Episode 200
On this 200th episode, we sit down with recurring guest Sam to discuss Trump, DOGE, and Elon Musk. Trump has executed a relentless flurry of initiatives, maneuvers, and executive orders to aggressively tackle government fraud, waste, and abuse. Americans the world over have been shocked to learn of the excessive spending of taxpayer dollars on frivolous and shady endeavors, all labeled as sweetly as possible in order to evade suspicion. Elon Musk has put his considerable intellect to work setting up a team to get this done, but can they do it? Is it enough? What more must be done? Join us as we discuss this topic more!
Listen to the Removing Barriers Podcast here:
Affiliates:
Notes:
Transcription
Note: This is an automated transcription. It is not perfect but for most part adequate.
So, it’s hard for me to call Doge an example of fascism, but if you wanted to make the argument that maybe Trump has a style of leadership with the government that’s more fascistic, I think you could make that argument so. But I just don’t think that doge is a good example of that.
[Jay]
Our Constitution, our founding documents, everything that is so American doesn’t say we the people for nothing.
Thank you for tuning in to the Removing Barriers podcast. I’m Jay and I’m MCG, and we’re attempting to remove barriers so we can all have a clear view of the cross.
[MCG]
This is episode 200 of the Removing Barriers Podcast, and in this episode, we will be celebrating 200 episodes of removing barriers. And also looking at Trump, Musk and Doge and cohosting with us in this episode is Sam.
[Jay]
Hi, this is Jay. MCG and I would like for you to help us remove barriers by going to removingbarriers.net and subscribing to receive all things, removing barriers. If you’d like to take your efforts a bit further and help us keep the mics on, consider donating at removing barriers.net/don. Removing barriers, a clear view of the cross.
[MCG]
All right, before we jump into the topic at hand, Sam, Jay, I’m going to put you on the spot. Let’s start with you, Sam. What is your favorite episode of all 199 episodes that we have done thus far?
[Sam]
Oh wow. I mean, that’s a tough one. OK. So, there’s one episode that jumps out, but unfortunately, I haven’t listened to it yet, but I want to and that’s related to, I think you had an episode on Brahmanism.
[MCG]
Mm-hmm.
[Sam]
And I really want to listen to that one so.
[MCG]
But it can’t be your favorite. You haven’t listened to it.
[Sam]
Yeah, well, so I hate to say that because my real favorite, and it’s probably because of the topic, but it seems a little self-serving see it sounds so bad. I’m choking up trying to say it is is the episode about the history of abortion and the Nazis. And it was a podcast with me and my brother. So it sounds a little.
[MCG]
Ohh yeah.
[Sam]
Self-serving to say that’s my favorite, but that topic is one that’s very important to me. So that’s kind of why that 1 jumps out.
[MCG]
Cool, cool. What about you, Jay?
[Jay]
That is a tough one.
[MCG]
You have been on every episode and listen to every episode, so.
[Jay]
That’s true. It’s hard to pick a single one, but the on the mission field episode with the Ferringer family was one that sticks out to me. They were the ones heading to Chile, right?
[MCG]
Mm-hmm.
[Jay]
But how can I say that was my favorite? Because I also like the one that we did. I shouldn’t say I like it, but the one that. Thought was. Perhaps consequential because it was about something that was happening right at that moment was the one about Derek Chauvin and the conviction and the sentencing that he experienced because the whole thing with George Floyd and Derek Chauvin was what kicked off the summer of love nonsense that were subjected to, or that we had to endure. The country back in what was that 2020? I think it was or. 2019-2020, 2020. 2020 another one that I really like ohh I can only pick one.
[MCG]
I didn’t say that, but we did that forever, though we didn’t say favorites.
[Jay]
Ohh. OK, OK. Then I will have to go with on the mission field with the Ferringer family then.
[MCG]
OK, OK, cool.
[Sam]
If I may, I actually have another one that I kind of like and that is the one on polygamy. I’m trying to remember which episode I think it was 184 somewhere around there.
[MCG]
Go ahead. Yeah, that’s all correct.
[Sam]
OK. Yeah. And I remember that one. Cause. So yeah, listen, I my wife, that is. We’re doing a Bible study here in town and we’re trying to get people from the neighborhood involved and and whatnot. And one of the issues that kind of popped up maybe a week or two before your podcast was polygamy and whether it was acceptable. In Christian society, or by Christian standards, whether it was OK, I guess in the Bible or whatnot under the New Testament and it kind of surprised me because that question kept popping up in our Bible studies, and I don’t even really think it was a topic. In the passages that we were studying that much, but it’s just like folks were thinking about it, you know, and really struggling. So that podcast was really helpful in dealing with that issue with the people that were asking those questions. And I think it helped. Because I feel like they were asking the question because they were actually honestly entertaining the idea a little bit.
[Jay]
Hmm.
[Sam]
And I think you know that podcast covered, I believe it was a missionary, and he lived in society where polygamy was legal, right. And he was giving examples of how that turns out. And it doesn’t turn out so great, you know. So I think that helped them deal with what they were thinking about. So. So I appreciate that. And I want to mention that.
[MCG]
Right.
[Sam]
I don’t think I ever talked to you about that, but that podcast is helpful, yeah.
[MCG]
Yeah. We haven’t spoke about that. Yeah. Missionary Scott is an avid listener, so I think he would enjoy hearing you saying that. So cool.
[Sam]
Awesome. Yeah.
[Jay]
You know another one? I think I want to poke in there as well. We had. I don’t remember what number it was, but it was with Delano Squires and it talked about Christians using pronouns and how to address that matter. To me, that was a really important one, because when you’re at the door and you’re engaging with someone or someone comes to your church and they. Are steeped in the ideology of the day. How do we as Christians, how are we supposed to react with love but also holding on to truth? That’s something I think more and more Christians are gonna have to fess up with, cause you know the gospel is still marching forward. People in the LGBTQ I am off. You’re going to get saved. And so when they come to your church with the. Ideology and the scarring that comes with it. How are we supposed to engage with them? How do we love them and teach them and disciple them and deal with the very specific issues that you know they bring to the table? I think that was very helpful.
[MCG]
Cool. Alright, so Sam, we have 200 episodes and actually three bonus. Episodes. How many episodes do you think you have been a part of out of 200 episodes?
[Sam]
Oh wow, I’m going to.
[MCG]
Putting you on the spot.
[Sam]
Say somewhere between 3:00 and 5:00.
[MCG]
That you have joined us.
[Sam]
Yeah.
[MCG]
No, you’re not even close.
[Sam]
Really.
[MCG]
Yeah, according to my account, you have been with us for 10 episodes.
[Sam]
What? Really.
[MCG]
And this is your 11th episode actually. Ohh wow.
[Sam]
Oh.
[MCG]
That means you have been with us for 5% of the. Episodes we have done.
[Sam]
Oh, wow. OK. Well, thanks for having me.
[Jay]
Now MCG, you didn’t get to say what your favorite episode was.
[MCG]
Well, I can’t say any forever because it’s like choosing your favorite kid.
[Sam]
That’s a cheap answer.
[MCG]
All the same kids, I do have a favorite, but out of my kids I don’t have a favorite.
[Jay]
You still have to.
[Sam]
OK, what’s your favorite topic?
[Jay]
Yeah, you still have to take something.
[Sam]
Was that one?
[MCG]
Ohh my favorite topic, let’s add for me still, but I do. I’m gonna go with this service series because I do like their testimonies and interview the missionary. They do like those.
[Jay]
Yeah, those are great, but that’s still cheating though, because that’s not one.
[MCG]
The bunkers is nice, but I don’t think I like it as much as I like the salvation testimonies and the missionary experiences, but I get you the fervor because I’m the one who contact everybody and everything. So.
[Jay]
You see how it is, Sam? Rules for the not for me. So we had to pick. One on the spot.
[MCG]
But if I choose one right, the endless now. Now here. Ohh this guy. Contact me about that podcast and I’m not his favorite, are they all?
[Jay]
But.
[MCG]
Favorite.
[Jay]
OK, I guess that’s diplomatic.
[Sam]
OK.
Fair enough. A way to get out of that one.
[MCG]
Uh-huh. I know. All right. So in celebration of 200 episodes, we’re doing a giveaway of multiple gifts. All you have to do is be a part of our subscribe member mailing list. If you’re not a subscribe member, simply go to removingbarriers.net and there you’ll find multiple ways to subscribe if you subscribe. Check your e-mail for details on how to win one of the many guests up for grab’s rules and regulation apply, of course. All right. Well, let’s jump into it. Let’s start out by just kind of explaining. What is the Department of Government Efficiency or Doge?
[Jay]
Think that we’re going to have a hard time actually defining the Department of Government efficiency because. The ones that are opposed to it say that it’s one thing while the ones that instituted it and the ones that support it say it’s something else.
[MCG]
Well, what is it officially though?
[Jay]
OK, officially doge is the Department of Government efficiency. It is a. What should we call this? Should we call it a task force? Should we call? It.
[MCG]
My initiative.
[Jay]
An initiative it was established by executive order and the whole point of Doge is to identify, root out and stop wasteful government spending in order to help rectify the deficit, there’s. Almost $2 trillion deficit, if I’m not mistaken, 1.8 or something trillion dollar deficit that America is running right now. It is headed by Elon Musk, although that is strongly. Refuted and so the concern for a lot of people is that this is unconstitutional. It’s more of a fascist sort of thing going on where you have government working hand in hand with a business or.
[MCG]
A billionaire.
[Jay]
Well, OK, so here. This is where it gets confusing. Multi billionaire and one of the most consequential billionaire. She’s not just a billionaire for being a billionaire sake. This is the man who established PayPal and SpaceX and Tesla. He’s a real heavyweight, both in Silicon Valley all around.
[MCG]
A multibillionaire.
[Jay]
World and he’s the one of the very few who took a stand against the woke insanity that we had to endure back in 2020. And everyone that’s on the left or everyone that is ideologically opposed to him, hates him for it even. Doge is doing a good thing. The fact that it’s headed by Elon Musk is a reason why people oppose it. But he says that he is. And not running it. He’s only in an advisory role to the President, and the President is the one making all of the calls on what gets cut and what doesn’t. So there’s a lot of back and forth about what doge is, what doge is doing, whether or not it’s effective. But I suppose a very simplified answer is it’s an initiative or a task force established by executive order by President Trump. In January of 2025, in order to identify and cut federal spending in order to address the almost $2 trillion deficit that America has right now.
[MCG]
Yeah. Why you will say so. What about you, Sam? Anything to add to that?
[Sam]
Yeah, I mean. So I guess the question about the constitutionality of Musk running or being at the top level of Doge, I don’t see an issue there, at least not based off of established law or case law.
[Jay]
They’re saying it violates the appointments clause of the Constitution as their argument.
[Sam]
Well, and I think the counter argument is that Elon Musk is a special government employee who, as far as I understand it, it’s been accepted that they’re allowed to. To be put in place, but it’s only for a time limit. I want to say it’s about 100. And 20 days. Or so. Yeah. And last I knew that hadn’t expired, although it I think it’s getting close.
[MCG]
Yeah, it’s going to expire sometime in May.
[Sam]
OK, as long as the special government employee is actually constitutionally accepted, I know that’s a position that we have recognized politically for why? Well, and I haven’t looked into whether that is constitutionally valid or not, but it’s not like it’s been so controversial in the past. I think it’s more controversial now all of a sudden.
[MCG]
Well, it’s controversial because of Trump, but.
[Jay]
Well. The appointments clause says that if you’re appointing someone like an inferior officer, someone that can be. Hired and fired at will. That’s not an issue. You don’t need the Congress to get involved, but if you’re appointing someone to run a particular outfit, which they’re arguing that Musk is doing, then that appointment needs to go through Congress. That’s what they’re saying. But Musk is saying, hey, I’m not running the thing. I’m just advising the president. And yet when doge actually. Does anything and we can see it both defacto in many other ways. It does seem to get his final mark of approval before it gets cut. So.
[Sam]
Whose final mark Trump or Musk? Gotcha.
[MCG]
But that doesn’t necessarily say he’s running it, though. That means he’s in a advisory role, and they want to go to him before because I guess he is the one who will take. It to the.
[Jay]
President, OK. So then the question is and who’s running doge? And did Congress approve that if Musk isn’t running it, then who?
[MCG]
Ultimately, ultimately would be the president.
