DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump Campaign Promises Part 5

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...port-elon-musks-companies-tra-rcna216156

Trump says DOGE 'might have to go back and eat' Elon Musk after his criticism of the GOP bill
The president's post comes amid the latest blow-up between the two men after a public feud last month.

July 1, 2025, 7:47 AM EDT / Updated July 1, 2025, 9:03 AM EDT
By Megan Lebowitz
WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump threatened to have the Department of Government Efficiency re-examine government support for Elon Musk's businesses, saying in a Truth Social post shortly after midnight that there was "big money to be saved."

"Elon may get more subsidy than any human being in history, by far, and without subsidies, Elon would probably have to close up shop and head back home to South Africa," Trump said in the post. "No more Rocket launches, Satellites, or Electric Car Production, and our Country would save a FORTUNE."

"Perhaps we should have DOGE take a good, hard, look at this?" the president added.

Neither Musk nor a spokesperson for the super PAC he created, America PAC, immediately responded to a request for comment. In the hours after Trump's post, Musk reposted several graphics on X depicting a climbing national debt, which currently sits at more than $36 trillion, according to government data.

Trump's post marks the latest blow-up in the feud between the president and the tech mogul, who spearheaded government cost-cutting efforts at DOGE before leaving his special government employee post in May. The public split is a steep downfall from their previously close-knit relationship, which saw Musk spend at least an estimated $250 million to help elect Trump.

Trump said while departing the White House on Tuesday morning that Musk "can lose a lot more than" electric vehicle incentives.

"We might have to put DOGE on Elon," Trump said. He added that "DOGE is the monster that might have to go back and eat Elon, wouldn’t that be terrible?"

In the days before Trump’s post, Musk repeatedly slammed the so-called "big, beautiful bill," ultimately suggesting a new political party be launched if the legislation passes.

"If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day," Musk wrote in a post on X. "Our country needs an alternative to the Democrat-Republican uniparty so that the people actually have a VOICE."

In another post, Musk said that lawmakers who vote for the bill "will lose their primary next year if it is the last thing I do on this Earth." In a yet another post, Musk shared a graphic depicting Pinocchio sitting in flames, with the word “LIAR” emblazoned across the picture alongside a message about voting to raise U.S. debt.

“Anyone who campaigned on the PROMISE of REDUCING SPENDING , but continues to vote on the BIGGEST DEBT ceiling increase in HISTORY will see their face on this poster in the primary next year,” Musk said in the post.

I tend to agree with you. There is certainly income inequality even in the top of the top 5% at the high end. So in essence while making 600k or 700k still keeps you out of the top 1% it may fit into what I would consider needing to pay more taxes not that they're in the yacht club variety. That's the problem with trying to categorize it as "the top 5%". That is a huge range of income. I think it has often been said that raising tax rates should begin at the 499k dollar income level. I'm not sure it shouldn't be a higher income than that but IMO that's close.

Here's the thing that I'm having trouble with...

Does Musk think that what he was doing with DOGE was helping with the budget? It's kinda wild that he took such an active role in hilariously failing to meet a budget goal, and now thinks he has the credibility to go hard in the paint against the guy he was working for.

I think what he's saying makes sense, I just think it's weird that he's the one saying it.

And yet at the same time watching two billionaires in a childish cat fight is amusing to say the least. It's popcorn time!

And they also found 2 trillion.... I mean 1 trillion.... I mean 150 billion in fraud. No wait, they had to hire a bunch of those people back. It's odd how on one hand even when someone they support gets found guilty they still claim he wasn't even guilty while in this case people will claim people are guilty who haven't ever been given a trial yet. "Things that make you go hmmmm... for $500 Alex?"

I think he has a warped sense of reality, but on some, narcissistic level, he does believe what he did helped...

I think it breaks down like this. No matter how successful or unsuccessful the DOGE cuts were, he was given the job on the premise that one of this administrations main goals was to reduce spending. This bill runs totally counterproductive to what he was told the objective was. It amazes me how a man that wasn't smart enough to realize what a con man trump is ever became so wealthy. One would think that game would recognize game.

I think you can extrapolate out that last thought to something that confounds me overall. I can understand why someone can be AGAINST Harris and the Democrats, but I will never understand how so many people - often intelligent people - can be FOR Trump given what he has historically campaigned on and what he actually does...

I don't disagree with what you say. But any time you have broad bands you get people at the top of one band separated marginally from the folks at the bottom of the band above.

Interestingly based on AI search. To be in the top 1% of income earners in the U.S., you need to make at least $794,129 annually, which equates to about $66,178 per month or $15,272 per week, according to NewsNation and Nasdaq. This figure is based on 2023 wage data from the Social Security Administration. . . . That's not wildly different than the 5% I'm actually surprised the difference isn't greater.

