this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2025
568 points (98.3% liked)

politics

21724 readers
3858 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Elon Musk’s DOGE faces mounting pressure to show achievements amid criticism. Staffers, under pressure from Trump administration officials, seek public relations wins to counter negative headlines.

Cuts to federal offices led to mass layoffs, and efforts to modernize government services have been chaotic. DOGE prioritizes speed over security and protecting sensitive information.

Trump has distanced himself, stating agency chiefs, not Musk, control department cuts, preferring a "scalpel" over a "hatchet" approach. Public opinion has turned against DOGE, with 48% disapproving versus 34% approving, according to a Washington Post-Ipsos poll.

With limited time before their tenure ends, DOGE officials are desperate to show results.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SabinStargem@lemmings.world 3 points 2 days ago (5 children)

There is no point in capping fiber speeds. Either that capacity is in use or it isn't. It isn't like water, where a resource is depleted from usage.

Aside from that, I agree with your concept of the government providing all the essentials. Capitalism is great for providing products that suit a person's individuality, but it sucks at ensuring the survival and wellbeing of people.

[–] oppy1984@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Ok, now that I've had a bit of sleep (,3rd shifter here) how about the government owns the fiber a sells access to the for profit companies. But there is no monopolies so there is competition and every company is required to offer a basic package that is low cost and has enough bandwidth for the average work from home video meeting. Oh yeah, and no data caps.

After that they can increase prices and offer more services. And if somewhere like farm country isn't being served by any of the for profit companies, then the government corporation could set up an ISP and serve those citizens.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmings.world 2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

That is local loop unbundling. Anyhow, as I said, no point in capping data speed. Society benefits from faster internet - less congestion, transactions like stocks, purchasing goods, and Zoom meetings are all faster or more reliable. It is a type of infrastructure that benefits civilization, in ways far more beneficial than raw money itself. Time is the most valuable thing for every human, since you can't buy more and it is always depleting. The less time people spend on slow internet, the more they can use it for other things.

Money should not, must not, be the purpose of civilization. That is just enslaving humans to it. We invented it to save time, and shouldn't lose sight of that.

[–] oppy1984@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I have been approaching this from a middle of the ground standpoint. Basically I know that a large enough percentage of Americans would reject this as "evil socialism" so putting caps on the government industry at first would be a Trojan horse to get a footing and get society comfortable with the idea.

Ultimately I would like to see companies have to compete with government offered products and services, but I just don't see it being feasible in our current political climate. Sadly I think it will either take generational change to get it done, or a more kinetic change that would harm the country and take far longer to recover from.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmings.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Honestly, I don't think the middle path works. At least, not when it comes to major turning points in society. Elon is chainsawing our social security, just to run up his high score. I think people will be ready for a different way, now that the billionaires have been mask off. In my opinion, people prefer clear leadership over something ambiguous. They want to feel confident in their leaders, which is why Trump, despite being evil, took the lead against a deteriorating Biden and a weathervane Harris. Pit him against someone of greater conviction like Bernie or AOC, and I expect they would take the lead of any conversation.

In any case, we will see within 5 years what way the wind blows. Hopefully towards a better place than where we are headed right now.

[–] oppy1984@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago

I honestly don't think even bold leadership would work at this point. Washington has spent so much time brainwashing the public to fear socialism that any bold leader on the left who suggests a plan like that without first kneecapping it would be killed in the polls because someone on the right would scream socialist and enough of the population would turn on them. And no amount of reminding the public about public roads, police, firefighters, libraries, ect. would change their minds. In my option it will take generational change to get past that mindset.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)