[Sam]
Yeah, I think that’s a hard one to prove, right. Because if Musk says let’s cut this and then, you know, like all must, you can’t do that. It has to be the president and then the President says, well, yes, I want this cut. Then like to me it’s almost kind of. Pointless argument, you know.
[Jay]
Right.
[Sam]
It must does something that Trump doesn’t want. Trump can fire him, so I don’t see what the big like. Maybe there’s a technicality where you can try to attack it, but ultimately it looks to me right now that Trump is going to back Musk and Musk is doing what Trump wants. So whether it’s Trump giving the final go ahead or Musk, who really cares, you know? You know, in a way.
[Jay]
Yeah. Well, even if they wanted to do something about it, they really can’t. The Democrats are in complete disarray right now, so they’re pretty much grasping at straws trying to throw whatever they can at the wall to see with stick. And of course, a lot of people make the argument that because USAID and all of these other wasteful spending entities were just honeypots for a whole bunch of people, not just in this country, but also in other countries, that’s probably why they’re fighting back so hard against it, not because they’re against what doge is about, but it simply hurts their pockets. And so of course, they’re going to make a stink. Too bad. They’re not organized and strong enough to do anything about. It.
[Sam]
Yeah. Yeah. I was thinking back about who’s the final one to say yes or no. I mean, ultimately, I think Musk is doing what Trump wants. But if this is a technicality that must be satisfied, maybe Trump should give Elon Musk his auto pin, and then we don’t have. To worry about it.
[MCG]
We’re not going to get there, Sir. What was those established to do and what are some of the accomplishments you will see that you have seen just for, of course, all of us been following the news, but what are some of the accomplishments that maybe stood out to you and some of the things that they’ve done thus far, you say, wow, yeah. I didn’t know that. I’ll start with you, Sir.
[Sam]
Ah. I think 1 of Dojos, biggest accomplishments that kind of surprised me a little bit, although maybe not too much, is related to USAID. And yeah, what’s going on there. And I guess for the sake of the audience with USA ID, what it looks like is we were sending a lot of money.
[Jay]
Yeah, that’s huge.
[Sam]
Billions of money to. Different. Countries a lot of times we would use examples of underdeveloped countries or poor countries that may need things like food and medicine or help with their government or whatever stuff like that. So we’d send a. Lot. Of money, supposedly to help these people. And I remember during the Biden administration seeing that a lot of this money was connected to. LGBTQIA plus type stuff. In fact, a lot of governments in Africa were complaining about it, like we don’t want.
[Jay]
Yeah.
[MCG]
Hmm.
[Sam]
This LGBT garbage right? We don’t want that, but they need food and medicine or other stuff, so it it puts them in a tough spot. Some of the country said no, we’re not taking it. And others said fine, we’ll go along with this agenda that was being pushed by Biden or whoever was really operating behind the scenes there in that. Administration. Well. Elon Musk uncovered, I guess, more details showing how. How far or how crazy some of this stuff was? Some of it was not so necessarily insidious. I guess. Stuff like Sesame Street. We spent, I want to say, what was it, 26? I’m just pulling it off the top of my head here. I want to say it was somewhere in the order of about $26 million or something for some Sesame Street. Program in Iraq.
[Jay]
MHM.
[MCG]
Did we figure out how to get there, by the way?
[Sam]
Did we figure out why?
[MCG]
Did we figure how to get to Sesame Street?
[Sam]
Can you tell me how to get to? Sesame Street. Yeah, yeah. Well, I’m not sure there is a Sesame Street in Iraq, but so maybe we should have spent more money to build the street. I don’t know. But yeah, we’re just spending money on all these programs, some of them, it’s like why? I mean, it’s I could see it being nice, but This Is Us money. Shouldn’t it be for the US taxpayer? And then other things, like I said, the whole LGBTQIA plus. Like we don’t need to promote that. I know coming from a Christian Conservative standpoint like, that’s appalling, right? That we would be forcing this down other people’s throat. I don’t want to force it down our throat. Right. Why are we gonna force it down the rest of the world? And then the other thing and maybe this is more the surprising area that I wasn’t paying close attention to. Is all the kickbacks, so it seems like a lot of doge money would go out through USA, not doge a lot of USA ID money would go out supposedly to help these countries, but for whatever reason it would always seem to go back to some company. Knee or to some account that was somehow tied in to the politicians who approved the money, right. And Elon Musk was starting to look into that. And a lot of the Democrats. And honestly, I think there are some Republicans that should probably be a little nervous about those kind of investigations. But ultimately I want to say a lot of USA ID money has been cut. Last I understood, and they screamed about that, you know, so.
[Jay]
Yeah.
[MCG]
Yeah, I think I’ll jump out to me, would USA, it would be the NGO’s I knew of them, but I didn’t know that it will run as deep as it did and non government organizations. So a lot of money goes to that. And as they say, it is true those companies, non government organization that many of the money come back into who knows, you know politicians or whoever.
[Jay]
Right.
[MCG]
Enrich themselves through it, but.
[Jay]
They rich themselves through these charitable foundations, so-called charitable foundations. And it’s just a front for land. Money. Do you really need a certain million number of dollars in order to provide services and things to other countries that don’t even believe in what you’re what you’re giving them? No, it’s obviously they’re laundering the money. And so to have the US be behind that, I think every American should find that unacceptable. But the problem is we’re not very much. Informed about what? Our government. Is doing. I’ll give a very distinct example for many, many, many, many, many decades the US has been involved with. If not, the US will say companies that have contacts within the US government that will enable them to facilitate operations in other countries that would be questionable or illegal otherwise. And these foundations, these NGOs, these businesses, these, whatever you want to call them, they destabilize other countries to the point where people are fleeing these countries. Haiti is a perfect example of that. Our involvement in many of the Middle Eastern countries is an example of that. And our government is either directly supporting that or by proxy, whether it’s supporting government businesses that are operating in a shady fashion like that. And I would imagine most Americans don’t want their money spent that way. The problem is we don’t know anything about it. And so I think that if doge did nothing. Else, bringing that out to light for the American people to understand and to see so that they can vote according to what they are able to find out. That in itself is worth its weight in gold. If doge does nothing. Else. It’s done a really great thing.
[MCG]
Well, I’m not quite sure that’s new though, because the US have been using the power of the purse for years, decades. To persuade other countries to do their things even before those we know of them pumping money into Pakistan to forcing the government there to accept what is LGBTQIA, or whether it is democracy or whatever the case, maybe this is nothing new for the US the US have.
[Jay]
Yeah.
[MCG]
Always use the power of the purse to persuade poorer countries to say hey, in order for you to get aid or anything from the US, we have to do this and many other countries kind of are on paper. Will acquiesce, but in culture and practice will not. And that’s weird. The fraud, with an abuse coming to play because. The money keep on going, but there never is any change because the culture of those countries is not going to change because the US want them to change, you know, of course we as Christians will say that true change will come when the heart is changed to Jesus Christ, not through the money, but also I want to add that, you know, some other findings. Recently, I think they find the unused or unneeded credit cards and they said they’re now 4.6 million active credit. Card that’s issued to the US government 4.6 million active credit cards. That is, after Doge has cancelled some 470,000 cards. Just let that kind of blow your mind for a little bit. So there’s 4.6 million active credit cards that is tied. To the US Federal government bank account and.
[Sam]
I can kind of vouch for that too.
[MCG]
And those close 470,000 and 4.6 million remain. I’m like, wow, again, I think I can say this. I have been a federal contractor for most of my career as a software engineer.
[Sam]
Yeah.
[MCG]
And I remember I was creating a new application and we needed to integrate with our third party API and this is a paid service. So we had to get someone to put the credit card on this service so we can use it and the government employee gave me a credit card that was tied to the US government. But I must say that one of the reasons why I’m surprised of this is because he was on this like a hawk. Every time a transaction is made, he will contact me and say, hey, I see this happen. Can we change? I think at that point we were doing like. Per minute. So every time we use the service they charge us as they can. We change it to a monthly billing or whatever the case may be and he was pretty much all over it on the credit card. So I’m surprised that they would be this much abuse on it when it’s something that can be monitored so easily. Another thing of course again mentioned that I’m a federal contractor have been for most of my career. I’m wistful contracts. Thought of clothes many as 10,000 contracts which have saved. Over $900 million.
[Jay]
What? Say that again.
[MCG]
So over 10,000 contracts have been closed or or cancelled.
[Jay]
Only 10,000, all of them are all of them together, 900 million.
[MCG]
Over over 900 million, the word over 900 million. Wow. Of course. We mentioned USA that’s ready. And of course, if you go to doge.gov, they make a list of everything that they’ve done and whatever they’ve closed and money they have saved and stuff like that. And most of these I got from torture Gov so. These numbers may have changed from when I pulled these numbers, but basically the credit cards and the contracts, Simon, you also a federal contractor.
[Sam]
I am, yeah.
[MCG]
And I don’t know if you’ve seen it, but I have seen federal contracts where the federal government don’t even know what they. Want.
[Sam]
Yeah.
[MCG]
And for months we are there and we’re trying to help them figure out what they want. And right the reason why they hire us and what they want exactly. Want us to do and I’ll tell this one. I was under contract some time ago on the federal government. Was paying us to do some research. And the federal government already knew what they wanted, but they wanted us to do the research, to tell them to choose the one that they wanted. And when we didn’t choose the one that they wanted, it wasn’t really sitting well for them or for us, because now they they’ll have a finger to point to and say that, hey, the contractor has chosen. Because they’re already chosen. So they yeah. Paid US waste government money. Me. Instead of saying, hey, we want this go and build something for us using this rather they say hey go and research all these things that come back but we really want this one that’s waste and I’m in agreement even though I have some issues with those I’m in agreement with at least cutting that part out at least running it a little bit more like a business. We if the value is not there, get rid of it, but anyways, I guess the question is though, is there any precedent for Doge? What what did you say as some of the precedent for Doge? If you think there’s a precedent for it?
[Sam]
Yeah. So there’s a few, I guess you could say precursors, if you will, the dog. One that jumps out to me right away is not here in America, but it’s in Argentina, Aviar Miley and his campaign to cut wasteful spending, fraud and government corruption, right, Argentina just a little bit ago, they had what was essentially becoming a rather socialistic.
[MCG]
MHM.
[Sam]
Type government and their. Wow, I want to say their economy was really in trouble. I want to say that they were running somewhere around 200% inflation every year or something like that. I need to double check that, but their inflation was out of control. Let’s see, Argentina.
[MCG]
Hmm.
[Sam]
Inflation just trying to double check some numbers here, but their inflation rates were really bad and a lot of it had to do with government spending. And so aviar melay he ran for president. This is just a few years ago. And maybe just like a year, year and a.
[MCG]
Yeah, I think it’s just a year ago.
[Sam]
Half or so. Yeah. And so anyway, he ran for president, saying that he was going to cut wasteful government spending, and wow, I’m looking at this.
[MCG]
If you want to go a waiver.
[Sam]
Afuera yeah, so.
[MCG]
Well, of course my Spanish is.
[Sam]
No good. So anyway, yeah. And it sounds like he’s really the economy is starting to turn around a little bit in Argentina. Last I had heard and so but he did it by cutting a lot of wasteful spending.
[Jay]
Yeah, that’s the one.
[Sam]
And I mean he. Cut thousands, many thousands of government jobs, and there was a lot of screaming, but it looks like it may turn out pretty good in Argentina in the end. And I think that some of Doge was inspired by Melee’s actions, if you. Will.
[MCG]
Mm-hmm.
[Sam]
And I guess you could also even look at like the latest one. Of the latest CPAC. Was in Texas or so when Javier Melee came in. This is just maybe a month or two ago. And he gifted Elon Musk a chainsaw like the one that he had when he was campaigning for president of Argentina. So there’s an example right there I want to say there’s similar things in the United States government before where we had, like Inspector General positions as well as boy. I’m trying to remember the term. Let’s see, we had the I think we had a Government Accountability Office, an office of Inspector General, and they kind of helped. Supposedly police are expenses and whatnot, but really, you know, it’s just another government agency that is interested in seeing a larger government, you know.
[Jay]
Yeah.
Right.
[Sam]
So, but in the case of Elon Musk, he may actually be interested in seeing the debt cut because he’s actually America’s biggest taxpayer. I don’t know. But yeah, I want to say he has the record for the most taxes paid by any individual to the federal government. So.
