The Need For Speed

The United States government currently pays 3.282% on its debt. This year, that will translate to $952B in interest payments, or about 16% of the government's total outlays. The Department of Government Efficiency is working at breakneck speed to find places to cut spending. That speed has distressed many people, who voice worries that good programs will be cut and that good people will be fired.

While I believe that, in many-to-most cases, those voiced worries mask less savory motives, e.g. personal dislike of Trump and/or Musk, fear that sacred cows will be gored, or disgruntlement over this administration actually accomplishing something good, I'll not presume that everyone is so basely motivated.

Would more prudence mean fewer errors and less chance that a worthy program doesn't become the baby thrown out with the bathwater? It might, though "worthy" is very much in the eye of the beholder. See, "sacred cows."

Prudence means delay. It means taking longer.

Delay costs.

DOGE is claiming, as I type this, $65B in savings. Some sources note that not all of this is actual savings, because some of the monies are legally obligated, so for talking purposes, let's say the figure is closer to $40B. That's across 5 weeks (again, as I type this).

What if it took 10 weeks to save that $40B? Those extra 5 weeks would cost taxpayers $126M in interest.

Yes, speed makes it more likely that we get less perfect cuts. But, speed means we save a whole lot more money, and even if a bit of extra money gets spent fixing some of those imperfect cuts, we the taxpayers are still ahead of the game.

Speed is also of the essence given the political landscape. Trump and the GOP have two years to a - cut what they can, and b - codify those cuts in Congress so that the next President can't simply pencil-whip all that spending back onto the books. Majority parties almost always lose House seats in mid-terms, and the GOP's thin margin makes it more likely than not that the Democrats will take over the House in 2027 and grind everything to a halt. While it's possible that Trump's moves and the Dems' fecklessness produce a GOP win in the mid-terms, Trump et al would be foolish to drag their feet and count on that.

Executive orders are lightning-quick compared to Congressional action, but even EOs have to be implemented, and there are a whole lot of people who work for Trump (i.e. everyone under the Executive Branch) who are going to fight tooth-and-nail against downsizing. Heck, we see agencies re-titling their DEI staff rather than cutting them as directed.

Go as fast as you can, because everyone around you will slow you down.

Trump recently urged Musk and DOGE to be even more aggressive than they have been. It's clear he recognizes the need for speed.

What's not clear is whether the people scolding the cost cutters recognize that, if not now, when?

If not this way, how? Nirvana fallacies aside, please.

Nothing else has worked in at least three decades of profligacy, not since Newt Gingrich and the GOP's Contract With America dragged William Jefferson Clinton back to the middle, him kicking and screaming all the while. Even then, when spending and the debt were much lower, and even with the dot-com bubble pumping vast sums into the treasury, the budget still didn't get balanced (some claim it was, but the national debt went up every year), and our Big Spenders have added $30T to the national debt since Clinton left office.

---

In 2000, the national debt was 55% of GDP, today it's 120%.

In 2000, the federal budget was 18% of GDP, today it's 35%. Since Hauser's Law tells us that federal revenues will always oscillate around a long-term average of 19.5%, spending needs to drop to that level or below if we are ever to balance a budget and start paying down debt. With debt service currently consuming 5.6% of GDP, the magnitude of the spending problem should scare the bejeezus out of all of you.

If you don't think that drastic measures, beyond even what DOGE is doing, are warranted, you're not paying attention.