I know we're on to new outrages like tariffs and Ukraine, but this is a great read on DOGE/beauracracy...

[Nole Lou]

The Federal Bureaucracy simply doesn't work. It must be fixed.

DOGE seems to have little interest in actually improving government and making it more efficient, rather just interested in destroying it. Most Democrats decry even a hint of a cut or a deregulation.

So who is actually going to fix this and make government work again?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/07/opinion/democrats-elon-musk-doge.html?unlocked_article_code=1.vE4.1Ajm.M5aA_2DrYxbm&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Is there a party in favor of reforming government to actually be lean, efficient, effective, and a force for good? Actually, I'd say Clinton and GWB were both pretty aligned on this vision, but both parties seem far from it right now.

 

[Nole Lou]

And a couple interesting thoughts on the topic...

 

[THE_DEVIL]

I agree but it should be done within the law and with due diligence. Our democracy has a way to make the changes so it should be followed. Blindly swinging an axe at everything when a good chefs knife is more efficient.

We the people are to blame. We have voted for decades to get to where we are.

 

[seminole97]

We the people are to blame. We have voted for decades to get to where we are.

 

[Nole Lou]

I agree but it should be done within the law and with due diligence. Our democracy has a way to make the changes so it should be followed. Blindly swinging an axe at everything when a good chefs knife is more efficient.

We the people are to blame. We have voted for decades to get to where we are.

Agree. But the author is a Democrat that couldn't get it done. Will more Democrats acknowledge the problem and the need to deregulate?

Will a more normal Republican approach it more systematically and appropriately?

Who's going to fix this?

 

[BelemNole]

Can you start by telling us specifically which part of the bureaucracy isn't working? Again, specifically.
And give us an example of who is doing it better to model your new efficient design on?
If not, it sounds a lot like people just bitching about paying their fair share.

 

[Joes Place]

The Federal Bureaucracy simply doesn't work. It must be fixed.

What, specifically, "doesn't work" and "must be fixed"?

That's simply NOT the starting point DOGE is using, and thus it's not going to "fix" anything.
Literally why they fired loads of people, then had to try re-hiring them back again at multiple agencies.

Nothing in those agencies was "broken".

 

[seminole97]

If not, it sounds a lot like people just bitching about paying their fair share.

How much is one's 'fair share'?
I'm sure you don't think equal is fair, but would one's 'fair share' be higher than their share of income?

 

[Nole Lou]

Can you start by telling us specifically which part of the bureaucracy isn't working? Again, specifically.
And give us an example of who is doing it better to model your new efficient design on?
If not, it sounds a lot like people just bitching about paying their fair share.

Did you read the link?

Mr. Musk’s recklessness will not get us there, but neither will the excessive caution and addiction to procedure that Democrats exhibited under President Joe Biden’s leadership.

By the measure of laws passed and dollars appropriated, the Biden administration can claim historic achievements. But voters measured tangible results. A $42 billion program for broadband internet, authorized under the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, had not connected a single household by December. A $7.5 billion investment in electric vehicle charging stations has reportedly produced just 47 stations across 15 states. More than half of the $1.6 trillion appropriated under Mr. Biden’s four signature bills remains unspent and vulnerable to clawback by the Trump administration. These outcomes put at risk not just Mr. Biden’s legacy but also American competitiveness, climate goals and public safety. And they are typical results of our overburdened system for putting policy into effect.

Mr. Musk would pin this glacial pace on lazy bureaucrats. In fact, most of the public servants charged with carrying out these policies have been working tirelessly and creatively, but the obstacles they face are daunting.
Imagine you’re a federal employee diving in to help deploy funding under the CHIPS and Science Act and are drafting a simple web form to allow companies to express their initial interest. Imagine you are then told that in addition to extensive reviews by lawyers and dozens of other stakeholders in your agency and across the federal government, your form is subject to review by the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, a process that typically takes at least nine months.

