• 0 Posts
  • 61 Comments
Joined 8 months ago
Cake day: November 17th, 2024
  • coherent_domain@infosec.pubtoNot The Onion@lemmy.world•Elon Musk and DOGE promised $2 trillion in savings. In reality, government spending is upEnglish
    23·
    2 months ago

    Took me a several click to get to the source: https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2025/4/3/real-time-federal-budget-tracker It has detailed budget breakdowns so it is decently convenient to explore.

    I have done a very brief scrolling, here are some interesting findings. All the following data are year-to-date, comparing 2024 to 2025, adjusted for inflation:

    Ups:

    • despite mass firing, spending on federal employee salary has slightly gone up (by 4 billion, from 79 to 83 billion), which I assume is either current admin paying themselves, severance, or sign-on bonus to hiring back their fired employee.
    • DoD and DVA spending has collectively gone up more than 20 billions.
    • Unclassified spending up aroubd 20 billion, from 70 billion to 89 billion, a near 30% incease, curious what those are.
    • Federal Highway, Railroad, and Transite are collectively up couple billion.
    • DOJ, DOE, DOC has surprisingly gone up in spending. DOJ in particular gone up 1 billion, from 7 billion to 8 billion.

    Downs:

    • NIH and CDC are either slightly down or remain the same. It is worth noting that NIH and CDC collectively account for around 20 billions total spending, the same amount as the increase in DoD and DVA spending.
    • Department of Education down 10 billion from 90 billion to 80 billion.
    • USAID gone down 2 billion, even though it only accounted for total of 6 billion of spending in 2024.
    • Homeland Security spending, surprisingly, down half a billion from 5.5 to 5.
    • USPS down 1 billion, from 14 billion to 13 billion.
  • coherent_domain@infosec.pubtoNot The Onion@lemmy.world•Trump plans to sign an executive order requiring commercial truck drivers to speak English.English
    3·
    2 months ago

    The article states: “Republican Representative Harriet Hageman of Wyoming … [states] a consistent rise in fatal truck crashes since its implementation.”

    Whereas your statement is “[Requiring truck driver to speak English improves safety] is a fact”.

    I am not saying what you said is necessarily wrong or the policy is necessarily harmful; but I feel we probably need more proof than “a republican representative said so”, to assert a certain statement as “a fact”.

    BTW, neither you nor the news article provided the relevant data, which IMHO doesn’t really inspire confidence in your argument. Let alone all the potiential confounding variable others have mentioned.