Saturday, December 27, 2025
Summary
Elon Musk’s efficiency department cut federal jobs but paradoxically increased government spending by 6%, proving efficiency is complex.
Full Story
🧩 Simple Version
Elon Musk, known for his efficiency drives in tech, took over the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to cut federal waste and spending.
He promised huge savings, like trillions of dollars.
Instead, despite cutting over 270,000 federal jobs—a historic reduction—the government's overall spending actually increased by nearly 6% in 2025.
Basically, fewer people, more money spent.
⚖️ The Judgment
This situation, dear citizens, is hereby declared: EXTREMELY POLITICALLY BAD.
It's a grand spectacle of unintended consequences, proving that sometimes, even when you try to shrink the beast, it just gets more expensive.
The gavel slams on the notion that a simple "cut jobs" strategy translates to actual fiscal responsibility.
Why It’s Bad (or Not)
Elon Musk’s tenure at DOGE was presented as a surgical strike against bureaucracy, but it ended up being more like a very expensive fire drill.
Here’s why this situation registers on the political bad-o-meter:
- Failed Promises: Musk initially vowed to slash $2 trillion annually, then $1 trillion, then $150 billion. None of these targets were met. The spending trajectory barely blinked.
- Misguided Efficiency: While 270,000 federal positions were eliminated, this didn't touch the vast majority of federal outlays. It's like trying to drain an ocean by scooping out a few buckets.
- Mandatory Spending Black Hole: The real budget drivers – Social Security and interest on the national debt – are on "policy autopilot" and were left largely unaddressed. These alone increased by over $200 billion.
- Shell Game of Departments: Some agencies like USAID were closed, and others like Education saw cuts. However, spending surged in departments such as Commerce, Justice, Homeland Security, and Defense, effectively negating any savings.
“DOGE had no noticeable effect on the trajectory of spending,” the Cato Institute observed, while noting it did achieve “the largest peacetime workforce reduction on record.” An expensive paradox, indeed.
🌍 Real-World Impact Analysis
For the 270,000 federal employees who lost their jobs, this was a significant and often painful disruption. Their daily lives were impacted, while the promised fiscal benefits for taxpayers never materialized.
While not a direct corruption scandal, the lack of transparency regarding how savings were redirected (or negated) raises questions. It creates an environment where real accountability can easily get lost.
This episode demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of government budgeting. Focusing solely on workforce cuts without addressing the core drivers of spending (mandatory programs and debt interest) is a classic example of political short-sightedness. It creates headlines but doesn't fix the underlying structural issues, leading to future fiscal headaches. The government now has fewer personnel, potentially impacting service delivery, but a bigger bill to pay.
🎯 Final Verdict
In the grand ledger of political accountability, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency stint has been logged as a valiant effort that, unfortunately, missed the entire point.
It proved that government spending is a hydra, not a single-headed beast you can simply "slash."
The verdict stands: a smaller workforce and a significantly larger national expenditure is not the efficiency citizens were promised, leaving the federal "health score" decidedly in the red.