I would think if you made over 2mil you’d be in the top 5% and if you made over 5 mil you’d be in top 1%. But what do I know. These numbers are on personal income and don’t include investment income or business income and their tax breaks.

The only fair tax system is a flat rate, say around 10% for individual and business taxes. And no tax breaks or tax deductions for anyone, especially churches and religious groups of any type.

All one has to do is look at results. He's winning everything.



I often wonder how intelligent people can be against his policies. I get people not liking him. I can't say I like him or would act like him, but I like the results, and in the end that is all I care about.

Very well said!!!

University of Pennsylvania agrees to ban trans women from women's sports in agreement with federal government
https://www.cbsnews.com/philadelphia/news/university-penn-lia-thomas-transgender-athletes/

How is he winning everything? Border, I'll give you.

This bill is awful. Any way you cut it, it's awful. No fiscal conservative can look at this bill and say "Looks great!"

DOGE is/was awful.

Ukraine - still bad. Russia surging now and is advancing on territory. It's been six months, let alone 24 hours and it's getting worse.

Iran - are we really in a better spot than we were with the JCPOA? Growing reports are less confident that their program is significantly impacted, and the chances of them going "dark" a la DPRK are now more increased.

Relations with allies, including our norther neighbors...not great. This admin has issued significant rhetoric toward invading Greenland and annexing Canada.

I could go on, but here's the thing. People will think he's doing great simply for the fact that they want him to do great. In their eyes, he will win, no matter what. Sure, the inverse is true as well, but I cannot for the life of me figure out how people think "he is winning everything." That's a hell of a case to make...

He is winning, yes. Whether the same can be said for his constituents much less the citizenry of the US overall is a whole 'nother conversation.

I'll say it this way... the first part of your post that I quoted above reminds me of my lawn. It looks good from a distance and as you're passing by without being able to look very hard. When you're walking in it and start actually paying attention you'll see the weeds, the clover, the holes my stupid dog keeps digging up, etc.
Trump has a pretty consistent history of making a big show of things that can get a crowd going... but executing on his vision usually results in a lot of head-scratching and raised eyebrows.

Examples
1. "Reducing govt waste, fraud, abuse" devolving into a fire/rehire HR exercise and a "no, you're a poopyhead" Twitter battle with Musk and culminating in a BBB that's going to add however many trillions to the deficit
2. "Deport illegals" while simultaneously shutting down legal avenues to be here legally (artificially creating more illegals out of people that were following every letter of the law)

They don't care how terrible the things are that he does as long as he's "winning".

You better get your lawn fixed up. You're bringing down our neighborhood...

Rubio hails end of USAID as study says its elimination could contribute to 14 million deaths in next 5 years

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio hailed the end of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) Tuesday as a new analysis found that its demolition could contribute to 14 million deaths in the next five years.

“This era of government-sanctioned inefficiency has officially come to an end. Under the Trump Administration, we will finally have a foreign funding mission in America that prioritizes our national interests,” Rubio said in a post on Substack Tuesday.

“As of July 1st, USAID will officially cease to implement foreign assistance. Foreign assistance programs that align with administration policies—and which advance American interests — will be administered by the State Department, where they will be delivered with more accountability, strategy, and efficiency,” he said.

The rapid destruction of USAID, led by the Elon-Musk backed Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), has seen thousands of foreign assistance programs slashed, including many focused on lifesaving work.

A study published Monday in The Lancet estimates that the USAID funding cuts could result in more than 14 million additional deaths by 2030. Nearly a third of those deaths – more than 4.5 million – are estimated to be among children younger than 5.

Authors of the study said that the effects of the funding cuts “would be similar in scale to a global pandemic or a major armed conflict.”

“Unlike those events, however, this crisis would stem from a conscious and avoidable policy choice—one whose burden would fall disproportionately on children and younger populations, and whose consequences could reverberate for decades,” they wrote.

USAID funding was most likely to reduce mortality related to HIV/AIDS, followed by malaria, according to the Lancet study. Strong associations were also found with tropical diseases, diarrhoeal disease, nutritional deficiencies, lower respiratory infections, maternal mortality and tuberculosis.

A senior State Department official downplayed the Lancet’s findings, saying Tuesday, “a lot of these sort of studies are based on incorrect assumptions about what Secretary Rubio intends to and has done before.”

“I think he’s been very clear that a lot of the life-saving work that we do will continue and will be made more efficient,” the official said.

However, aid groups have said that USAID’s swift dismantlement, coupled with a sudden and sweeping freeze on foreign assistance in January, has already had devastating consequences.

The official was largely dismissive of criticism of the administration’s moves.

