still a forced savings plan, employees and employers both contribute to the CPF, but the money grows because it is invested in the market, and the account is inheritable upon death, and transferrable if a citizen leaves the country and renounces citizenship.

      Here is another article that is more descriptive about how the Singapore CPF works:

      https://www.ey.com/en_sg/insights/tax/is-now-the-time-to-review-the-central-provident-fund

      The key point here is though that people only get out what they put in, plus interest. If people don't save (beyond the mandatory contribution) then they don't get anything else back. And the money actually belongs to the citizen, not to the government.

      1. Overt   8 months ago

        I am not a fan of sovereign funds like this because they are too often used as a forcing function by the government. Especially the US Government. It would be the largest sovereign fund in the world, and dominate all purchasing activity. It just can’t be done for the largest economy in the world.

        That said, we don’t really have to do a sovereign fund. IF we had to compel people to pay into retirement account (which is not even close to libertarian) then they could just do it like an IRA or 401k in a private account. You don’t need a massive, managed fund.

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   8 months ago

          An idea like the CPF moves the needle in a libertarian direction because at the very least individuals own their own money within the fund. You are right, it is not the libertarian ideal. But, like "ending the welfare state", the libertarian ideal is not going to come to pass within our lifetimes.

          And it doesn't have to be a sovereign fund in order to meet the idea behind CPF. It could be, for example, that individuals choose from a list of private government-approved funds.

          But the main benefit of something like this, at least conceptually, is that the Singapore CPF actually exists and to the best of my knowledge old people in Singapore are not dying in the streets, or subsisting off cat food, because they do not have money to fund their basic needs. It is a step in the right direction that can be used to assuage everyone's fears about whether it is doable or not - it most definitely is.

          1. Commenter_XY   8 months ago

            I could see a hybrid of Singapore's method and Chile's method.

            I just don't see a POTUS Trump screwing with SSA. To many other things: border wall, mass deportations, 2017 tax rates permanent, calming down UKR and ISR, DOGE. Pretty full legislative plate for 700 days.

            1. Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

              And something needs to be done about the democrats and their media outlets first too.

  11. shadydave   8 months ago

    Have you recovered yet, Eric?

  12. shadydave   8 months ago

    The libertarian case against cutting government waste

    1. Eeyore   8 months ago

      "It's too hard!"

    2. mad.casual   8 months ago

      +1 Not even as a libertarian but just as a fiscally aware human being, I reject the fundamental premise that “possibly the biggest pile of waste in any given budget is the improper payments portion of said budget.” No one who isn’t an abjectly dishonest retard who specifically doesn’t want to be taken seriously would lead with such a premise. It’s retarded trophy wife economics.

  13. Nobartium   8 months ago

    Reason is really pissy that beltway libertarians have been cut out of the picture.

    You guys just can't be happy that this is happening.

  14. Commenter_XY   8 months ago

    I would prefer that Elon and Vivek focus their efforts on reducing the DC bureaucracy by a meaningful percentage (>33%). Not even Reagan did that.

    Pres Elect Trump isn't going to fuck with SSA, other than not tax it, so stop with that pipe dream of ending it and put down the crack pipe. Paul Ryan put out a plan awhile back that would work.

    Medicare is ripe for some reform, but the payment schema has to be overhauled.

    And defense can absolutely be cut.

    1. Stupid Government Tricks   8 months ago

      The current US military, meaning the bureaucracy, reminds me very much of the 1930s military. Submarine skippers particularly were dismissed like crazy after Pearl Harbor because they had been trained in being cautious during exercises. Ships and planes were gold-plated, to an extent, because things were not urgent.

      Now it's DEI and long long yard periods. Saw something about a carrier getting its mid-life refueling and upgrade -- 5 years in a shipyard!

      The F-22 took so long to produce that its electronics went through three different upgrades entirely because the kit kept getting delayed and became so obsolete it couldn't even be manufactured.

      The DoD mentality is bureaucrat to the core. I don't know what the solution is.

      1. Eeyore   8 months ago

        Lots of early retirement.

      2. Commenter_XY   8 months ago

        DOD: AI and drone technology are a big part of the solution. We need lethality, not people carrying/flying/driving lethal weapons. Big difference. You could fire the entire Joint Chiefs, and their Vice Chiefs and their staffs...and by the next morning, their replacements will be sitting at the desk.

        We probably spend more than the next 5 or 6 countries combined on defense. How about we just spend more than the next 2 countries combined? Would that really be the end of the world?

  15. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

    Congress needs to take on entitlements. It is their domain.

    1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

      If Trump is true to his word he would veto anything from Congress that cut entitlements.

      If that were to happen, would you join me in condemning Trump and backing Congress, or be a cunt?

      1. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

        I’ll stick to reality instead of your retarded hypotheticals.

        It will take Congress. He took it on last time with ACA and your hero neocon saved the program.

        You live in a world of pure imagination sarc. You live in a world devoid of facts or reality.

        Even here you live in what you believe, not in what was already done and blocked by your neocon heros.

        Unlike you and the other TDS inflicted democrats, I understand how government works.

        1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

          You would condemn Trump?