[MCG]
Right, right. Well, why don’t we act? You know, we know that Trump, Musk, and the writing would say, of course, the president for Doge. But what about the leaders of the left? Well, let’s ask Obama back in 2011 and Joe Biden also back in 2011, let’s see what they have to say about government efficiency. Up there.
[President Obama]
Everyone knows that getting rid of the deficit will require some tough decisions, and that includes cutting back on billions of dollars in programs that a lot of people care about. But what should be easy is getting rid of the pointless waste and stupid spending that doesn’t benefit anybody. Waste. We should be getting rid of, even if we didn’t have a deficit. Sure, some of these cuts aren’t that big, but no amount of waste is acceptable. Not when it’s your money, not at a time when so many Americans are already cutting back. Just as families are living within their means. Government should, too. Did you know the federal government pays for a website devoted to a folk music ensemble made-up of forest Rangers? They’re called the fiddle and foresters. I’ll. Put their music on my iPod, but I’m not paying for their website and there are hundreds of similar sites that we should consolidate or just get. By the way, you’re not only paying for websites, no one needs. You’re paying for thousands of buildings all across the country. No one uses for the last decade. The governments owned a massive and completely empty warehouse in the middle of Brooklyn, for example. Now, the government hadn’t been able to sell this building and others like it because of red tape and Washington politics that held things up for years. But we’re finally cutting through all that and plan to get rid of these buildings in the month. Ahead, we need to step up our game. We need to go after every dime. We need to make government work for you. That’s why starting today, I’ve asked the Vice president to lead a renewed effort to hunt down misspent tax dollars in every agency and department of this government. We’re calling it the campaign to cut waste, and I know Joe’s the right man to lead it. Because nobody messes with Joe.
[President Biden]
There’s a new.
[MCG]
Alright, so that’s Obama talking about.
[Sam]
Wait, that Joe Biden say there’s a noose.
[MCG]
No, there’s the news, I think, but I’m going to pay what Joe Biden’s gonna say, but if you. Notice. Obama. Was advocating for Doge long before we had a doge, right?
[Sam]
Yes.
[MCG]
All right. And this is Joe Biden. When he was coherent, not when he was. Let the Joe Biden of last year, but the Joe Biden of 2011, I shall continue.
[President Biden]
There’s a new standard by which the government is going to function this point on the American people are entitled to transparency. Look. A lot of this depends on new sophisticated methods, but it also it also we know depends on relentless focus on making this a priority focus that can’t be delegated, we’re holding ourselves accountable and we’re deeply committed and focused on making government function better. We’re not just eliminating. Fraud in waste, we hope to be instilling an entire new culture that not only our administration, but every succeeding administration will in fact pursue. We’re going to give you the government you expect and deserve.
[MCG]
All right, Jay, what do you have to say about your former President Obama and Joe Biden?
[Jay]
I’d like to go back and see how much of the government they actually cut, because otherwise it just sounds like lip service to me. It sounds like they’re saying what they ought to have said, what they know, everyone wants to hear, but I don’t think there was any teeth to what they were saying. I don’t think any of it actually happened because government has gotten bigger every single year from its inception. Really. I mean, I guess you could point to a few years in its history where it hasn’t gotten. Trigger, but after the crash of 29, government exploded and it hasn’t stopped. And I don’t think they did anything to actually address it. Now Trump is actually addressing it or his second administration is actually addressing it, and it’s all a problem only because the wrong people are saying something about it.
[MCG]
Right. I think you know the nail on the head there. I think it’s not. What is being done is who’s doing it. Sam, you comment on your former president.
[Sam]
You talking about Obama?
[MCG]
Obama and Joe.
[Sam]
I mean, I’m surprised I’ve heard some of these. I don’t think I heard it from Joe Biden, but I want to say I’ve heard similar things from Nancy. Josie and Chuck Schumer. But I do have to say that I’m a little surprised to hear the clip that you just played with Obama and Joe Biden, like Jay was saying. It sounds very good. You know, I’m a little surprised, but I think like, she was also saying it to me, it sounds like a. And we just look at what actually happened. I don’t know whether it’s intentional or not, but they did not accomplish what they stated there. And I guess I have to wonder, especially looking at all the corruption and looking at Joe Biden’s administration, that is just. Asked. It makes me think that maybe there was not much intent to cut these expenses, especially because Biden has or people in Biden’s orbit, have really benefited from corruption in the government. And it’s well documented when you look at things like what went on in. What’s the country called? They’re warring with Russia right now, Ukraine. You look at what happened in Ukraine with Burisma and several of the business associates Hunter Biden. When you look at Joe Biden’s brother, James, I want to say, like they made out pretty good from that, and even Joe Biden himself because.
[MCG]
Allegedly, we don’t want to be sued.
[Sam]
He had that.
[MCG]
Allegedly.
[Sam]
Allegedly yes. But I mean, there are documents on Hunter Biden’s laptop that has been confirmed by the FBI, where they refer to the big guy in giving cut to the big guy. And I want to say those documents and maybe this is more the alleged part because I don’t remember. For sure, but I’m pretty sure that the laptop did explain who the big guy was in other documents, but the laptop that describes corrupt business dealings, you know, the FBI has confirmed the laptop and the contents on it. That has been discussed on many conservative channels. So for me, it’s funny. That we would say it’s, you know, the some government agencies say, oh, well, maybe it’s Russian disinformation. But our government has confirmed it, and this is before Trump was president, even.
[MCG]
Yeah.
[Sam]
But yeah, but there’s a lot of corruption going on in Ukraine and a lot of. It’s happening through. Government spending. And so it’s hard for me to think that Biden really meant that he wanted a lot of that corruption, by the way, happened during Obama’s term. I totally forgot about that because the whole burisma stuff that was back in, I want to say 2014 is when a lot of that.
[MCG]
Yeah.
[Sam]
Stuff happened, and that’s during Obama’s term.
[MCG]
Yeah. The second term, yeah.
[Sam]
So.
[Jay]
Well, he OK.
[Sam]
So it is just lip service. Biden had no interest in. He had the opposite of interest in cutting those waste programs.
[Jay]
Or are they playing 4D chess in some way? So for example the Democratic platform is one that seems to be pro immigration, whether legal or illegal, and Obama was known as the Deporter in chief. He deported so many more people than Trump did, or whoever or Biden did in any of their. Well, Trump’s first administration in Biden’s administration. So is there a game that they’re playing where they’re saying one thing and doing another?
[MCG]
Yeah.
[Jay]
Like they know what needs to be done, but they have to. Say the publicly pleasing thing is that what’s going on here instead or?
[MCG]
Well, the game is called politics and and this is exactly what I hate about politics, because if you go back far enough, and of course I have to do a lot of research when they come to these episodes to find clips and stuff like that, and you don’t have to look deep to find Nancy Pelosi agreeing with building a wall.
[Jay]
Well, yeah.
[Sam]
Yeah.
[MCG]
You don’t have to look far to find clips where Hillary Clinton agrees with deportation and legal immigration and hates or detests illegal immigration. You have to look far to find clips of these people talking about doing it the right. Hey. You just have to go back a few years. Kamala Harris went to Nicaragua and tell them don’t come. So you don’t have to go too far to find clips of these people saying one thing. But they allow the other and this is the same for Obama and Joe to some extent, I believe they meant what they say back in 2011 here about government. Police fraud and abuse and cutting it out. They just didn’t have the political will to do it because if they had done it quite honestly, the Republicans would have been giving them the same treatment that the Democrats are giving those right now, it’s all politics. Anyways, go ahead Sir.
[Sam]
Yeah, you know, I guess for me the other question is, I don’t know about Obama so much, but I remember Joe Biden, he was under fire for some of his deportations. He was deporting Christians, so he was allowing people coming in from all over South and Central America. Mexico. He was letting them come in illegally was allowing a lot of gang members trend dagua. And then there were gangs. Unfortunately from Haiti and other Caribbean islands of the Caribbean islands. But a lot of these were bad folks, right? That were coming in. And whether they were bad or not, they were still coming in illegally. But then there were Christians coming in seeking asylum from persecution and Joe Biden would send them out immediately, right? Very quickly, he would send Christians seeking asylum. But people that were **** ******* or it seems to me, people that are more likely to vote in a liberal. Session he was allowing in and so maybe it’s not that he’s just doing what needs to be done for the country, but maybe he’s doing what needs to be done to secure Democrat votes in the future.
[MCG]
Yeah, probably. As I say, it’s all politics, but I have another clip here, here is Elon Musk and imagine you dubbed this over what? Obama just said and see if they’re not saying the same thing.
[Elon Musk]
You know, there’s been a tremendous amount of waste and fraud in the government during the Biden administration, which estimated the federal government fraud to the. Half a trillion dollars. What we’re trying to do is get that number down to a much smaller figure, save money for the American taxpayer, stop money being spent on things that are that I think very few taxpayers would agree. Make sense, you know, transgender animal surgeries are why are the 20 million. People who are definitely dead mocked as alive in the Social Security database.
[MCG]
Wasn’t that the same thing Obama was saying back in 2011? This was Enon Musk this year.
[Jay]
The wrong person saying it, that’s all it boils down.
[MCG]
To yeah, I would agree and think that. Yep.
[Sam]
You know, to me it’s the wrong person saying it, and again you have one person who says it or a few people, Obama and Biden, they’re saying it. So they’re the right people because they’re Democrats. So. OK, yeah, we cheer on our team. But in addition, I think it’s OK because they know that. It’s going to help them politically to say it, and they’re not actually going to do any. Thing of consequence about it, you know, whereas when Elon Musk talks about it, they know when Elon Musk or when Trump talks about it, they know that there’s a good chance that Elon Musk or Trump actually intends on doing something about it. And I think that’s where the real issue were. If Trump were to talk about it. And never do anything. Or if you were to talk to them in the backrooms. Hey. Don’t worry, I’m going to talk about it a lot, but nothing’s ever really going to happen. I think they would calm down. But the problem is they know he’s gonna do something. Partly he’s gonna give it a good try anyway.
[MCG]
So is the action there against not. They’re talking about it because we guess argument can be made that Obama was all talking to action. But I’ll give Obama this too, because I do remember the news cycle when he was talking about that, especially the unused buildings for the federal government. And I think he did do something about that. But anyways, I have Greg Gutfeld. Here is another precedent that we haven’t discussed yet.
[Gutfeld]
Do the monologue. This week, doge perfectly exposed government bureaucracy in a nutshell while working on the IRS website doge.
[MCG]
And I think you might be able to identify with this, Sam, this is about software. Engineering.
[Sam]
OK.
[MCG]
I have a lot to say about it, but I’m going to let Gutfeld finish.
[Gutfeld]
Notice the sites login button. Was it in the top right like most web sites? It’s a small thing, but doge noted it was weirdly placed in the middle of the page so doge wanted to move it to the right spot. But an IRS engineer said the soon as they could do that was July 21st over 100 days from now. So what did those do? They stepped in and fixed it. In 70 minutes, here’s how it. Now see there it is. They moved it from the middle to the. Top. It’s a small thing. Yeah, but the government would have needed 100. Days to go. To go from there to there. So imagine how long it takes for them to do stuff that actually requires more. Efforts. This is how the government works. Hey, Steve, can we change the website a little? No problem, Joe. I’ll have to submit a work order for that, which requires approval from the boss. And then we’ll circle back at the monthly meeting for the next round of approvals. Then we’ll hire a contractor to hire. Subcontractor they’ll hire teenager to make the change. Total cost and chunk you taxpayer 60 billion but. Hyperventilated. But when it’s no longer on the taxpayers dime, it gets done in minutes. See, This is why you need Elon and doge a government website shouldn’t be harder than translating Jasmine Crockett into English.
[Sam]
Wow.
[Gutfeld]
And this week, doge uncovered millions of taxpayer dollars of unemployment insurance claims for people who haven’t been born yet over the age of 115, and even even between the ages of one and five. Live.
[MCG]
Alright, so that’s gut felt. I have a lot to say on it, Sam, but. I’m gonna let you go first.
[Sam]
That’s a new one. I’ve not heard of it taking 100 and something days to move the login button. You know, because we’re web developers, I’m trying to think is there a technical reason for that? Why would and of course, I mean at first glance, you’d say absolutely not. I can’t think of a technical reason. So then he’s talking about the whole contracting process. It’s like, well, maybe that could slow things down quite a bit, but that’s pretty ridiculous. I mean, just when it comes to writing the code. Should be and I guess doge proved it because they changed it pretty quick, didn’t they? So.