“You can go back and relitigate all these little decisions. That’s not our focus. That’s not the secretary’s focus. We are excited about what sort of the America first foreign assistance agenda is going to look like and how much impact we can have moving forward,” they said.

Rubio described the new approach as “prioritizing trade over aid, opportunity over dependency, and investment over assistance.”

“Moving forward, our assistance will be targeted and time limited. We will favor those nations that have demonstrated both the ability and willingness to help themselves and will target our resources to areas where they can have a multiplier effect and catalyze durable private sector, including American companies, and global investment,” he wrote.

The official said the administration is looking at new metrics to gauge the success of US assistance work.

“We want to see sort of more bilateral engagement. We want to see more investment from our partners, co-investment. We want to see trade deals, compacts, agreements, to work together on stuff,” they said. “Those are a big indicator of success for us.”

“What we want to do with this is build bridges bilaterally consistent with the president’s sort of mission and diplomatic agenda more broadly,” they said.

The closing of USAID has cost thousands of jobs and had ripple effects throughout the broader humanitarian aid world. The senior State Department official said they did not anticipate an operational “gap” with USAID’s closure, noting “some number of personnel over from USAID and other places” had been hired at the State Department. Sources who spoke to CNN described the hiring process as opaque and not-merit based.

The senior official repeatedly raised the example of PEPFAR, the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, and said their work would continue in a “more efficient” and “more impactful” way. Bipartisan lawmakers have long supported the initiative, which was launched by President George W. Bush.

In 2023, 60% of PEPFAR’s bilateral HIV assistance was obligated and implemented by USAID, according to the Lancet study.

“Most of the PEPFAR program is up and running today. Between 85 and 90% of the direct treatment beneficiaries are receiving their medications,” they said. “We intend to sort of put out a really long-term comprehensive roadmap in the coming weeks and months about what we intend to do with PEPFAR.”

https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/01/politics/us-aid-elimination-study-14-million-deaths

#winning

Winning what? What Policies? What Results? Explain!

Shock job report shows worst employment drop in years in massive blow to Trump economy

By ALICE WRIGHT FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

Published: 09:01 EDT, 2 July 2025 | Updated: 11:24 EDT, 2 July 2025

e-mail
137
shares
1k

View comments
Private sector hiring shrunk dramatically last month in a worrying sign for the the US economy.

Private payrolls shed 33,000 jobs in June, but analysts had expected them to add 100,000, the latest ADP figures revealed.

The worrying data - the first decrease since 2023 - suggests the US economy could be a lot less resilient than investors have been hoping.


The S&P 500 and Nasdaq indexes turned negative in pre-market trading following the release of the report on Wednesday morning.

'Though layoffs continue to be rare, a hesitancy to hire and a reluctance to replace departing workers led to job losses last month,' Nela Richardson, ADP's chief economist said in a statement.

It comes after a recent stable jobs report and better-than-expected inflation figures sent encouraging signs that the US economy was bearing up amid President Trump's whipsawing tariff policies.

The government's major nonfarm payrolls report for June will be published on Thursday.

Economists have predicted a 110,000 increase in jobs for June and a slight ticking up of unemployment from 4.2 percent to 4.3 percent.

Private payrolls shed 33,000 jobs in June despite analysts expectations of positive hiring
+
2
View gallery
Private payrolls shed 33,000 jobs in June despite analysts expectations of positive hiring


However, some analysts may decide to scale back their expectations following the release of ADP's figures.

The latest report will likely confirm the Federal Reserve's position on holding interest rates steady.

Fed chair Jerome Powell has advocated a wait-and-see approach, concerned that the full effect of Trump's economic policies have yet to be felt by the wider economy.

Companies have looked to tighten their payrolls in the face of high tariff bills and economic uncertainty caused by chaotic policy.

It comes after the economy contracted in the first quarter of the year and economists are increasingly concerned about the risk of a recession.

Microsoft announced on Wednesday that it would be slashing 9,000 jobs - around 4 percent of its global workforce.

'We continue to implement organizational changes necessary to best position the company and teams for success in a dynamic marketplace,' Microsoft said in a statement.

The news comes days after Amazon's CEO announced brutal workforce cuts as continues to implement AI in its operations.


Private sector hiring shrunk dramatically last month in a worrying sign for the the US economy

Amazon boss Andy Jassy said he plans to reduce the company's corporate workforce over the next few years as the tech will make certain roles redundant.

Jassy told employees in a note seen by the Wall Street Journal that AI was a once-in-a-lifetime technological advancement and it has already transformed how Amazon operates.

I'm no expert on this, but if the mini-tariff-war taught us anything, it's that the market is dumb. It exhibits all the hallmarks of a large crowd of people (impatient, panicky, etc), and companies big and small base their decisions on the current state of the market.

Hey, it's green isn't it!?

