By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by Elon Musk, was disbanded eight months earlier than scheduled after failing to meet its objectives. Despite the agency’s mission to cut government spending, DOGE wasted an estimated $21.7 billion in its first six months and oversaw a $220 billion increase in federal spending. The agency’s short tenure was marked by chaos, including the firing and subsequent rehiring of federal employees, frozen government projects, and questionable salaries for some staff members. Following Musk’s departure and policy disagreements with President Trump, many DOGE figures have been quietly reassigned to other federal agencies.
Read the original article here
Musk’s DOGE Quietly Killed Off After Delivering Almost Nothing
So, it seems we’re talking about the whole DOGE situation, and let’s just say, the assessment is less than glowing. The general sentiment is that it promised a lot, but ultimately delivered… well, almost nothing of benefit to the American people. Instead, the consensus leans towards significant harm, damage, and a whole lot of wasted resources. It’s like the project was less about positive change and more about a data grab and a power play by a few select individuals.
The core issue seems to be about data. The claim is that DOGE facilitated the collection and transfer of vast amounts of sensitive information, including Social Security numbers, to parties who would then exploit it for profit and power. This is a big deal, and if true, it represents a massive breach of trust and a significant threat to national security. It’s not just about losing privacy; it’s about opening the door to potential fraud, identity theft, and even national-level exploitation. The fact that the agency disbanded months before its scheduled end only further fuels the sense that something was amiss.
Moreover, the impact on government operations is painted as overwhelmingly negative. The narrative describes a period of chaos, disruption, and a concerted effort to undermine key governmental oversight abilities. The claim is that DOGE intentionally weakened the federal workforce, fostering distrust in the system and ultimately making the country worse off. And for what? For what appears to be a PR stunt designed to justify mass layoffs and deregulation, all while enriching a select few at the expense of everyone else.
The criticism also extends to the people involved. The finger is pointed at certain individuals and organizations that benefited from the project. These beneficiaries are accused of using DOGE to advance their own agendas, including surveillance, political influence, and financial gain. Essentially, DOGE is portrayed as a tool that enriched the few while harming the many. It’s a tale of data theft, deregulation, and deliberate damage to the government.
The effect on the federal workforce is particularly emphasized. Many people dedicated their lives to government jobs, only to find themselves displaced or having their roles significantly altered. This resulted in significant stress and job losses, leaving those involved feeling betrayed by the very system they worked to support. The general tone is one of frustration and resentment towards those who were involved in this situation.
The discussion also raises questions about the long-term consequences of DOGE’s actions. There are concerns that even after the project’s disbandment, its legacy of data breaches and weakened institutions will continue to haunt the country for years to come. The next administration faces the daunting task of cleaning up the mess, including securing systems and rebuilding trust in government agencies. That is going to cost more taxpayer dollars.
The narrative also suggests an element of political intrigue. There is a sense that the project served a broader political agenda, aimed at reshaping the government in a way that benefited specific political allies and ideological interests. The implication is that this was a carefully orchestrated plan, executed with little regard for the well-being of the American people. The whole thing seems to have created a divisive atmosphere.
Ultimately, the consensus is that DOGE was a failure. It failed to deliver on its promises and instead, delivered chaos, suffering, and the theft of sensitive data. It appears to have served the interests of a select few while harming the many. The premature disbanding of the agency only reinforces the feeling that DOGE was a failed and potentially even nefarious endeavor, the consequences of which will continue to be felt for a long time. It delivered a lot, just not what America needed.