[MCG]
Well, your software engineer you should know, but you know the sad part of all this? What godfall said. He’s not wrong. I wish he was wrong, but I have experienced things that are so similar to that is crazy. I can give you an example of an example of an example to my career as a government contractor where we had a simple thing to change. And we cannot touch the code because it needs to go to some sort of channel. I remember my very first job, my very first job, we were generating letters these. For using something called proc code, I’m not gonna try to get too technical, but proceeds basically C programming with all headers so you can easily interact with the orca database using the C code.
[Sam]
M.
[Sam]
Interesting.
[MCG]
So basically you create your application in writing C code. Then you you know you got your make file and regenerate one of the case of maybe and it spit out a bunch of letters that the company. I’m not going to divulge much of what it is what the company can now send these letters out to the appropriate parties the format and the letter. What’s wrong? And I caught it in Uiti, which is basically user acceptance testing. I said, hey, can I change it really quickly before we push this to production? No, they had had a meeting, Sam. They had to talk about money because the deadline was coming up and there was no money in whatever for us to go back and change a format in change. I went and change it. It took me 5 minutes or less to make the change in development on my personal.
[Sam]
Ohh wow.
[MCG]
Peter, only thing I had to do was to push the code so it goes to quality assurance, then to UAT. It will take probably an hour. Depends on how we want to run it. They have to have meetings after meetings, after meetings, drag me into this meeting to that meeting and finally do one day say, hey, how long you? Think you can do it? I’m like it’s done. Have to do is push the code. Why all this?
[Sam]
Yeah.
[MCG]
I have other stuff that I can tell you. I can tell you of times when we want to put a banner on the website, but he has to go all the way up to the lawyers and in order to get to the lawyers, he has to go through the program manager and the program manager to go to his boss and then they go to that boss. Then the lawyers come back and say, OK, don’t use this verbiage, use this verbiage or whatever. Maybe. And you take you months just to change your tax on a web page so it’s government government bureaucracy. That part about it is true. To move a button from the middle of the page to the right corner of the page, we’ll take a qualified self engineer 2 minutes to do.
[Sam]
Yeah, I can see that. Cause.
[MCG]
Yet it takes months because designers have to look at it. Developers have to look at it. the IT PM has to look at it. This person has to look at it and everybody has to get some approval suddenly. Well, go.
[Sam]
Ahead. No, I mean you’re right. Because we have and I don’t know how things work out in your situation. In my case, a lot of the contracts are a lot more lenient so. If I need to make a change to the sites that I work on for the most part, I can make a change and it’s not that big of a deal. So in my case, like our contract is ongoing, right, and we renew it every five years. And so I can make changes whenever as long as I get like a local government, he’s like, almost like an immediate supervisor over me on the government side as long as he signs off on it, I can push it to production. And it’s not that big of a deal. But when we are transitioning from let’s say 1 project to another and let’s say 1 project is about to shut down and then I need to make changes but it’s not covered in the contract for whatever reason yeah then it’s a huge problem because like you said, we have to get lawyers involved and they’re expensive and take time sometimes. And then we have to write up a whole new document for the requirements to make this one change, and then of course we have things like the Americans with Disabilities Act. So we have to make.
[MCG]
Mm-hmm.
Yep.
[Sam]
Sure, that whatever changes we do.
[MCG]
50. 8.
[Sam]
Yeah, exactly. So for those who don’t know, that involves things like making sure that your website is good for color blind people and also that works with text readers or like website like blind assistance tools. There’s a lot of different things. And of course you have QA and I don’t know how it’s set up on your side. But you know, we have some automated QA, but then we also.
[MCG]
Yep.
[Sam]
Have a QA team that has to run through stuff, so every little change that we push to production has to go through all these checks and technically.
[MCG]
Yep.
[Jay]
Is that’s because when something goes wrong, they have to be able to go back to the exact person or the exact process where things went wrong because they say it’s so hard to fire people in the government or whatever it is. Is that why all the bureaucracy? Is that why all the headache to make a simple change on the website? Well, what’s the logic there?
[MCG]
No, it’s, I mean I.
[Sam]
I think it makes sense for big changes, right? Because you hate to push up a website and then find that it has some major issue that you didn’t foresee and causes all sorts of trouble.
[MCG]
Oh.
[Sam]
So like we have a list of rules to avoid these major failures. Or like I said, you know, you have the Americans with Disabilities, so we have to make sure that the website also works for blind people and stuff like that as much as we can accommodate them.
[MCG]
MHM.
[Sam]
We have to get waivers if we can’t accommodate it and stuff like that.
[MCG]
Yep.
[Sam]
So I think for avoiding major problems and then also of course compliance with blind law and all that disability law, that’s why we have to go through all these checks and a lot of times for us, if it’s a simple tweak, we’ll just. You know, and maybe I shouldn’t say this, but sometimes if it’s a simple tweak, we’ll just, you know, you can kind of as a developer, you kind of know when I make this change, maybe we might to rerun this test suite, but it’s not going to really hurt anything else. So why bother going through the whole test suite if you will. So that’s not the official way to do it. But I think it’s sometimes it’s a smart way to do it. And I guess like if you’re working as a private company, people can, you know, make those judgment calls more easily. But if you’re working with a government organization, the rules are the rules and you just do it, you know, sometimes and there’s not. There’s not as much room for judgment calls, I don’t think. Anyway, it doesn’t seem like it to me. So.
[MCG]
Yeah.
[Sam]
Not officially. If you do make judgment calls, you’re kind of, you know, getting into some Gray areas, so.
[MCG]
Yeah, I’ll say this. I don’t know about your applications you’re working on, but most of the time this problem shows up more when it’s a public facing application than what is an internal application. So I’ll give the government that because of course they want to avoid lawsuits. We talk about 508 and the disability are the reason why the government is so adamant about making sure the website. Is. Accessible for folks with disabilities because those folks can eventually sue the government if they go to letssayirs.gov. Yep, and they can’t use the website they can to the government. And of course, some private organizations have also been sued. I’ve heard of. I think it was Domino’s who got sued because their website was not. You know, accessible enough for a blind person to go on, then order pizza. I don’t know what happened to that lawsuit, but those are things they try to avoid. Which makes sense and of. You don’t want to put any verbiage on the website because if you don’t freeze it well enough, people can find loopholes and eventually sue the government to get money from the government. So the lawyers get involved because they want to make sure that you’re getting allergies and crossing all they are that you know that in all your eyes and crossing. All. It is. Hmm. So it kind of makes sense. There’s a method to the madness. But the problem is it shouldn’t take months or even weeks for a lawyer to say, hey, this is what it is. But the problem is me as a contractor. Don’t have direct access. To the lawyer or the lawyers who are making these decisions. So I have to escalate it up to my PM and my PM escalated up to their government, PM and the government. PM escalated up to who’s of his bosses and then his boss escalates it up until they finally get to the people that are the lawyers in the government that can say hey. Ohh this is what you want to do. Phrase it this way and just take a whole amount of time. That is ridiculous. He’s talking about moving the button. I’m talking about changing text which yeah, a baby can do. So how do we make that more efficient? Maybe the government can plan a little bit better and get lawyers to give us their verbiage long before we start working on the website. I don’t know, but what Gutfeld said here, I’ve been living it for years with government and also the other thing is is money. When you’re contracted to do it. X your company do not want you to do Y even though Y makes sense because they want to go back to the government and say, hey, Mr. Government, we need to do. Why so therefore we need to charge another 100,000, two $100,000 because there’s no way in the contract that said we need to do. Why again with foreign abuse. Why is it that if a letter came out and in that formatted properly and it takes a little bit less than 5 minutes to do that they have to go back to the government than say we want more money to form at the letter properly? It doesn’t make sense in a private company. That will be done in a heartbeat. Yeah, so anyways, I guess I’ll step down now, but that got fell for you. All right, moving on. So I spoke earlier, some of the pain points I have with doge and it is that real people are affected, people that have nothing to do with waste, foreign abuse, what say you, what is the cause for these people?
[Sam]
Ohh wow. You know, I think this is a little bit of a tough subject to talk about. So I can only speak about what I see myself, right and where I work, boy. Good thing I don’t need my job because this could jeopardize a little bit. I love my job. I love working it. But I do see a lot of. I see a lot of obvious waste. And obviously doge may it should help resolve that. And then I see a lot of less obvious ways. So there’s some folks in the building where, OK, I used to work in a building since COVID we’ve kind of been working out of our house, but just to go along with my work environment, I’ll just refer to it as the building. So there are some folks in the building that they come in and. And they sit in their cubicle. They have a bunch of phone conversations. Many times it’s not even with anybody, government or contracting or anything like that. It’s personal phone calls. They’re there for, I don’t know, somewhere between 8:00 and 6:00 hours. And then they check out. Right. And I’m trying to think how much I want to go into what I’ve seen. I don’t really know if I want to go. Much further because it’s it might start to point out some stuff, but that could come back and bite me. But anyway, I see a lot of situations where work is not getting done and. In some occasions, well, on many occasions, these are government workers and they can’t or it’s very difficult to fire them, right. And so they’re like, whatever. And you know, it doesn’t really matter. I still have my job. I’ve seen one person. They did end up getting removed from the project. I wasn’t working this project, but I was observing it. They ended up getting removed from the project. And getting put on some lesser or just kind of like some other job. Really didn’t have anything to do with the project.
[MCG]
But they don’t care because they get the.
[Sam]
Same IP. Exactly. Yeah. Got the same pay and they pretty much at that point. Then officially had very little responsibilities. So they were just punching the clock. Really. And that’s all that’s happening. So in that case, like doge, at the very least, I’m hoping will encourage those people to start working. Right. I don’t want to see people lose their jobs per say, but maybe they could actually, you know, earn their. But you know, there’s a lot of folks on the contracting side too. I know in my area we’re starting to come under a little bit of pressure because there’s scrutiny on how much is being spent on contracts and stuff like that. And so a lot of us, I hate to say it, you know, we’ve been a little lazy and I feel like we need to. Step. Up our game. Not all of us.
[MCG]
Hmm.
[Sam]
But there’s quite a few even on the contracting side. And I’ve seen that more since COVID like since we’ve been sent home working from home. Some of us try as best we can to do a really good job and others, it seems to me maybe they’re. And maybe I could be missing something, but it seems to me that there are a bunch of contractors that are just kind of not working so hard, you know. And you can even look at it like, you know we do agile programming and you can look at the numbers on the Sprint and whatnot and some of it is the government’s fault because I don’t feel like they communicate so well while we’re out of the office. But some of it, I think is the developers as well. And Doge is putting us under pressure. I think we’re having to perform a little bit more. Make a more compelling argument for why the contract should stay with us, you know, or why we shouldn’t be let go. So like in my case, I worked right with the contracting. Firm and there have been a few people where they were going to get let go, but they were given an opportunity and this is because of the doge cuts. They were given an opportunity to step up their performance and as far as I’m aware they have and it looks like they’re going to stay on on the contract. So you know, I think that’s a good thing. Nobody likes to go through that but. We can’t spend like drunken sailors. Every dollar has to count for something. So I mean, I hate to talk like that, but I think it’s the reality. And I know for me, it’s caused me to. I’ve always tried to do my best, but it’s a little extra motivation. You want to be in the best position when contract negotiations are going to happen. So. Yeah, everybody seems to be stepping it up a little bit is at least where I am. So because of those.
[MCG]
Yeah. I would say though, I don’t know if you were saying this, but I hate using Sprint and you know JIRA numbers and all that stuff to judge performance. I don’t think it gives a good accurate impression of someone performance, especially if you have a senior engineer helping a junior or. New engineer. OK, that doesn’t show up on the Sprint board. Then the time when you give your points to a ticket a lot of times it’s arbitrary. It never really truly reflects the number of working it for many times, let’s say A5 pointer for me might be an 8 pointer for a junior or freshman engineer. So I just don’t like that pointing system. And if those are. Cause in that I hope they have engineers that know that that stuff shouldn’t be a mark for performance, but sadly it’s used many times for performance. By not just the government, but by companies outside the government to judge how well you’re doing. I always hate that I give you one example and no kind of golf point here, but I remember 1 Sprint I did like. I think it was 30 something. Points. Mm-hmm. And the only reason I did when I’m on the points was because when we were pointing the tickets, I told them, hey.