In addition to preparing robust documentation, you must post your plans to the Federal Register, demonstrate you have adequately addressed the comments from the public, revise the form, post it again, and again address comments from the public. The procedures to hire a contractor to put your form online are equally onerous, as are a dozen other steps in the process.

You’d been eager to engage with the companies and understand what kinds of projects might be possible, but you soon realize all your energy will go to navigating the bureaucracy for months on end. The companies will have to wait.

At the same time, your team is trying to staff up. You’ve read the excellent Merit System Principles that supposedly govern human resources practices, but you quickly learn that hiring takes many months and you have little control over either the process or the outcome. More waiting.

 

[Colonoscopy]

Haven't read it.... But I'd go at it from perspective of system redesign first and then layoffs and whatnot as appropriate next.

 

[Nole Lou]

Can you start by telling us specifically which part of the bureaucracy isn't working? Again, specifically.
And give us an example of who is doing it better to model your new efficient design on?
If not, it sounds a lot like people just bitching about paying their fair share.

Literally only you could be so partisan as to be like $7.5 Billion for 47 charging stations years on? That's efficient.

 

[Nole Lou]

Haven't read it.... But I'd go at it from perspective of system redesign first and then layoffs and whatnot as appropriate next.

I could go for that...is anyone interested in doing that?

 

[Joes Place]

By the measure of laws passed and dollars appropriated, the Biden administration can claim historic achievements. But voters measured tangible results. A $42 billion program for broadband internet, authorized under the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, had not connected a single household by December. A $7.5 billion investment in electric vehicle charging stations has reportedly produced just 47 stations across 15 states.

What does this have to do with federal workers and agencies?

These are FEDERAL CONTRACTS. Many are long-term, and the money spent take quite a while due to local zoning, land acquisition, etc.

 

[Joes Place]

Literally only you could be so partisan as to be like $7.5 Billion for 47 charging stations years on?

How about digging into the timelines and costs for running electrical infrastructure to the areas to put the charging stations?

You cannot simply "build a box" where you do not have the transmission lines in place to deliver power to it.

 

[seminole97]

By the measure of laws passed and dollars appropriated, the Biden administration can claim historic achievements. But voters measured tangible results. A $42 billion program for broadband internet, authorized under the 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, had not connected a single household by December.

More egregious than the delay is the cost per connection.
Proposals rubber stamped at >$200,000 per house/business.
Just a giant tax giveaway to telcos/cable companies.
Meanwhile a Starlink base unit costs $350, so we could literally purchase 120 million of them with that money and connect every household and business in the country.

Nobody would spend $200,000 of their own money for a landline cable connection.

“Nothing is easier than spending the public money. It does not appear to belong to anybody. The temptation is overwhelming to bestow it on somebody.” - Calvin Coolidge

 

[hawki4ever]

I believe that 7.5 billon was the money appropriated, not spent.
The article is speaking on the bureaucracy it takes for every step. Well when you’re spending 1.6 trillion of the tax payers money there has to be safe guards to make sure the people aren’t getting ripped off, all laws are followed, the work is done correctly etc. By the way, it speaks to the federal workers, whom it praises.

 

[Nole Lou]

I believe that 7.5 billon was the money appropriated, not spent.
The article is speaking on the bureaucracy it takes for every step. Well when you’re spending 1.6 trillion of the tax payers money there has to be safe guards to make sure the people aren’t getting ripped off, all laws are followed, the work is done correctly etc. By the way, it speaks to the federal workers, whom it praises.

Even so...three years on, nothing to show for it. Forget the accusation that I don't want to pay my fair share...if we appropriate billions for broadband or chargers...that implies we need those things, so how can anyone justify that there's been zero progress in three years.

If we appropriate the money for something, we should get the something.
If we don't get the something, we shouldn't be spending or appropriating for it.

There's no ideology that justifies $42 billion to connect zero people to broadband. You either budget billions and connect them, or don't connect them and don't spend billions.

But the absolute grinding inertia is inexcusable.

 

[Joes Place]

Even so...three years on, nothing to show for it.

How do you know there is "nothing to show for it"?