05, I’m not sure I can be numbered amongst the “often intelligent “ ones but I will tell you why I think Trump is where he is with the support he has. It goes back decades. For years a large swath of Americans have been angered by the government’s inattention or indifference to our border security. Pol after pol has given lip service to securing our border. Then they get in office and do little to nothing about. The average American citizen was who they catered to during the election but once in office it was the big money donor class who had their attention. They wanted cheap labor in their meat packing plants and in the construction industry. They wanted to pay their housekeeper and landscaper as little as possible. So virtually nothing solid was done. Instead the will of honest average Americans was ignored.


Often times the politicians, mostly Dems but with the help of establishment Repubs, would try to circumvent our immigration system by sneaking some sort of amnesty for these folks who broke into our country. It was earl 2000’s I think when the 11 million number of illegals was used. That is a lot of people in our country who have no right to be here. I forget the year, maybe 2010 or 2012, when the “gang of eight “ was assembled, both parties represented. Their goal was to”comprehensive immigration reform reform, including some form of amnesty. I remember Rush a some other conservative radio guys letting folks know hat as going on and that resulted in an avalanche of calls to congressmen and senators. Our congressman in Ohio was interviewed and said he had never gotten a response like that on any other issue, that his phones were swamped. 05, I think a lot of legislators heard the will of the people that. The plans died a well deserved death.

So now Trump comes down the escalator and declares his candidacy for President. Almost the first words out of his mouth were about the kind of people who were breaking into our country, that he was gonna build a wall and put a stop to it. Nobody had ever said anything like that about illegal immigration and it struck a chord. Don’t quote me on these numbers but very quickly Trumped was polling 25-35% during that primary with 16 candidates. Meanwhile establishment candidates like Jeb Bush et al were ringing up numbers in single digits. And it was mostly immigration. I almost had the feeling his campaign started with one issue and while he pressed that issue his advisers were building other issue positions for him to campaign on. Maybe a slight exaggeration there but somewhat true.

05,because Trump is the only politician to take his strong stance on illegals in our country those millions of Americans who believe we have the right to control border, and citizenship in America should be granted by the will of the people and not by an ability to sneak by border patrol and enter illegally he had an immediate constituency. He still has it.

Been pretty gabby 05, so I’ll let it go with that. Trumps position on deregulating the free enterprise engine, cutting taxes, keeping males out of girls sports and girls locker rooms are all popular with a lot of Americans. Keeping American soldiers out of foreign wars is important to a lot of Americans. There are others as well.

Btw, a number of folks on here swore up and down that dealing with the border crisis would require legislation. Well , the past two months we have dumped zero illegals into our country. 12 months ago Biden was dumping 70k a month I believe. No legislation just a President who gave a damn.

I hope all is well at work. Retirement is going nicely down here in the Cape. Be well!!

Why is the focus solely on illegal immigration?
Is that really more important than pressing national issues like fiscal responsibility and our ballooning national debt? What about law and order—or due process—both of which Trump has consistently undermined?

Is immigration a more urgent concern than our standing on the world stage? Our relationships with allies and neighbors? The war in Ukraine? The crisis in Gaza? Soaring healthcare costs? Widening poverty? The growing wealth divide?

Let’s not lose sight of facts:
Undocumented immigrants contribute significantly to our economy.
https://www.bu.edu/articles/2024/do-immigrants-and-immigration-help-the-economy/

Even the source Trump cited in 2018 has said that Trump used is findings to attack illegals but his paper and it's conclusion were misrepresented:
https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...ration-economy-unemployment-jobs-214216/

Yes, Trump won support by going hard on immigration. But that doesn’t mean it's the best direction for the country. Both parties have failed to act meaningfully in the past—but now the pendulum is swinging too far in the opposite direction.

As that second article notes, a crackdown could drive inflation by pushing wages higher—good in theory, but chaotic in practice. And that’s just the beginning. The broader long term consequences could take years to unravel. Just like the consequences of DOGE and Trumps actions pandering to Putin while poking allies in the eye.

Meanwhile, I’m deeply concerned about other critical issues:

U.S. foreign aid being defunded—risking millions of lives globally.

Massive food aid programs collapsing under mismanagement - with food rotting away because of poorly implemented change that was all about 'shock and awe' headlines without any actual substance.

The massive wave of firings and panic re-hiring.

A president taking unilateral military action without congressional approval—against nations that posed no imminent threat.

And these tariff wars which are provably negative to the US economy.

We need to reorient the national conversation. Immigration matters—but it shouldn’t eclipse everything else.

I see Trump has made a long post about growth and his big beautiful bill.... lying about the economy that was recovering nicely under Biden and ignoring the June job report. . . . and there's going to be many on this very board that ignore the facts and lap Trump's drivel up.