          1. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

            If Congress got 60 votes he likely signs. You'd still condemn him though.

            1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

              Yes I condemn him for signing the CARES Act. You defend him. Just as you'd defend him for vetoing legislation that would cut entitlements. I don't have a problem with Trump supporters. Sometimes even I support Trump - when he isn't being a bombastic buffoon. His defenders on the other hand, people like you, are indefensible scum.

              1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

                Ideas™ !

              2. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

                Oddity is you only condemn him, not Congress. And you dont condemn Biden or Congress passing more spending with 50 votes and a tie breaker.

                I dont condemn presidents for veto proof bills. How many times do I have to say this before it gets through your retarded head? I've been consistent on this for decades dumbass.

                I'm not retarded like you and understand the different branches of government.

                1. Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

                  The CARES act doesn’t matter to him. He just hates Trump no matter what. Thats all he is. A Trump hating drunk bitch. No ideas, nothing clever or witty to say. Nothing even (intentionally) funny. Just a vicious leftist Trump hating lush without anything to say, but saying it too loudly.

      2. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

        Todays new word: cunt

        1. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

          He never provided citations for him not being a cunt this morning.

          Bet we can provide many citations for him being a cunt though.

        2. Chumby   8 months ago

          Drunkard drunkunt

      3. chemjeff radical individualist   8 months ago

        Oh come now. You know the answer. Jesse along with half the commenters here will defend Trump to their dying breaths. That is the real TDS.

        1. Fire up the Woodchippers! (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

          No, you just nonsensically blame Trump for everything. There is nothing else to you besides being a worthless drunk.

  16. shadydave   8 months ago

    The internet is now spreading a "Brandon Herrera for head of the ATF" meme. Herrera has already stated he would happily accept the position.

    1. chemjeff radical individualist   8 months ago

      Who?

  17. Longtobefree   8 months ago

    Sorry Eric, the whole point is that Musk and Ramaswamy don't HAVE to do anything someone else says.

  18. Red Rocks White Privilege   8 months ago

    Once more, with feeling:

    Once again, because people don’t actually realize it–from September’s Monthly Treasury Statement:

    Table 4–Receipts
    -Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund: $386.8 billion

    Table 5–Outlays
    -Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services: $2.147 trillion

    Delta: $1.76 trillion

    FY24 Deficit: $1.83 trillion

    Pretty much all of our national debt is due to government grants for Medicaid spending. Realistically, Medicaid isn’t going anywhere, so how does this get addressed? Go after medical monopolies and introduce price competition, and incentivize massive discounts for cash over third party insurance payments, including Medicaid. Get rid of EMTALA to mitigate the mooching off of the emergency room.

    Once these are in place, then we can start having a discussion about how much Medicaid really needs to be giving out, since you’re working to actually try and mitigate the problem.

    1. sarcasmic   8 months ago

      I wonder how much would change if health care providers were required to post prices like every other service in the universe.

      1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

        (Sarc has never seen an unpriced menu), but he did stay in a Half million dollar home one weekend.

      2. Red Rocks White Privilege   8 months ago

        Believe it or not, Trump actually required that with an EO with in 2019

        It obviously didn't take very well, because good fucking luck finding a price list on a hospital website that isn't a pain in the ass to dig through. But something like what the Surgery Center of Oklahoma does would be incredibly beneficial in terms of price shopping for various treatments.

        1. JesseAz (5-30 Banana Republic Day)   8 months ago

          Now sarc is against it.

      3. I, Woodchipper   8 months ago

        You can actually call the doctors and hospitals and ask them about their prices.

        Those are retail prices. Insurance discounts make the real price much lower but only if you're insured. You can negotiate with them for a lower retail price but most people have no idea they can do it and have no wherewithal to do it either. It's a fucked up system from many angles.

        1. Red Rocks White Privilege   8 months ago

          The reason people just default to third-party payer most of the time is because the hospitals deliberately make it such a pain in the ass to pay. If I have to have a knee surgery, I don't want to negotiate over a price like I'm buying a fucking used car. Just post the shit on your website so we know what to expect. And paying cash should absolutely not cost more than using an insurance "discount"--that's some real mafioso bullshit because I guarantee the time and paperwork involved to process an insurance claim are nowhere near what it would cost me to plop some cash or my credit card on the counter.

          Put it this way--when our kids were born, the charged price was $25K each. That was for a normal live birth and a night in the hospital. The "discounted" insurance price was $17,500. In the 1960s, the cost to have a kid was about $50 for the same shit. That's about $500 in today's money. It's fucking ridiculous.

  19. I, Woodchipper   8 months ago

    As much as I want to feel hopeful about what DOGE might accomplish, this will never happen.

    Entitlements will bury the budget as they print trillions of dollars a year to keep up until we're all buried in a hyper-inflationary cycle. What happens after that is anyone's guess but the one thing that will not ever happen is the fed gov taking the budget under control in any way shape or form.

  20. One-Punch_Man   8 months ago

    Wait, Boehm I know you are TDS so you can't think straight but how is eliminating improper payments reducing Medicare? Somehow reducing fraud is reducing entitlements. That is what you are saying? You used improper. You didn't say a cut across the board.

