Is DOGE improving efficiency and reducing waste in the government? No. And before I discuss why not, let’s understand the definition of efficiency in concept and in practice.
First, efficiency is measured like an equation – it requires a stated and expected outcome – the constant. And the variables are the resources and processes applied to obtain that outcome. Here’s an example; an automobile needs to get you to a destination. That automobile requires resources, including initial cost, fuel, maintenance, repairs – the combined costs of reaching your stated outcome. But, the objective remains static – you still need to get to work. Consider Miles-Per-Gallon. in order to measure MPG efficiency, the “Miles” part needs to stay constant and the variable becomes the gallons needed to obtain the mileage outcome. You can reverse these, but clearly the objective is never to just put a gallon in your tank and then see how far you get. If you want to increase efficiency, you attempt to reduce the resources needed to obtain the objective. That is NOT what is happening at DOGE – they are changing (or removing) the desired outcome, dismantling the equation, and claiming that the resulting reduction of cost is increased efficiency. Whether you support what they are doing or not, the“E” in DOGE is a mischaracterization that the American public is being asked to believe. Don’t fall for it.
Let’s look at another example. A burger chain sets out to increase efficiency. They stop buying meat and claim the money saved is a boost in efficiency. They saved money for sure, but the outcome . . . the objective . . . is also removed. They are out of the burger business. No longer operational – and no longer able to be profitable. Their objective is not met and they close their doors. My point here is you cannot be efficient by removing the objective and/or the business model. This applies to government programs as well. So what IS going on right now with all of these firings and closing of agencies in the name of efficiency? I’ll say it again, it’s a mischaracterization. So what is it?
The Trump administration is slashing objectives and outcomes – not inefficiencies and waste. Seeking out and understanding inefficiency and waste is a process that requires careful observation, analysis, experience, and if found, the precise scalpel of a skilled surgeon. You do this by keeping the objective intact. By hastily and blindly slashing these agencies and programs, they are executing an assault on the infrastructure and ideology of these related outcomes. Humanitarian aid, security, health, and much much more, are the real targets here. If improved efficiency and a reduction in waste was the real goal – we would be seeing a very different process from what’s going on at the moment.
So why are these programs and agencies being slashed? Because there are proposed tax cuts that need to be funded. And those tax cuts are slated to benefit the country’s richest individuals and corporations. Why do you suppose there are so many billionaires trying to get involved in this administration? And why do you think the country’s richest individual is leading the charge at DOGE?
Worse yet, the change of policy for these objectives and outcomes is resulting in the slashing of careers and the financial stability of not only those impacted – but those they serve. It will have a profound affect on the economy by slowing down goods, services, the financial markets, and could also result in further inflation and even a recession. The loss of employment will most definitely increase unemployment and unemployment filings. And . . . it is falling on the backs of the lower and middle class – the most financially vulnerable population in our country. And we are only scratching the surface – expect the larger targets, such as Medicaid and Social Security, to be impacted as well. And what about the loss of intelligent assets and collective experience of those professionals being let go? It will take decades to reconstruct, if possible at all, the knowledge base of what these programs and agencies have accumulated thus far.
So, let’s stop accepting the false talking points being delivered about DOGE. It never has been about efficiency – it’s a shift of policy and agenda. It’s an attempt to stop those outcomes designed to help those in need and create new outcomes (and financial gains) for those who do not need the help of the Federal Government. And let me end by saying this – these programs, agencies, and employees are being paid for by us – through our tax dollars. Let’s send a strong message to the politicians at fault for this abuse of power; although we DO want efficiency, we do NOT want to turn our backs on program objectives and outcomes we care about. And, we will certainly not buy into promise that burning down the village will somehow benefit it. We understand the definition and concept of efficiency – and this is not what we’re seeing in the practices of DOGE.
MP