[Sam]
Hmm.
[MCG]
These are not 3 pointers. These are by best one pointers. But they didn’t listen to me. I was overruled and I end up and got a bunch of three pointer tickets. And I knocked them out and I went back and got the rest, all of them, because all of them were similar and guess what? It was. It was simply a text change and update the name of a variable. Wow. Why does that need to be a three pointer? So I did a bunch of those that I end up and get 30 something points in the Sprint. And what does that does for the next Sprint? Well, it.
[Sam]
Ohh.
[MCG]
Shows off our metric because I’m not gonna be able to do 30 something points every Sprint. You know, I’m saying so. I don’t like those numbers, but what I do notice about the government, though, as a federal contractor, I’ve seen that they have a lot of redundancy in the times. When I was a writer, when I’m with a private company. So I’m not a federal employee. But what I’ve seen in private companies is that they don’t have as many redundancies. For instance, I work with a company and there’s this guy.
[Sam]
Yeah.
Hmm.
[MCG]
We know the system in and out, and if he jump over dead one day, nobody know what he. Yes. Which is not the best way to do it, but a lot of private companies. That’s what they have. There’s this one. Yeah. Guru that he better not leave the company. He better not get hit by a bus because the companies going to be in the limbo for a couple of months until someone else can learn what this guy knows by the federal government. You have a bunch of self engineers and everybody got another system. Then you have this other person in the government. You know, this is them. So if someone leave, well, it goes back to what you’re saying. If I have 5 people that can do the same thing that. I do. I may not have any work to do, so I come to work and I sit on my phone and talk to my friends all day with thought and abuse. So it might be where do we find the perfect redundancy? Is it 2 employees? Is it 3? Maybe it’s not 5, but when I compare to what I see in the federal government to what I see in private sector, one of the big thing I will say is that the private sector. Then not to have as many redundancy because everybody the private sector have in the seat, they’re paying a salary too. That cutting into the overhead and cutting into their profit. But when you don’t have to worry about overhead and profit because the money is not yours. The government said Oh well, let’s hire someone else. This person is not working to the standard they expect are pulling the old weight. Well, let’s hire someone else. So I guess the question was, what are the cause for some of these people that have been fired, that have nothing to do with the with foreign abuse? I would say, sadly, I don’t think there’s much they can do or anybody can do because they might just be redundant in the case where they come. Government and I wanted the big thing I have, though I do feel even though on a high level for most part I do agree with those, I think they’re using a blunt machete and they’re coming in and they’re hacking away or they’re using the train so that he got from the President of Argentina and just hacking away rather than using this couple and kind of surgically removed this stuff, I think they’re going a little bit too fast for my liking. And it’s not just doge is doge. It is the deportations. It is tariffs. Everything coming at you so fast you almost getting whiplash. I gotta wish, like maybe slow down a little bit, but at the end of the day, they probably can’t slow down because they probably have until midterms to get all the. It’s done so things doesn’t change so I can understand one way, but that doesn’t mean I really.
[Jay]
Like it, I think the American people really need to wake up and realize everything that you gentlemen have said because. We can’t keep going on this track. We can’t keep having these redundant people doing not important work and unable to be fired and an ever bloating ever growing government. It’s not sustainable. We can’t continue at a nearly $2 trillion deficit as a country. We can’t keep doing that. And I think maybe that points back. To the fact that America has in large part walked away from biblical principles because there is a theology of work God has created every single person. And it’s interesting. I think most people don’t realize that God had Adam and Eve working in the garden before the fall. Like work is not a result of the fall hard work like work that brings about thorns and thistles, even though we try our best as a result of the fall. But work was instituted before the fall, so work is good and we should not as people that are made in the image of God. Whether you’re saved or not, you should. We shouldn’t be OK with just being in a cubicle making a few personal phone calls like Sam was saying, and then going home and getting a full day’s worth of wages for that. We should never be OK with that. We should want to do whatever it is God put us on this earth to do, and to do it with vigor and with joy. And all of those things that come along with obeying God. And yet it seems like. So. Many in our government and our businesses and our schools in our fill in the blank are OK with just showing up for a paycheck or just showing up, even if it’s wasteful, even though it’s fraud, even though it’s abuse, even though it’s poisoning the country that we live in, it’s crippling and debilitating. The country that we live in. We should not be OK with that as image bearers as Americans because it’s not good for the country. Perhaps what we can do as Christians, perhaps what the church needs to kind of wake up and do, is to in some way disciple and teach the nation about the theology of work and why it’s important and why we need to do our best and all of those different things. Now how we go about doing that, that’s certainly up for discussion, but.
[MCG]
Yeah, definitely. And I think that those have definitely caused some harm, at least in my opinion. I’m thinking about the obvious would be, of course, people being let go contractors who have lost their jobs. Remember, every employee. Well, almost every employee, you’re talking about the family that’s behind of that employ. So that they are supported so you know, whatever the case may be, someone lost their job, is not just them being affected, the entire family being affected. You can talk about also another harm for those would be the political divide. It seems to be deepening a political divide in the country. And of course, you can talk about the hinderance to the gospel. With this doge thing, I don’t know about. You, Simon, where you at? But we were cursed out on a Saturday morning when we were evangelizing from a lady. That assumed because we are Christians, that we agree with Trump and we agree with Doge and she basically, you know, basically said that we are not Christians because look at what Trump and Doge are doing. And I can understand real families again are being affected. So what is real or? Perceive there’s definitely some stuff there. And of course there were some people in US aid that weren’t participating in fraud. They really wanted to get medicine to some places that needed they really wanted to help people, and now it’s gone. So I will give them at least that $0.02.
[Sam]
You know, but I would argue that it’s not really the government’s business to send aid to any country. Honestly, that’s more of a charitable thing. The governments job as our founders set it up. Its job was really to establish order here in the United States and to keep foreign enemies, you know, at Bay.
[Jay]
Yeah.
[Sam]
And then if you just look at and we, I want to say we even had. The debate, well, I wish I could remember. What politician this involved? This is probably going back about 200 years or so, maybe not quite 200 years, but we would have debates as to whether the government should be involved in charity and over and over again. The answer would be no. The federal government should not be involved in charity, and in fact, we considered it many years ago. Staff. If the federal government was involved in charity, if there was somebody that was starving, or somebody that needed help, then we as American citizens would get together and help that person right through charitable means. Not through the government. So to me with the whole, I mean it does stink that you might have people in another country that were used to counting on the federal government for aid. But really the federal government, from my vantage point, and I think history, American history, would agree the federal government should not be involved in. That, and we really need to get our charities really need to be more involved, but it’s also tricky, right, because if we’re paying so much in taxes, how are we going to have money to give to charity, you know?
[Jay]
Well, if you cut down the size of government, we won’t have to pay so much tax. Perhaps we that argument can be made too.
[Sam]
Yeah. I think so.
[Jay]
If you feed someone crack and you get them hooked on it in order to help that person turn around, you have to completely take the. Take away some people. Make the argument for weaning them off of it. But yeah, it’s going to be unpleasant. Yeah, it’s going to be awful withdrawals and everything, but it really needs to be done. And I think that this is a situation where as a people, we are so accustomed to the government being so large and so like the tendrils are in every single facet of personal and political and spiritual life. That we can’t even imagine. Well, some of us can’t imagine our country with such a pervasive government, when in reality, as Sam said, government was never supposed. That was never government’s role. That was never their fear of authority. They were there. Like, what does the Bible say to judge the wicked? And for defense, we’re we’re the good and punish the evil for defense, of course. But all of these things that we’re so accustomed to the government doing and being are not role. And I think to cut back, it’s going to be very painful. And that’s not just a financial statement. That’s a huge cultural adjustment as well. All of these things flow from that fountain as well. And so, but it needs to be done.
[MCG]
Award of good.
[Jay]
And I don’t think that Trump’s second administration is the only thing, or the only effort, that we should make as a people in order to address this problem. This has been a train wreck coming for a very, very, very long time. I don’t want to be pessimistic and say that we can’t do anything about it. I don’t want to quite go that far. But some really drastic changes need to be made. In fact, I have a chart pulled open here in order to address like to meaningfully address the deficit, we have to really talk about cutting some things that people are not gonna be happy with. We’re talking Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, all of these different things. They absolutely have to be cut. They’re the largest pieces of the pie when it comes to spending. Social Security alone is 1.5 trillion. That’s more than anything else that’s more than defense. It’s more than Medicare, Medicaid. It’s more than any of those things.
[MCG]
Well, Social Security should be self funded though, but sadly, because the government raided Social Security, it’s not. But I agree with you guys on the level that the government should not at least wasn’t initially designed to do a lot of these things that the government is doing but a little bit cautious because I don’t want America first to become American only and America has. Always been there to help and I think that’s a good thing to to some degree. Of course, we know the Bible tells us that, hey, you know who should be supporting the widow and the widower. It should be the church and we get that. But America I’ve moved so far away from this. You know, if the Lord has blessed us with so much money, there’s so much good and there’s a village in Africa that we can send $20,000 and feed them for five years, why not send them $20,000 to feed them for five years, hoping that they applied will turn around? I don’t know. Maybe we could send missionaries along with that $20,000 as well. But I’m just, really. Saying hey, of course it’s not America responsibility to feed other nations around the world and protect other nations around the world, but just to use. For example, if my neighbor kid come over to my home hungry, I have no obligation to feed that kid. He’s not mine, but I want to think that I have enough access to so if a kid come over to my house hungry that I can give them some food, whether I have him sit at the table with us and eat or whatever.
[Jay]
The case may be, I think, but isn’t that the reasoning behind doge not behind doge? Behind the programs that Doge is cutting right now, their idea that we need to go to Pakistan and teach these people about our first world ideals and even though.
[MCG]
Yeah, everything.
[Jay]
These people do not want.
[MCG]
Well the problem.
The problem I think with that was they were using it as a way. To say hey, become like America. So adopt the LGBT philosophy, adopt democracy, which I have no problem with. Countries. I think democracy is a better government of the ones that have seen, but you shouldn’t be forcing people to give up their culture and their way of living just because they give them some money. Because as I said earlier, there’s going to acquiesce on paper, but they’re not going to really do it. In their culture.
[Jay]
So then why give the money at all? Then there’s no reason to give.
[MCG]
I’m saying I’m saying if it is for a purpose of people that are in need, the US government have always been doing this. What it is is for military purposes or otherwise they will give money through a hand wash hand. So why is it that we have military base? Is in all these other countries around the world. It’s kind of hand washing kind of thing. So we get benefit, they get benefit.
[Jay]
A hand washed hand thing that is always subject to corruption though, and I mentioned Haiti before when you have the government working in hand with a lot of these so-called foundations, these NGO’s that go, the money’s never accounted for and the heart change that’s necessary for people to establish.
[MCG]
That’s true.
[Jay]
A government that glorifies God and uplifts people and provides for the betterment of everyone. You can’t throw money at that and bring that up. You have to invest people and time, and that’s where missionaries come. And I think Jeffrey Bot can. There’s a lot that I don’t agree with him on, but one of the things that he said that I really agree with is one of the worst things that we did as America is we sent. Our military into these countries, the Middle East or wherever, and we fail to send missionaries behind them in order to witness to people and change their hearts and turn them to Christ so that they can establish their own civilizations of well. I don’t wanna say democracy, but the heart change can be there for them to affect their own change. America, I think, is coming to realize that we can’t just keep throwing money at a problem wherever it may be in the world, whether it’s here in our country or abroad, then it just becomes a black hole and the issue is never resolved. So what we can do right now is cut it. It’s a gangrene now it’s gout. We have to. Well, you don’t cut gout, but it’s gangrene at this point. We have to cut it. We have to cut it. I don’t see any other.
[MCG]
Yeah, but you cannot share the gospel with the. Every man you know, if you go to give the gospel to someone that they’re that’s hungry.
[Sam]
Then the church can feed the hungry man. It’s really our job, you know, it’s.
[MCG]
That’s true, but the church has failed dramatically in some of these respects, and I’m just simply saying.
[Sam]
Not. Job. The government’s not gonna hand out.