    Making something more efficient is not a bad thing.

    I work in government. There is a lot of waste in meetings because no one will make a decision. Lots of waste in one group can't talk to another group. We won't talk about the paper work.

  21. mtrueman   8 months ago

    Isn't the problem that for all the taxes Americans pay, they get little in return? That's why it's called Department of Government EFFICIENCY. Cutting spending will only mean that Americans get even less in return for their taxes.

    1. Don't look at me!   8 months ago

      It’s important that the government not go bankrupt.

    2. I, Woodchipper   8 months ago

      what in god's name are you talking about

  22. One-Punch_Man   8 months ago

    As a Gen X'er, I never planned on social security. Maybe medical but not the rest. I figure I'm paying for my parents, mom now. We also said that SS won't be there when we retire.

    I think most of Gen X is like that. They don't believe government will save them. The future generations that have been put into a bubble. We will see.

    1. Dillinger   8 months ago

      >>I think most of Gen X is like that. They don’t believe government will save them.

      word.

    2. KaDaSha   8 months ago

      Absolutely! I have saved assuming I will have NO SS. My Boomer dad hates this because his attitude towards SS is much like the younger folks. WE WILL HAVE IT. COLLECT SOON AS YOU CAN. At the very least, Gen X will have to wait till 70 or see a 20% reduction. I wish they'd just freaking make a BIPARTISAN plan so we can get out of debt. I hate not knowing but either way, I can retire. Im'a have less if I get no SS, however.

  23. Dillinger   8 months ago

    >>When it comes to cutting waste, fraud, and abuse, what's lacking is not ideas but the political will to act on them.

    can we ... see what happens before you go off half-cocked bossing around billionaires?

  24. Overt   8 months ago

    A huge amount of “Spending” comes in the form of refundable and non-refundable tax credits. These largely don’t show up on the budget, because they are expressed as net-lower revenues.

    Many of the people in my neighborhood spin up solar companies for local charities and churches. This investment is 100% tax deductible and they can depreciate the capital investments over a short timeframe. These are very rich people creating white elephants (big solar farms stuck in the parking lot of a church, which will break down in 15 years) and reaping huge tax returns off of it. These are not working rich- these are people who have large nest eggs, where they can afford to put $150,000 down at one time, and wait until tax time to get it all back (plus some) as a tax refund.

    It is noteworthy that these don't show up in our discretionary funding numbers. We have paid nearly a trillion dollars in 3 years on these solar incentives, but they don't show up on the budget because they are hidden in our revenue stream. Zeroing in on our shitty tax code is the very first place to find savings, because not only do they allow well off people to avoid taxes, they generally incentivize very shitty behavior (like creating a bunch of solar projects that won’t be working in 15 years).

  25. Earth-based Human Skeptic   8 months ago

    What, a democracy that does not give away trillions of dollars, funded by taxing some people trillions of dollars? What kind of crazy idea is that? We might as well be Nazis.

  26. RickAbrams   8 months ago

    Reduce the amount of social security, SSDI. and medicare and medicaid supports will be the fastest way to ruin the Trump Presidency. There is no mandate to do any of this; only grandiose hubris.

    https://tinyurl.com/rsmmsr November 11, 2024, CityWatch, The Folly of Mandates, by Richard Lee Abrams

    1. I, Woodchipper   8 months ago

      These programs are going to die. It only depends on how soon you recognize it.

  27. TJJ2000   8 months ago

    Yes. Trumps promise to uphold Security for Socialists is one of his biggest mistakes out of the gate. Course it also might of been one of the very reasons he won.

    Maybe it's the American Socialist mindset that needs to change.
    'Guns' ARE NOT going to make you sh*t no matter how diluted you are.
    Their only human asset is to ensure Liberty and Justice for all.

  28. KaDaSha   8 months ago

    Absolutely! I have saved assuming I will have NO SS. My Boomer dad hates this because his attitude towards SS is much like the younger folks. WE WILL HAVE IT. COLLECT SOON AS YOU CAN. At the very least, Gen X will have to wait till 70 or see a 20% reduction. I wish they'd just freaking make a BIPARTISAN plan so we can get out of debt. I hate not knowing but either way, I can retire. Im'a have less if I get no SS, however.

  29. MaverickNH   8 months ago

    “ Unless Trump is willing to set aside his promise not to touch America's entitlement programs, the DOGE will be unable to follow through on its mandate.”

    Nah..you just gotta cut into muscle instead of fat to lose weight. Muscle weighs more!

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

In Defense of the Tourist Trap: Why Following the Crowd Might Be the Smartest Way To Travel

Christian Britschgi | From the August/September 2025 issue

69 Percent of Americans Say American Dream Is Not Dead

Autumn Billings | 7.4.2025 8:30 AM

With Environmental Regulatory Reform, California Gov. Gavin Newsom Finally Does Something Substantial

Steven Greenhut | 7.4.2025 7:30 AM

Celebrate Independence Day by Insulting a Politician

J.D. Tuccille | 7.4.2025 7:00 AM

Independence Day Reminds Us You Can Be American by Choice

Billy Binion | 7.4.2025 6:30 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!