It's a problem

  Trump is creating the Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE. Sounds like an oxymoron to me if ever I heard one. But it isn't a bad idea in a general sense. The only problem being getting congress to agree to tightening those purse strings. I'm quite certain there are quite a number of programs, grants or whatever that could be eliminated. I'm convinced a number of them only exist as a "favor" to someone or some group of someone's. Bureaucracy seldom shrinks and funds are rarely cut back or eliminated from programs. Government efficiency? There is nothing efficient about government.

  I haven't read much or heard a great deal about how this department is supposed to operate. How many employees will it have? Given the extent of government programs it would certainly require either a lot of people, a lot of time or both! My first suggestion for a more efficient government would be stop borrowing money to give away to other countries. I also wouldn't be supplying millions of dollars in military hardware to anyone. Much more efficient to keep that for your own self defense in my opinion. But I realize all of that is a part of the political landscape and may be a necessity in some situations. How efficient is our tax system? 6,871 pages of regulations that's how efficient that is. Got it covered, right?

  The Washington crowd is very nervous about all of that. Government employees are concerned about that as well. There are about 2.87 million federal employees. If you include state and local government that numbers swells to 19.58 million. That's about 6.5% of the population. Do we really require that many people? Six people to every hundred doesn't appear to be very efficient at all. Beyond their jobs however there are all the little perks to be concerned with. What if we really have to come into the office for instance? Gee, what if Congress had to be in session, actually working, for more than the 154 days they did in 2023. For us average, every day, 40 hour a week people we work 260 days a year. Seems to me government employees should have to do the same, all government employees, including congress! 

  The real issue with this department of government efficiency is that "business as usual" will be impacted. Many of these programs the government have been funding are completely unnecessary. I'm 100% certain of that without even looking at the list of programs and grants. Congress occasionally mentions "pork barrel" spending whenever it suits their purposes. It's great when you can use that against your political enemies for instance. Heard a lot about hundred dollar hammers and toilet seats. Not so much about vital research. 

 The National Institute of Health (NIH) granted $465,339 to researchers at Reed College in Portland, Oregon to “create a token-based economy where pigeons are taught to gamble with slot machines.”  The US National Institutes of Health spent $592,527 at Emory University in Atlanta to explore why chimpanzees throw feces. Another $117,000 was necessary to conclude that most chimps are right-handed, the Washington Examiner reports. Their research suggests that throwing feces is a sign of intelligence in chimps. The National Institutes of Health gave $5 million to the Oregon Health & Science University to study if finches slurred their songs when alcohol was in their systems. The birds were given white grape juice spiked with alcohol, which impacted their singing ability, NBC News reports. 

  That was just the first three I saw when I googled government spending on outrageous programs. I'm certain the list is a whole lot longer than that. And that is where the problem rests. Austerity is not the hallmark of government, any government. Those in power will not adhere to that model. No, it will always be, for me, but not for thee when it comes down to the brass tacks. In government whenever anyone begins to talk about austerity they are quickly labeled as tyrants, despots, authoritarian, strict, severe, harsh, demanding, rigid, uncompromising, inflexible, forceful, austere, dour, domineering, iron-fisted, unrelenting, unyielding, gruff, imposing, hard-liner or heavy-handed. A Department devoted to austerity? Well now, that's going to be a problem.