[MCG]
Tracks, that’s true, but the government to some degree can help make the path a little bit clearer for the missionary to go again. I’m not necessarily disagree with you guys. I’m just simply saying that there’s some new ones to this that I kind of feel be looking over, because if I go to you mentioned Haiti as an example and I’m sharing the gospel with a hungry. Family, it would behoove me to feed the family first before she. Gospel. I think the gospel better receive if I feed them first, but if I don’t have the, but if I don’t have the resources to feed them and my government can say hey MCG, you’re down there where the case may be, you can form an NGO or non government organization. We will give you money and then you can also share the gospel because they don’t control it. AKA that would be something like. Tomorrow, 10 First Samaritan purse got tons of money from US aid, but Samaritan Purse. I’ve also been doing a lot of good and other lates. If you have listened to what? His name? The leader deal. I don’t know his name. The lead of Samaritan.
[Jay]
Cool.
[Sam]
‘S purse. Franklin Graham.
[MCG]
Franklin Graham. He has been on point with the Gospel of late. So again, I might agree Franklin Graham and everything he teaches, but I’m simply saying that’s one example of working with the government and also sharing the gospel. And if you remove the barrier of hunger, remove the barrier of medicine, remove the barrier of whatever these people are having so you can share the gospel a little bit easier. I don’t necessarily see anything wrong with that.
[Jay]
You know how one time we had Pastor Todd on and he talked about how you could have two paths that look like they’re going the same way. But because one is off ever just so little, you don’t see how the path will differentiate until you get way on down the line and you see that they’re completely different paths. It’s the same thing with this thing that we’re talking about here. If we take the approach that it seems like you’re saying, then the people that come for the food or for the help or for the sustenance will only stay for those things. The gospel is not their priority, and we’re not called to feed them, OK, we’re not called to feed them first or firstly, we’re not called to feed them. We’re called to share the gospel with them and bless them through. Our efforts, whether it’s food or sustenance or whatever, we just interviewed missionaries to Ukraine and they’re doing exactly that. But the priority is the gospel, the priority, our hearts, the priority is the spiritual, the physical will follow, and it’s just a natural result of showing them the love of Christ. And I think that maybe the way that our government presents itself to other countries, perhaps we should follow that same path. And I don’t pretend to be able to explain how that would come about. And I’m not being Christian nationalist about it either. But I think we’ve tried the whole, you know, feed the people and they will like to engage with you. It doesn’t seem to work. That’s the basis of nation building.
[MCG]
I don’t know if I would say it doesn’t seem to work. I would definitely have a problem sharing the gospel with someone who I know is physically hungry and I have the means that I could feed them and don’t.
[Jay]
And it. Ohh no, no, no, no, no. When I say that you shouldn’t. That’s not what we’re saying at least.
[MCG]
That’s what I’m saying. I’m not saying that the gospel is second priority. I need first priority is to feed them. I’m just simply saying that the medicine, the food might be a barrier that we can remove so that they can get the gospel a little bit easier. The gospel is still the first priority is just that our part to get deer might be a bag of grocery. So Advil might be the pot to get deer. But mm-hmm. The Gospels to the party. And I think that’s what. Samaritan persons doing and other good organizational they’re saying and I’m guessing what I’m saying. A lot of these organizations were also receiving funding from US aid to do a lot of these internal. Does not work and I don’t necessarily know anything wrong with that. Go ahead, Sir.
[Sam]
Yeah. For me, I’m opposed to that, honestly. But that being said right, like if we have a Choice USA give money to LGBTQ or give it to Samaritans purse, obviously I prefer Samaritans purse. But personally I feel like the government really should not be in the business of charity.
[Jay]
Sure.
[Sam]
I see government being involved in charity as robbing the American people. The government’s job is to take care of the American people and the American people, especially if they are Christian. Their job is to get the gospel out there, so it would be God talking to me. God talking to you saying, hey, Sam, what are you doing to promote the gospel? And then on top of that, even in the Bible. Makes it clear, or at least to me, it seems pretty clear that we’re supposed to take care of Jerusalem first, then Judea, and then the Samaritans, and then to the uttermost parts of the world. And so even if we just look at it that way, let’s say it were the government’s responsibility. The government is in many ways failing the American people, especially when we look at how much. Debt and the deficit that we’re in every year. Yes, the deficit is $2 trillion. That means every year we’re going $2 trillion more into debt. And that’s not sustainable. I want to say that our biggest item is actually servicing our debt and we spend more on servicing our debt than we spend on funding our military. Remember correctly than we spend on Social Security, that’s a new thing by the way. It wasn’t that way. I think it wasn’t even that way, just like 6 or 12 months ago. But servicing our debt has now crossed over and that’s dangerous because if we don’t correct this quickly. It’s going to become a hole that we can’t dig out of unless we completely, you know, scrap our financial system and start all over, which is another. I would argue that is unbiblical too, because the Bible talks about how if we take out a loan, if we make a promise, right, if we have a debt and we make a promise to pay it, we should keep it.
[MCG]
MHM.
[Jay]
MHM.
[Sam]
And so right now, I think the argument is if we through doge or by some other similar action, if we cut the spending, then maybe we can pay off our debt like we gave our word. But if we don’t get this under control and I think the situation is more desperate than we recognize, we don’t get this.
[MCG]
Mm-hmm.
[Sam]
Under control. Then you know we’re going to have to refinance the whole country, pretty much declare bankruptcy in effect and then guess what, there will be no USA ID at that point. And and there will be tremendous instability here at home. It could be a huge mess and we’ll all potentially be poor. So even if you look at it that way. We have to cut the spending because pretty soon we won’t be able to give anybody anything, you know, so.
[Jay]
And it’s a beast. Yeah, it’s a beast. We have to take a hatchet. Or was it a chainsaw to it? I think we’re beyond the point of a scalpel right now. And doge. Unfortunately, it’s doing great work, but I think it’s a scalpel. I don’t think it’s a chainsaw.
[Sam]
Dangerous.
[MCG]
You seem like a maturity to me, so.
[Sam]
But anyways, somewhere in between, right? A compromise?
[MCG]
In between, yeah. You’re listening to Removing Barriers podcast. We’re sitting down with our recurring host, Sam, and we’re talking about Trump, Musk and Doge. We’ll be right back.
[Jay]
Are you looking for a consistent and reliable place to get all your Christian materials? Try christianbook.com started from humble beginnings in 1978. Christianbook.com now offers a wide range of books, CD’s, DVD’s. Homeschooling and church supplies, plus more. So, whether you are a parent, a homeschooler, a pastor, or a lay person, christianbook.com can be a one stop shop for all your needs. Click the link in the description section below and check out the vast array of Christian materials christianbook.com has to offer.
[MCG]
All right, so we were talking about just before the break, some of the harms or perceived harms of those, do you think some of these harms are overblown? Actually, let me play a clip from a lady that’s talking about some of their perceived harms that folks are probably overblowing.
[Jay]0
The doge report National Park services. This has been highly requested, so I did a little bit of digging because what is being put out is that there is just this massive blanket firing of 1000 people park shutting down millions of hundreds of millions of dollars being cut. And it is happening, but not like they’re making you think it’s happening. So what is actually happening? Well, turns out when Doge did a little bit of digging, they found that 650 million of our taxpayer dollars were going to straight administration fees. That is over 25% of the actual budget is not going to the parks. Improvements. Or the customer experience or the park goers experience. Straight to administration, things like. 3.5 million of our taxpayer dollars. In the National Park, Service was going to creating PowerPoints and meeting agendas and minutes.
[MCG]
Notice that over $3,000,000 going to PowerPoints meeting agendas.
[Jay]0
OK, ChatGPT can do that for free in two seconds. OK, so money saved, so that doesn’t help the park at all. They’re also. Yes, they are cutting staffing, but they’re cutting staffing at parks that aren’t actually visited very frequently. There is one example, Eugene O’Neill National Historic Site is very difficult to actually get to in less than 10 people a day on average, visit the site. And they have a full staff. They have shuttle buses. And the things now pull staff means Park Rangers. Maintenance crew. The shuttle drivers. That’s a lot of money for a park that doesn’t really get visitors. It does not need full time staff. For that. So they’re cutting that type of staffing. Also they found that. 22.3. Billion dollars of backed up maintenance tickets have been found. And on top of that, they just arbitrarily increased those costs by 35% with 0 justification. Of the fees and they just want us to pay it. It was almost $3.7 billion of. Our taxpayer money. And then finally, they’re also shutting down a little bit of land acquisition situation because while the park services can’t keep up with this $2.3 billion maintenance fee. They’re out there buying more land for parks. Now I’m all for parks. I love national parks. I actually used to travel in the camper all around the park, so I absolutely love them. But they do need to be responsible with our money. I don’t. I don’t care. I want part. Yes. But you can’t steal our money. Not do right by the people you’re taking it from and not actually having all this money go to the parks. Does that make sense? So. There is your update on the National Park Service. You can. Decide if it’s a good idea or not.
[MCG]
Alright, so there you have it. She’s talking about some of the harms that people are talking about are not really as justice as, I guess, the media.
[Jay]
Let on. Well, naturally, we’re going to see that in the news, right, like. We mentioned before. The people that are opposed to Trump himself just because of who he is, they’re opposed to Trump. They’re opposed to Elon. They’re going to take everything and put a negative spin on it in order to cast it out and to encourage the American people to fight against the efforts of Doge. I saw an article explaining how. Those will take something that is only, say, $8 million in its savings and somehow frame it as though it were billions of dollars saved. And one thing that Americans don’t have is a way to verify all of these things. Where would we even begin to go to verify if any of these claims, whether they’re on the left or on the right? Are true. I would know where to go. I would have to take what they tell me at face value. So if I’m only listening to the people on the left, I’m gonna think that doge is a complete waste of time. If I’m only listening to people on the right, I’m gonna think doge is the best thing ever. So like what tools do we, the American people, even have in order to Fact Check and see what’s actually being done so that we can do something about it? If there were something to be done about it?
[Sam]
You know that’s a good question. Uh, there are some sites. In fact, I’m on one right now and I do have to make a correction when I suggested that the interest that we’re paying on our debt is greater than what we’re spending on Social Security, that’s what I was told by a radio talk show. Well, I’m on usdebtclock.org.
[MCG]
Mm-hmm.
[Jay]
MMM.
[Sam]
And. Whether these numbers are accurate or not, I don’t know that they look about right, but I’m looking at usdebtclock.org and what they say we’re spending on interest for our debt is about $1 trillion. I presume that’s annually because all these other numbers that they’re looking at are annually as well. So defense spending is. Right now it’s about 894. Billion per year.
[Jay]
Mm-hmm. Ohh, that’s calm down.
[Sam]
What’s that?
[Jay]
No, I was just remarking that went down. Actually, it used to be in the trillions, not. In the billions, you say?
[MCG]
No, it’s with the loan 900 billion.
[Sam]
No. Ohh well. So it’s been in the 8 hundreds for a little bit, but they’re proposing to bump it up to a trillion. Is what I understand this upcoming budget Social Security is 1.5 according to this website 1.5 trillion. So that is way up there and the biggest one. I didn’t realize this Medicare Medicaid according to. Usdebtclock.org is $1.67 trillion per year on Medicare and Medicaid. So that’s huge. And then they also do have.
[MCG]
MHM.
[Sam]
A Doge clock on this as well. And like I said, oh, they say the source is U.S. Treasury when it comes to the doge numbers, so that’s interesting.
[Jay]
OK, OK.
[Sam]
And right now they say that the Doge clock and this is constantly adjusting, but it’s about $344 billion. Looks like it’s about to take over to $345 billion and just to saved by Doge, which they say is also about $3000 per US taxpayer that they’ve saved since Doch has been started. So it’s interesting.
[MCG]
Give me that number again. How much doja save?
[Sam]
$345 billion since the starting of Doge, which was what, two months ago.
[MCG]
Yeah, since January 20th 2025, I guess you could say.
[Sam]
OK. Was Doge started then I think it was a little bit after that.
[MCG]
Well, I’m just going on. When Trump came in, but I think I’ve heard higher numbers for doge than that though, but go ahead.
[Jay]
Higher than 345 billion saved or I don’t even believe that those just saved that much.
[MCG]
Mm-hmm.
[Jay]
Am I wrong?