Is that what Elno told you?

 

[RileyHawk]

More egregious than the delay is the cost per connection.
Proposals rubber stamped at >$200,000 per house/business.
Just a giant tax giveaway to telcos/cable companies.
Meanwhile a Starlink base unit costs $350, so we could literally purchase 120 million of them with that money and connect every household and business in the country.

Nobody would spend $200,000 of their own money for a landline cable connection.

“Nothing is easier than spending the public money. It does not appear to belong to anybody. The temptation is overwhelming to bestow it on somebody.” - Calvin Coolidge

So ignorant.

The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), allocated $42.45 billion to expand broadband access across the U.S. The program aims to connect millions of unserved and underserved homes over the next several years.

Timeframe for Deployment:​

• 2023-2024: Planning phase, including FCC broadband map challenges and state funding allocation approvals.
• 2024-2025: States finalize subgrants and begin large-scale infrastructure deployments.
• 2025-2030: Most broadband construction and home connections are expected to be completed.
• 2030 and beyond: Some hard-to-reach locations may take longer due to logistical challenges.

Total Home Connections Projected:​

• The BEAD program's goal is to provide broadband access to an estimated 8.5 million homes and businesses that currently lack adequate internet service.
• The actual number of connections will vary depending on how states allocate funding and the cost of deploying infrastructure in different areas.

While the timeline and number of homes connected may shift due to regulatory hurdles, workforce shortages, and permitting issues, the overall objective remains to close the digital divide by 2030.

 

[Joes Place]

So ignorant.

The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), allocated $42.45 billion to expand broadband access across the U.S. The program aims to connect millions of unserved and underserved homes over the next several years.

Timeframe for Deployment:​

• 2023-2024: Planning phase, including FCC broadband map challenges and state funding allocation approvals.
• 2024-2025: States finalize subgrants and begin large-scale infrastructure deployments.
• 2025-2030: Most broadband construction and home connections are expected to be completed.
• 2030 and beyond: Some hard-to-reach locations may take longer due to logistical challenges.

Total Home Connections Projected:​

• The BEAD program's goal is to provide broadband access to an estimated 8.5 million homes and businesses that currently lack adequate internet service.
• The actual number of connections will vary depending on how states allocate funding and the cost of deploying infrastructure in different areas.

While the timeline and number of homes connected may shift due to regulatory hurdles, workforce shortages, and permitting issues, the overall objective remains to close the digital divide by 2030.

#That'sABingo!!!

Let's sit back and wait for @seminole97 to address the disinformation he'd posted....
STAY TUNED!!!

 

[BelemNole]

Literally only you could be so partisan as to be like $7.5 Billion for 47 charging stations years on? That's efficient.

I can't help you if you are determined to believe Doge. I happen to have worked on several rural broadband projects - they don't deliver broadband the same day. It will take years.

 

[RileyHawk]

And here's a comparison between fiber broadband vs. Starlink. In essence, Starlink is just like any other satellite internet provider that has been around for many, many years. It doesn't get implemented because it is so technologically inferior. The BEAD program is designed to bring quality internet access to rural areas to facilitate their needs. It's like providing paved highways vs. gravel roads in the past. You can try to say the both provide a roadway but the difference is significant. Particularly to the people who need it.

Starlink vs. Traditional Fiber Broadband for Home and Business Users

Both Starlink (a satellite-based internet service by SpaceX) and traditional fiber broadband have their advantages and disadvantages depending on location, speed, reliability, and cost. Here’s how they compare:

---

​

1. Speed & Performance

Feature	Starlink (Satellite)	Fiber (Wired)
Download Speed	50-250 Mbps (Residential)	300 Mbps - 10 Gbps+
Upload Speed	10-30 Mbps	100 Mbps - 10 Gbps+
Latency	25-50 ms (Better than older satellites but still higher than fiber)	1-5 ms (Lowest possible)
Consistency	Can experience slowdowns during congestion	Extremely stable

• Winner: Fiber → Higher speeds, lower latency, and better consistency, especially for gaming, video conferencing, and large file uploads.

