The ideal outcome is that government fails, then they can point at the failing government and ask, why do we want to pay for something that is failing.
If you want people to get onboard with spending cuts, you should raise taxes high enough to actually pay for all the spending so taxpayers feel the consequences of it.
Reducing revenues and letting people run up the credit card for decades instead, as an intentional strategy, was beyond irresponsible.
They've known for a long time that they can't cut spending. It will be terribly unpopular. So they cut taxes (especially on the rich) which keeps tax pressure on everyone else, but gets them wealthy donors.
Then the opposition has three choices: play chicken with the national debt, cut spending, or raise taxes. Usually raising the national debt is the easiest option.
Yeah, their vision is us living in burbclaves of New South Africa, Mr Lee's Hong Kong and Reverend Wayne's Pearly Gates and the bankrupt US Government with trillion dollar notes not to be used as toilet paper because it is illegal and clogs the plumbing.
When you are Elon, or Trump, or even a moderately succesful business… all the government does (or at least what you perceive) is tell you no. You can't dump that here, you can't build that there, you can't fire that person for that reason, you can't do that without a permit, etc.. They just want to clear all the roadblocks out of the way for their PERSONAL gains.
Get rid of the government and you can do whatever you want. That is what they want. These are people who feel they have "won" the game of capitalism, and were still told, "No." That greatly upset them. How can a winner be told they can't do something?
There's thousands of homeless and underhoused people all over the US for the same exact reasons so you don't have to be rich to feel the effects of government telling you no. Didn't used to be that way at all. My grandfather built his own house ~70 years ago with his brother from trees they cut down on the property and set it on blocks. He lived in for 60+ years and it's still standing. It's a house I could buy and live in right now. But I can't just build a much better house with modern materials and live in it without an egregious amount of site work.
It's so dumb it's gotten to the point that there is intense competition for the most rundown house that's already utility connected so you can tear it down and replace it piece by piece to avoid all the ridiculous new rules. It's only feasible to build either million dollar+ homes or jank-station multi-families where you hear your neighbors toilets flush.
There's thousands of homeless and underhoused people all over the US for the same exact reasons so you don't have to be rich to feel the effects of government telling you no.
There was a new EO recently that required all new hires to be approved by DOGE. So the goal would be to bring back something like the CSC had (which was essentially IQ filters for a job). Then the per employee productivity would increase in the government.
Government employees are unbelievably unimpressive, and it started in 1978 with the abolition of the CSC.