[MCG]
Well, if you calculate basically over 900 million in contract cancelled, I don’t know if they cancelled that save money, but some of it is contract that was about to be awarded but never got awarded or whatever the case may be because they’ll stop it. So, I don’t know if you can call it saved because I guess the money wasn’t being spent. I don’t know how they calculate it.
[Sam]
Yeah. I think.
I think that’s part of the calculation. Yeah, but 900 million would only be roughly $1 billion, you know? Yeah.
[MCG]
Right. But I’m just saying that along with other stuff, but I guess you could be right. I just, I kind of think that I heard high numbers, but fine. The. Trying to doge though, because I think that, sadly, the political left have shown that if you do not agree with something, it’s going to be turned into burning down buildings, burning the thing right now is, well, less harm. Elon in whatever way. What’s your feeling towards the reaction to dogs? Well, do you agree with it or not? I think we had some little bit of disagreement here, but I don’t think we’re gonna burn down each other, homes. Because we don’t agree on everything USA is doing.
[Jay]
Right.
[Sam]
It doesn’t seem like an acceptable reaction to me.
[MCG]
Does it make sense to boycott? Enon and his companies, Tesla especially, I guess they can’t do much about SpaceX. I guess they can’t shoot the rocket out of the sky.
[Sam]
I mean, I think a boycott is within anybody’s right. So if anybody has an issue with doge or with Elon, that’s their right to boycott. I don’t have a problem with that. I disagree with them. Obviously, I think that. But see, for me, The funny thing is like, I wouldn’t buy a Tesla anyway because I don’t. Want I don’t like the cars with all the computers that record all your information in it and all that and send it to satellites or send it to a cell phone. I’m not interested in that and.
[Jay]
So great, yeah.
[Sam]
Even regular cars, they kind of do that like I have a Chevy suburban and it has a satellite connection and it has a cellular connection and it does phone home. At least I’ve caught it phoning home before. I’ve ripped the communications out of my Chevy suburban. It. It took me a month to figure out how all that worked, but I ripped it out and so. But Tesla’s. I think they’re worse. You know, when it comes to that. So I would never buy one, but if I did, like Tesla. I wouldn’t just start boycotting it because I think Elon’s doing good work in this area.
[MCG]
They probably put one of those stickers on there. I got this Tesla before Elon went crazy.
[Sam]
Yeah, yeah, yeah. For me, I look at it the other way around. I thought of Elon as you know, he’s been more liberal, and now he’s doing some good stuff. Maybe the area where I would worry is, you know, Elon is the richest man in the civilian world. And I. I don’t know how much I like. Like, I think what he’s doing right now is good, but humans are corruptible, and someday, you know, let’s say, well, we have Twitter. Twitter is possibly going to become the Everything app. I don’t really like that because that’s one organization that can control, you know, your payments. It can control. It’s like a quasi. Government in a way, you know, so I don’t really like that. And there are other things that Elon Musk is doing that I don’t really like. I’m not so keen on Neuralink. I think there’s some good stuff you can do with.
[MCG]
Hmm.
[Sam]
Link but overall I don’t really like it. Why do I want a computer in my head that can be hacked, right? Or that can send my thoughts to somebody else, just not keen on that. But when it comes to cutting government spending, I’m behind that. I agree with that. But yeah, everybody has the right to protest. Whatever. I just don’t like the whole thing where you start burning things down or threatening to kill people. That’s. Where we have a problem, you know.
[Jay]
I agree there’s a line there. There’s protesting and then there’s terrorism. If you are throwing Molotov cocktails and burning up Teslas and committing arson and doing all of these different things, that’s not protesting anymore. That’s criminal, that’s terrorism. And the definition of terrorism, which I think would fit. Perhaps this is a slippery slope. I need to be careful about this. But if you are using any type of violence in order to scare, manipulate or otherwise entice people to behave a certain way, or to feel or think or believe a certain. That’s beyond the realm of negotiation. You know, America always says we don’t negotiate with terrorists. If you say I don’t agree with Elon, I don’t like what he’s doing. And so if you don’t agree with me or in order to make you believe or agree with me, I’m going to wreak havoc and burn this Tesla or throw a Molotov cocktail. In this area it’s the same thing that people were doing in 22. Me when they wanted us to believe that white cops were hunting down black men. What did they do? They burned the cities down. They instill fear. They terrorized people into not speaking up or not opposing them. We saw it happen with the trial. With Derek Chauvin’s trial. Where? People. What? What were they doing to the jury? Intimidating the jury and actually making credible threats. Some of them even tried to. They were following the bus. They were throwing things at the jurors. Hmm. In order to bring about a certain result. All of that. You’re in terrorism realm at that. But in my humble opinion, we don’t negotiate with people like that. And I think that we really need to. As the people understand what the line is between protesting and terrorism, and I think that a lot of these. People that are against Trump or against Elon against Doge. If their only method of interacting or affecting change is to terrorize people, they need to be arrested, they need to be put in jail. They need to be held to the highest expression of the law, because as Americans, we don’t do that. That’s not how we’re supposed to operate.
[MCG]
Yeah, I have a clip here where Elon was being interviewed about Doge and Fox News. I’ll play this and then we’ll get your reaction.
[Fox news Clip]
Liberal Tesla, Tesla lover here. My sister has two and her family. So have not thrown any Molotov cocktails recently, but I wanted to talk to you about what doge has been doing. So you’ve been making cuts to a lot of the agencies that have open investigations and regulatory battles with your companies at the same time, you continue to get billions in government contracts. Tesla. That’s billions in subsidies. How do you explain that to the American people?
[Fox news Clip]
Well, everything that Doge does is an open book. So we’re I think the most transparent action, the most transparent organization in government ever, every single dosh action is listed on the dosh.gov website. It’s also listed on the X handle. So if if if anyone has a concern about any one of those actions, they can bring that up, they can raise that. And and I do want to say like sometimes we make a mistake, nobody bets 1000, we will at times make mistake and make a mistake will will act very quickly to. Corrected. I am under such an extreme spotlight. So much screwed me that it’s literally impossible for me to get away with anything nefarious and obviously, nor do I wish to. So this is this is a a case where we we have radical, radical transparency. We’re actually willing to admit that we do make mistakes. Often people are not willing to admit they make mistakes, but we are and we, but we want to emphasize we fix them quickly and we’re trying to do the right thing for the American taxpayer, for the American people. And I think history will be. Judge that what we’ve done here and what we’re doing is a very good thing for the strength and future of America.
[MCG]
Your reaction to what you just heard saying?
[Sam]
I’m inclined to take Elon Musk at his word. In this case, I do know that he does have personal interest, especially when it comes to things woke and the promotion of LGBTQIA type. Stuff he’s not so interested in that because they castrated one of his sons. The woke mob did, and he’s not happy about that. So ever since that happened, he’s vowed personally he was going to do everything he could to stop that. And I think that doge is one of the ways that he’s doing that some people may not be happy about that. But I think in our case. We probably agree with that, you know, but either way, I mean, why should the government be spending money if you want to promote LGBTQIA plus, let it be done. Through, you know, political charity type stuff. It should be private funds, not government funds. That does stuff like that. So yeah, I think he’s interested. I think he is interested in cutting the expense and also of course, like I mentioned earlier, he’s the biggest taxpayer in American history. So that would be another incentive for him to cut unnecessary. Government spending.
[MCG]
Yeah, I do have some concern about Elon, but it’s not necessarily because of those. So I don’t even think it’s worth bringing up.
[Sam]
Yeah.
[MCG]
But and of course. I can see a conflict of interest, especially since he does have government contracts, especially with the SpaceX, and I think with Tesla as well. Of course he’s making electric cars, so the government is interested in that. But yeah, I don’t necessary have much of a problem with him in terms of what he’s doing with Doge or even his government contracts. I guess it’s more what I’m seeing from his personal life. In the news, which quite honestly, you know, that’s his life. I disagree with it. But yeah, the relationship between Trump and Musk, do you think this is a expression of fascism?
[Sam]
Ohh.
[MCG]
What do you think?
[Sam]
If you’re asking me, that’s a tough question. I think so. First of all, my understanding of the definition of fascism is when the government gets different private companies involved in carrying out the government’s agenda. Right? And.
[Jay]
Yeah.
[Sam]
I think honestly if you ask me, I think that the American Government has exercised fascism on many occasions for a long time, certainly since. World War 2, and I think you might even be able to find examples before that, but when it comes to like Defense Production Act, I think that’s the right name that’s legalized fascism here in America, where the government can say, alright, Ford, you’re going to take your factory that you used to make cars and you’re going to make parts for bombers or for. You know, military equipment or whatnot, and Ford has to do it right. According to the Defense Production Act. And you know, the government can take over Essex. Actually, factories all across America and make them do what it wants to do. The argument is for the sake of winning a war, we have to do it. But whether it’s right or wrong, I think that’s an example of fascism. You know, fascism has like stigma to it or like some kind of like an implied idea. But just looking at it. Technically, what is the definition of fascism? I think that’s an example of fascism. We saw fascism again when it came to COVID when the Defense Production Act was actually. Employed, we took Jack Daniels, right, and we told them, hey, instead of making alcohol for drinking, we’re gonna make alcohol for sanitizing. And so Jack Daniels did, and many other companies, I want to say, we had several companies making. What do you call them, those machines that help people breathe? Ventilators.
[Jay]
Letters, yeah.
[Sam]
Yeah. So that was an example of fascism. So in my mind I kind of struggle. I kind of look at Trump and I like a lot about Trump, but to me, him, along with maybe some of the Roosevelt. To me, Trump is one of the more fascist presidents in American history. I’m not saying he’s a Nazi. I think he’s the opposite of a Nazi. But I think when it comes to government style, it’s a more fascistic style.
[MCG]
I’m surprised you said that, Sam.
[Sam]
Yeah, well, you know, I think it’s just telling the truth. And I’m not necessarily in favor of it. However, when it comes to doge, I don’t see that as an example of fascism all by itself, because the whole idea is we’re cutting government spending. And so that’s a lot of companies that were not. If anything, we’re cutting back what we’re spending on these companies. So it’s hard for me to call those an example of fascism. But if you wanted to make the argument that maybe Trump has a style of leadership with the government that’s more fascistic, I think you could make that argument so. But I just don’t think that doge is. A good example of that.
[Jay]
Yeah. Well, so I think it’s only this time around though, because this is Trump 2.0 he was not like this in his first administration. It seems that after the assassination attempt, after they came after him with the nations legal. System I think he saw that this is like this is a beast. We have to cut the head off and he’s going scorched earth. He can’t run for a third term and so.
[MCG]
Well, not According to him.
[Jay]
Not, of course. Well. Well, FDR did. It wasn’t FDR. That was.
[Sam]
That was before the amendment. Yeah, I think it was FDR.
[Jay]
Before the amendment. But yeah, so he knows that this term is the only time that he’s going to be able to do it. And so he’s acting accordingly. I don’t think that under normal circumstances, he would be quite this, for lack of a better word, extreme. And I. Feel like perhaps he feels like there’s no other choice. He’s got to take a hatchet to it. Or like you said, MCG, machete to it while he still can.
[MCG]
Not a dull blonde machete.
[Jay]
Yeah, I don’t think it’s funny.
[Sam]
That sounds like a Billy club, then.
[Jay]
I don’t think it’s quite like that, but there are some elements of fascism I would say it looks something that could look fascistic, but I don’t think that we could call it fascist at all because a fascist government is headed by a dictator. Well.
[MCG]
If he asked the Democrats.
[Jay]
They would say that he is 1, but what dictator have you ever heard of in your life that has limited or reduced his own power or reduced the size of the government? That’s not a thing. So they might call it.
[Sam]
I would argue our first President, our first President under our current Constitution, George Washington. Technically, you might say, well, he wasn’t quite a dictator, but he had the like. People wanted him to be king, right of America. And he said no, he doesn’t want that kind of power.
[Jay]
Sure. Yeah, yeah.
[Sam]
You know. I don’t know, but yeah, you’re right. It is rare that you see somebody that could be an autocrat.
[Jay]
Yeah. And there are other presidents in our history that have done worse. I mean, Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, for crying out loud. I mean, that doesn’t hold a candle to what Trump is doing.
[MCG]
Well, here’s the pushback, though. If I’m a bleeding Democrat, the argument I would made is this. Yes, he’s making cuts, but the cuts he’s making that cuts that would have put checks on him or allowed the government to do things that he doesn’t want the government to do, like you said, or one of the.