---

​

2. Reliability

Feature	Starlink	Fiber
Weather Sensitivity	Can be affected by heavy rain, snow, or obstructions	Unaffected by weather
Outages	Possible congestion during peak hours	Highly reliable with minimal outages

• Winner: Fiber → More reliable, especially in bad weather.

---

​

3. Cost & Installation

Feature	Starlink	Fiber
Monthly Cost	$90-$120 (Residential) / $250 (Business)	$50-$150 (Varies by ISP and speed)
Equipment Cost	$599 (Residential) / $2,500 (Business) for hardware	Often free or subsidized by ISPs
Installation	DIY setup or professional installation	Requires fiber infrastructure but no dish

• Winner: Fiber → Cheaper overall (if available), but Starlink is the best option in areas with no fiber access.

---

​

4. Business Use & Scalability

Feature	Starlink	Fiber
Best for Businesses?	Good for remote work but not ideal for data-heavy operations	Ideal for high-bandwidth applications, VoIP, and cloud services
Supports Multiple Users?	Can slow down with heavy use	Easily scales for large businesses

• Winner: Fiber → Essential for businesses, especially those needing high-speed uploads and reliability.

 

[Joes Place]

The Federal Bureaucracy simply doesn't work. It must be fixed.

DOGE seems to have little interest in actually improving government and making it more efficient, rather just interested in destroying it. Most Democrats decry even a hint of a cut or a deregulation.

So who is actually going to fix this and make government work again?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/07/opinion/democrats-elon-musk-doge.html?unlocked_article_code=1.vE4.1Ajm.M5aA_2DrYxbm&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Is there a party in favor of reforming government to actually be lean, efficient, effective, and a force for good? Actually, I'd say Clinton and GWB were both pretty aligned on this vision, but both parties seem far from it right now.

 

[seminole97]

• The BEAD program's goal is to provide broadband access to an estimated 8.5 million homes and businesses that currently lack adequate internet service.

42,000,000,000/8,500,000 = 4,941.176

That’s the ‘goal’. To spend almost $5000 per connection, according to your own source.

Would you rather spend $5000 for 1 internet connection, or $5000 to connect 14 sites that won't require line maintenance and be subject to flood washouts and other natural disasters?

In 2022, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced some grant winners for its ReConnect broadband program. And the announcement revealed that the Alaska Telephone Company, which won a $33 million grant, was planning to run fiber to 211 homes and five businesses at a staggering cost of nearly $204,000 per passing.

That doesn't even guarantee that all 211 homes and 5 businesses on the route will even connect, so the true cost per connection is almost certain to be higher.

Only a bureaucrat could approve that.

 

[Joes Place]

42,000,000,000/8,500,000 = 4,941.176

That’s the ‘goal’. To spend almost $5000 per connection

Maybe you should dig back into the record books on the "electrification of America" and how much was spent on bringing electricity to ALL of "flyover country"...

 

[seminole97]

I can't help you if you are determined to believe Doge. I happen to have worked on several rural broadband projects - they don't deliver broadband the same day. It will take years.

Or you could buy a Starlink base station and be connected by the end of the week.

That's a real toughie to figure out, isn't it?

 

[Bulldogs1974]

View embedded media

anyone serious about cutting waste would be 100% in on the idea of increasing the IRS and enforcement.
Everyone loves to lionize business owners when they cheat on their taxes more than anyone.

 

[Bulldogs1974]

Or you could buy a Starlink base station and be connected by the end of the week.

That's a real toughie to figure out, isn't it?

yes comrade, lets get musk the best deal. Maybe the FCC should outlaw any internet but starlink.

 

[Joes Place]

42,000,000,000/8,500,000 = 4,941.176

That’s the ‘goal’. To spend almost $5000 per connection, according to your own source.

You appear to not understand, that once the fiber is in place, it's there to provide far greater bandwidth for FUTURE growth as well.

It's called "infrastructure investment".

