 |
|
Asking a different way.
Posted on: March 12, 2025 at 07:44:42 CT
TigerMatt STL
Posts:
94185
Member For:
26.32 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
35
As Grok 3, built by xAI, I’ve dug into the available data to assess the accuracy of the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) cost-cutting numbers. DOGE has claimed significant savings—starting at $55 billion in mid-February 2025, rising to $65 billion by late February, and reportedly reaching $105 billion by early March 2025. However, verifying these figures is challenging due to inconsistencies, lack of transparency, and revisions that don’t align with the totals they tout.
First, let’s look at what DOGE has shared. Their “Wall of Receipts” on doge.gov, launched around February 12, 2025, lists specific contract terminations, lease cancellations, and other cuts. Initially, it detailed savings like $8.5 billion from about 1,100 contracts (averaging $7.7 million each) and later claimed $12.7 billion by February 24. But here’s the rub: even when these itemized savings were at their peak of $16.6 billion, they fell far short of the $55 billion total DOGE advertised at the time. By late February, after media scrutiny pointed out errors, the top five biggest cuts—like an $8 billion Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) contract that was really $8 million—were quietly scrubbed, dropping the listed savings to $9.6 billion. Yet, DOGE bumped its total claimed savings to $65 billion without explaining the gap.
Experts and analyses cast further doubt. NPR’s investigation in mid-February found that, of the verifiable cuts, only about $2 billion in actual savings could be confirmed—mostly from dismantling parts of agencies like the Department of Education and USAID. They noted over half the listed contracts weren’t canceled yet, and a third wouldn’t save anything because funds were already spent or maxed out. Reuters pegged savings at $8.5 billion for contract cuts by February 19, a tiny fraction of the federal government’s $6.7 trillion annual spending. Forbes and The New York Times highlighted errors like triple-counting a $655 million USAID cut (really $18 million) and claiming a $1.9 billion Treasury cut that happened under Biden, before DOGE existed.
DOGE’s response? They’ve admitted to “some errors or omissions” and said only 20% of savings were reflected online initially, implying the rest comes from unlisted actions like “fraud detection,” workforce reductions, or asset sales. They corrected the $8 billion ICE flub, blaming a 2022 clerical error in the FPDS database, but didn’t adjust the $55 billion total after such revisions. Posts on X echo this skepticism, with some calling the numbers “made up” or pointing to the unchanged totals despite slashed line items.
So, are the numbers accurate? Based on what’s public, they don’t add up. The verifiable savings—around $2 billion to $8.5 billion—rely on aggressive contract terminations, but even those are inflated by double-counting, misreported figures, and cuts that don’t yield real savings (since terminated contracts often still pay for completed work). The jump to $105 billion by March 6, per some X posts, lacks any detailed breakdown. Without comprehensive, audited data—unlikely from a group prioritizing speed over precision—it’s reasonable to conclude DOGE’s claims are exaggerated, possibly by orders of magnitude. The real savings might be a small fraction of what’s advertised, masked by a lack of rigorous accounting and a flair for big, unproven headlines.
https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_9ef3a562-856f-4d4b-a07a-94dfe981217a
First, let’s look at what DOGE has shared. Their “Wall of Receipts” on doge.gov, launched around February 12, 2025, lists specific contract terminations, lease cancellations, and other cuts. Initially, it detailed savings like $8.5 billion from about 1,100 contracts (averaging $7.7 million each) and later claimed $12.7 billion by February 24. But here’s the rub: even when these itemized savings were at their peak of $16.6 billion, they fell far short of the $55 billion total DOGE advertised at the time. By late February, after media scrutiny pointed out errors, the top five biggest cuts—like an $8 billion Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) contract that was really $8 million—were quietly scrubbed, dropping the listed savings to $9.6 billion. Yet, DOGE bumped its total claimed savings to $65 billion without explaining the gap.
Experts and analyses cast further doubt. NPR’s investigation in mid-February found that, of the verifiable cuts, only about $2 billion in actual savings could be confirmed—mostly from dismantling parts of agencies like the Department of Education and USAID. They noted over half the listed contracts weren’t canceled yet, and a third wouldn’t save anything because funds were already spent or maxed out. Reuters pegged savings at $8.5 billion for contract cuts by February 19, a tiny fraction of the federal government’s $6.7 trillion annual spending. Forbes and The New York Times highlighted errors like triple-counting a $655 million USAID cut (really $18 million) and claiming a $1.9 billion Treasury cut that happened under Biden, before DOGE existed.
DOGE’s response? They’ve admitted to “some errors or omissions” and said only 20% of savings were reflected online initially, implying the rest comes from unlisted actions like “fraud detection,” workforce reductions, or asset sales. They corrected the $8 billion ICE flub, blaming a 2022 clerical error in the FPDS database, but didn’t adjust the $55 billion total after such revisions. Posts on X echo this skepticism, with some calling the numbers “made up” or pointing to the unchanged totals despite slashed line items.
So, are the numbers accurate? Based on what’s public, they don’t add up. The verifiable savings—around $2 billion to $8.5 billion—rely on aggressive contract terminations, but even those are inflated by double-counting, misreported figures, and cuts that don’t yield real savings (since terminated contracts often still pay for completed work). The jump to $105 billion by March 6, per some X posts, lacks any detailed breakdown. Without comprehensive, audited data—unlikely from a group prioritizing speed over precision—it’s reasonable to conclude DOGE’s claims are exaggerated, possibly by orders of magnitude. The real savings might be a small fraction of what’s advertised, masked by a lack of rigorous accounting and a flair for big, unproven headlines.
https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_9ef3a562-856f-4d4b-a07a-94dfe981217a
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
- 
Asking a different way. - TigerMatt STL - 3/12 07:44:42