And, FWIW, using Starlink will cost those 8.5M homes a cumulative $5B a year MORE than the fiber will (for slower service btw). Ergo, not only does the infrastructure investment provide for future growth, there's also an obvious ROI here, and it's less than 10 yrs.....

 

[seminole97]

yes comrade, lets get musk the best deal. Maybe the FCC should outlaw any internet but starlink.

Let's get taxpayers the best deal, dipshit.

If there is something cheaper, let me know.

But borrowing $5000 per connection instead of $350 is stupid, and something no one would do with their own money. Only the government can be that wasteful.
The worst part is the $5000 is just the initial borrowing. We'll never pay that off, we'll just pay interest on that $5000 forever, so the real cost will measure closer to infinity than $5000.

Nothing has to be outlawed, just let people decide how to spend their own money and they'll never be this wasteful.
But put the money in a politician's hands and they'll happily be this wasteful, just to spite Musk, and you'll cheer like a seal.
Ridiculous.

 

[Joes Place]

42,000,000,000/8,500,000

8,500,000 x $50 MORE per month for Starlink service x 12 months a year = $5.1B/yr
($50/month vs $100/month for Starlink)

In 10 years, Starlink will cost those residences (NOT INCLUDING new ones, which would be "free" to hook up to the existing fiber), MORE than the $42B grant here ($51B). And ANOTHER $5.1B for the $300 & $2500 "hookup fees" - which is a low-ball estimate. The $2500 per site business cost that is fully HALF what you are bitching about for per-fiber-hookup here.

$42B gets you infrastructure with basically unlimited bandwidth for unlimited growth.
$60B gets you slower service for 10 yrs that is not likewise "expandable", and probably more like $70B+ if you add up the costs for business hookups.

Additionally, the fiber allows for COMPETITION among ISPs to deliver internet along the fiber.
Starlink locks you in to ONE carrier in perpetuity.

#LearnHowToRunTheMathIdiot

 

[Joes Place]

Let's get taxpayers the best deal

We are.

Learn how to add numbers, dipshit.

 

[Joes Place]

Let's get taxpayers the best deal, dipshit.

If there is something cheaper, let me know.

There is.

If you learn how to ADD.

 

[RileyHawk]

42,000,000,000/8,500,000 = 4,941.176

That’s the ‘goal’. To spend almost $5000 per connection, according to your own source.

Would you rather spend $5000 for 1 internet connection, or $5000 to connect 14 sites that won't require line maintenance and be subject to flood washouts and other natural disasters?

In 2022, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced some grant winners for its ReConnect broadband program. And the announcement revealed that the Alaska Telephone Company, which won a $33 million grant, was planning to run fiber to 211 homes and five businesses at a staggering cost of nearly $204,000 per passing.

That doesn't even guarantee that all 211 homes and 5 businesses on the route will even connect, so the true cost per connection is almost certain to be higher.

Only a bureaucrat could approve that.

It's infrastructure. There are costs with infrastructure that no private entity would take on which is why the government does so. It's called progress. It's how we got the internet in the first place. And highways. And space travel. And thousands of other advances for our society.

I would definitely spend $5000 for the reliable infrastructure that meets the needs of current businesses and homeowners rather than a sub-standard technology that can be disrupted by clouds or a rain storm. If this technology was sufficient those in rural areas would be clamoring for it now. They aren't.

Your myopia, coupled with your intentional ignorance is a bad combination.

 

[RileyHawk]

Or you could buy a Starlink base station and be connected by the end of the week.

That's a real toughie to figure out, isn't it?

I could connect via dial-up but opted to pay for technology that met my needs and was reliable.

 

[RileyHawk]

Let's get taxpayers the best deal, dipshit.

If there is something cheaper, let me know.

But borrowing $5000 per connection instead of $350 is stupid, and something no one would do with their own money. Only the government can be that wasteful.
The worst part is the $5000 is just the initial borrowing. We'll never pay that off, we'll just pay interest on that $5000 forever, so the real cost will measure closer to infinity than $5000.

Nothing has to be outlawed, just let people decide how to spend their own money and they'll never be this wasteful.
But put the money in a politician's hands and they'll happily be this wasteful, just to spite Musk, and you'll cheer like a seal.
Ridiculous.

This is nonsense. You're comparing a dirt road to a highway system. This is why so few take you seriously.

 

[Joes Place]

Or you could buy a Starlink base station and be connected by the end of the week.

That's a real toughie to figure out, isn't it?

And all spend MORE THAN $42B in excessive internet fees to Starlink over 10 yrs.

Fiber
8,500,000 x $50/month x 12 month x 10 yrs = $51B ($50/month being fiber connection lowest cost)
ADD on the $42 "fiber investment" and total cost is $93B

Starlink
8,500,000 x $100/month x 12 month x 10 yrs + 8,500,000 x $300 equipment = $104.5B ($100/month Starlink shittier connection cost)

The NEXT 10 yrs on fiber is essentially "free" because the infrastructure is already in place. Cost to consumers remains $50B
The NEXT 10 yrs on Starlink costs ANOTHER $100B.

 

[Obviously Oblivious]

And here's a comparison between fiber broadband vs. Starlink. In essence, Starlink is just like any other satellite internet provider that has been around for many, many years. It doesn't get implemented because it is so technologically inferior. The BEAD program is designed to bring quality internet access to rural areas to facilitate their needs. It's like providing paved highways vs. gravel roads in the past. You can try to say the both provide a roadway but the difference is significant. Particularly to the people who need it.

Starlink vs. Traditional Fiber Broadband for Home and Business Users

Both Starlink (a satellite-based internet service by SpaceX) and traditional fiber broadband have their advantages and disadvantages depending on location, speed, reliability, and cost. Here’s how they compare:

​

---

​

1. Speed & Performance

Feature	Starlink (Satellite)	Fiber (Wired)
Download Speed	50-250 Mbps (Residential)	300 Mbps - 10 Gbps+
Upload Speed	10-30 Mbps	100 Mbps - 10 Gbps+
Latency	25-50 ms (Better than older satellites but still higher than fiber)	1-5 ms (Lowest possible)
Consistency	Can experience slowdowns during congestion	Extremely stable

• Winner: Fiber → Higher speeds, lower latency, and better consistency, especially for gaming, video conferencing, and large file uploads.

​

---

​

2. Reliability

Feature	Starlink	Fiber
Weather Sensitivity	Can be affected by heavy rain, snow, or obstructions	Unaffected by weather
Outages	Possible congestion during peak hours	Highly reliable with minimal outages

• Winner: Fiber → More reliable, especially in bad weather.

​

---

​

3. Cost & Installation

Feature	Starlink	Fiber
Monthly Cost	$90-$120 (Residential) / $250 (Business)	$50-$150 (Varies by ISP and speed)
Equipment Cost	$599 (Residential) / $2,500 (Business) for hardware	Often free or subsidized by ISPs
Installation	DIY setup or professional installation	Requires fiber infrastructure but no dish

• Winner: Fiber → Cheaper overall (if available), but Starlink is the best option in areas with no fiber access.

​

---

​

4. Business Use & Scalability

Feature	Starlink	Fiber
Best for Businesses?	Good for remote work but not ideal for data-heavy operations	Ideal for high-bandwidth applications, VoIP, and cloud services
Supports Multiple Users?	Can slow down with heavy use	Easily scales for large businesses

• Winner: Fiber → Essential for businesses, especially those needing high-speed uploads and reliability.

Wow, I didn't realize Starlink sucks so hard.

 

[Joes Place]

Wow, I didn't realize Starlink sucks so hard.

Can't be.

It's run by this dude that's a Super-Genius. He sez so, himself.

 

[RileyHawk]

Wow, I didn't realize Starlink sucks so hard.

If it was as great as some of the rubes believe we would have businesses and homeowners converting to it. That's not happening.

It provides relatively slow access in remote areas where there isn't any other option. That's about all it has going for it.