[Jay]
Right now, but.
[MCG]
This may be.
[Sam]
But that’s the job of an executive. An executive’s job is to make decisions on where we spend money, you know.
[MCG]
Touché, but that would be the argument from the Democrat and to some degree, they might have a point. Maybe that’s a big one.
[Sam]
Yeah. How’s that fascism though?
[Jay]
Everything is fascism to them, though everything is Nazi. Everything is fascism. Everything is racism. Everything is everything to them. Well, I have lost meaning but these.
[MCG]
Good, I agree. I think they would have been thrown out too much, but to Jane’s point though, can doge. Really. Do what they set out to do. I’m thinking that the only how doge is going to be successful, but the way I’m joining success is permanent is if someone like Ron de Santos, JD Vance, Vivek Ramaswamy gets an opportunity to win the next general election because Trump can say all he wants. I don’t see how it’s going to be constitutively possible for him to be able to be president for a third term. Now, if we go off of what he said. If Jade events run and then decide he’s going to, hey, I don’t want to be president and Trump is is running me and then Trump become president, you’re talking about, OK, can’t be president for more than two terms. Well elected constituents elected and also the Constitution also leave out the priorities of what you have to be to be a President. Of course, you have to be 35. You have to be natural born citizen and stuff like that. So. I guess they can look at all these things and say, OK, maybe I don’t see how it’s constitutionally possible that he can run again. So my point is this, if a Democrat wins, the next general election, Mm-hmm. For most part, always he would accomplish the. Those would go for not because all these things are going to come back really. So because the people will say we want them back because too many people have lost their jobs. Too much uncertainty with all the tariffs, the deportations have cut into labor that I wanted. If you go to Democrats and Jasmine Crockett. Mm-hmm. The Labour I wanted to clean my house, which as an immigrant, I’m offended about that. But anyways. But I’m simply say. In in order for any of these to be successful, meaning permanent, the Republicans have to win with at least the next two general elections.
[Jay]
Yeah, I agree with that, yeah.
[Sam]
Well, yeah, the next two presidential elections, I think will be crucial. I think before that. So it seems to me that Doge has an immediate job, which is to cut the spending that we’re doing now. And it seems to me that they’re being partially successful with that. And then when it comes to cutting, for instance, the credit cards, right, like I actually know people in the government that no longer have their credit card, they’re fussing quite a bit about it, actually. Technically, their credit cards haven’t been cut, is what I’m hearing from them. The line hasn’t been cut. But they can only have a balance of $1.00, right? Right. So because Trump tried to cut it, but then the courts put a stay or something, they limited him, at least temporarily. They’re saying you can’t cut the line. So then Trump’s like, OK, fine.
[MCG]
Bye bye.
[Sam]
I’ll keep the line, but I’ll change the limit to $1.00, so there you go. Right. So anyway. And that’s just the specific scenario that I’m hearing at my job, right. So it may be that he did cut a bunch of lines elsewhere. I don’t know about that personally, but yeah, it seems to me that doge is accomplishing the immediate cuts to some degree. But once the president changes. Those cuts are gone, right? And that money can be spent again. So we need Congress, House and Senate. They need to pass laws to make those cuts, per. Imminent, but of course, you still have the problem, and that is, you also need a president and a Congress going forward to keep making cuts and to keep watching our spending to actually resolve this problem. Because right now, you know, we have a deficit and Trump can do a little bit about that and Congress helping him can really help do more about it. But we still have a huge debt, right? And not only do we have to get rid of the deficit, but we also have to get rid of the debt. Let me see if I can go back to the debt clock. Maybe I.
[Jay]
Yeah.
[Sam]
Killed that website, but it’s huge. OK, here it is. It’s $36.7 trillion, actually, if you round it up, it’s $36.8 trillion. Our current debt. Right. So it’s going to take a while. Like you’re saying it’ll take a while, even if Doge is successful in the immediate, it’ll take a while before. We’ll actually be able to cut our debt back down to something reasonable. It’s hard to for me to believe that, you know, just 20 years ago, we had no deficit. I want to say, well, maybe a little past 20 years ago during the Clintons, I want to say we balanced.
[Jay]
Yeah. The last president that we had.
[MCG]
Just 30 years ago, Sir.
[Jay]
Yeah, 30 years ago. Was President Clinton? Yeah.
[Sam]
Ohh wow. Well, it’s just a little while ago. It was 20 years ago, so time is flying.
[Jay]
And I don’t think Americans have, I don’t know if Americans will have the stomach for what needs to be done in order to bring the deficit down. It’s going to take a lot of pain. Will. Painful choices, painful cuts, maybe a reduction in our standard of living. There’s gonna be quite a bit that we’re gonna have to endure, and we might not want to do that, but.
[Sam]
Yeah.
[MCG]
Let me wrap this up. What would you say the take away from all of this? We’ve been talking about this all that stuff, but what would you say are the take away, whether spiritual or political or physical, whether some of the takeaways that come to your mind from all of this time?
[Sam]
Well.
Wow.
Ah, well, I mean, so how did we get here? Right. How did?
[MCG]
That’s a good question.
[Jay]
Great question.
[Sam]
And I think it’s when we want a free meal, you know, everybody’s like, oh, I want this person power because they’re gonna give me a free meal or they’re gonna give me this or they’re gonna give me that. And I think ultimately, you know, that’s corruption. At the lower level, I want the government to take money from this guy who’s working hard and give it to me. Why don’t you go out and earn it, right? And I know not everybody can, but a lot of us can.
[Jay]
Uh-huh.
[Sam]
Work. If you can work, go out and earn a living. Don’t try to take it from other people and the Bible even talks about that, for instance. Second Thessalonians really it’s 37, Second Thessalonians chapter 3, verse 7. 211 I would say kind of covers that. The highlight would be verse 10. This is probably what a lot of people are familiar with for even when we are we. With you this we command you that if any would not work, neither should he eat right. And I think verse 7 if you start with verse 7 it gives a little bit more context because it sounds a little harsh but it seems to me that part of the message in this is we as Christians are a bad testimony. If we go to somebody. And want another man’s bread. And we want it for nothing. We won’t labor verse seven kind of talks about how we want somebody else’s food, but we won’t labor for it. We won’t work. In night, but instead we just want to take somebody else’s stuff. We shouldn’t do that. If you want to eat, you should work. You know? Obviously, I guess, said like that doesn’t what about a baby? Well, a baby’s not gonna be working, but able bodied people, they should work if they want to eat. And we’ve gotten away from that. I think that’s a form of corruption at the personal level. And if we’re going to push the government to fulfill our corrupt desires, then the politicians are going to take that as an opportunity to fulfill their corrupt desires. And money is gonna, you know, not be spent very well. We’re hurting ourselves. I think that’s how we got here. And we need to to fix it. You know, there may be drastic change that needs to take place at the government level and those may be trying to do that, but ultimately we as Americans need to fix our heart.
[Jay]
Uh-huh.
[Sam]
And work for our food, you know, and not be lazy bums, which we like to be so.
[Jay]
I would definitely agree with everything that Sam just said. The change has to come through God’s work on the heart of the American. Let me just say it like that because our Constitution, our founding documents, everything that is so American doesn’t say we the people for nothing. James Chapter 1 says. Well, let me just read a few verses here.
[Sam]
While you’re looking for it, I do think that it’s it’s good, right? As Christians for us to look out for people in difficult situations. Yeah. So that’s totally different. But I’ve known several people who’ve been in a bad situation. And the ones that seem to have done the best, they’re like, wow, some of them have even a neighbor. He ended up in a bad spot and in his case he wasn’t gonna just take charity. People did give him money, but then he’s like, can I clean your yard? Can I? This can I that can I do anything for you. And he really did put in a lot of hard work and he’s now. In a much better spot, he actually was homeless for about a year, which is a long time. But he is a hard worker and he’s back on his feet. He’s not taking government check. He’s actually working for his food and for his stay. I think he’s going to, you know, do well in the future, so.
[Jay]
Yeah. Thank you for that, Sam. The first I was looking for is James, Chapter one, verse 17 and also proverbs 10/22. I’ll read them both. James, 117, says every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the father of lights, with whom is no variables. Ness neither shadow of turning proverbs, Chapter 10, verse 22 says the blessing of the Lord. It maketh rich, and he added no sorrow to it or sorrow with it. The Lord doesn’t change, and so if he said in his word that. A certain thing will bring about blessing and will bring about our prosperity. It will be the same and it will be true in 2025. So many people would like to say that the Bible is no longer relevant and that it has nothing for us. But the Bible is very clear that work and avoiding. That and everyone is striving to do their own individual best, helping where they can of course. But not relying on someone to provide for your sustenance. But it was very clear that this is the path to prosperity, and this is the path to blessing. But when we start taking on debt and borrowing and spending money that we don’t have and creating all of these programs. That have a form of helping others or being a blessing to other people, but in reality it creates or it encourages advice in whatever form that may be. None of those things come from God, and none of those things will tend toward prosperity. And I think that as a nation, we’re seeing that right now, when the Lord blesses something and every gift that he gives.
[MCG]
Yeah.
[Jay]
There is no added sorrow to it. You’re not going to like we’ll talk about loan sharks, for example, right? You borrow a dollar to have to pay back like 50 or something. Yeah. They gave you a dollar. But you know, you’re digging yourself into a deeper and deeper hole. And I think that our government and our politicians and our culture, all of these things are an expression. Of the people. And so we have to look at ourselves individually in order to see, just like Sam said, what can we do to repent before the Lord and live as he has laid out in his word, in order for us to bring about the really big changes that we want to see, like in this particular podcast, we’re talking about our government and where all of those fraud, waste and abuse come. Then. Those just doing what it can, but the American people need to be doing everything that we can.
[MCG]
Yeah, all this. And my take away would be this phrase, the urgency of the hour, and I think President Trump, Musk and his team do see the urgency of the hour in terms of that they feel. And they have got a fact and they acted. They said, hey. The government is spending too much money where the deficit is too high. There’s too much waste for their abuse. They saw something and they acted. And you know, the Bible tells us in John Chapter 4, verse 35 say that he they are yet four months and then come at harvest. Behold, I say unto you, lift up your eyes and look onto the fields for their white. Are ready to harvest. I guess what I’m saying here is truly that Jesus spoke those word then, and it’s true now that we need to lift up our eyes and look at their face for their white already on the. In some respect, that’s what Doge did. Doge looked and they say, hey, federal government. Hey, American people. We’re wasting too much money in our government and they acted. My challenge here is for Christians to also look and act because by talk about implementation, Jamari said how his eyes affected his heart. We needed to honestly. Fact and go back to the basics of gospel so many times in our churches today, we are more involved in entertaining than presenting the gospel. Church has become a show and all these things maybe we need to cut the fat and go back to the base of the gospel. Maybe we need to go back to the streets and start preaching open air preaching. Maybe we should start going knock on more doors. Maybe we need to start. Be a more of a light and salt in our communities because. Then what might take away the urgency of the hour and the urgency of the hour, really want to tell people, hey, you are sinners and you’re in need of a savior. And of course you can go through Romans 323 for all of sinners come short of go with God. Of course, going down the line. There, the gospel presentation of we’ve made so many times in our episodes here and removing barriers. But just to Christians. I guess my question is, do you see the urgency of the hour to me to some. Then Elon Musk and Trump, seeing the urgency of the hour and saying America, we’ve headed for Cliff. I’m gonna fall over it if we don’t do anything. And I’m saying there a lot of unsafe people out there who are heading for Cliff and they’re going to fall in the pits of hell if we don’t see the urgency of our and share the gospel. All right, Mr. Sam, it’s always a pleasure. We’ll definitely have you back. Let’s see, you got a new headset. You sound pretty good.
[Sam]
Ohh. Awesome. Well, thank you.
[MCG]
Thank you for joining us on the Removing Barriers podcast.
[Sam]
MCG, Jay, thanks, it’s been a pleasure.
[MCG]
Alright.
[Jay]
Thank you so much for listening to the Removing Barriers podcast. Make sure to rate us everywhere you listen to podcasts, including Spotify, Apple Podcast, Google Podcast, or Stitcher. Removing barriers, a clear view of the cross.
[MCG]
Thank you for listening. To get a hold of us, to support this podcast or to learn more about Removing Barriers, go to removingbarriers.net. This has been the Removing Barriers podcast we attempted to remove barriers so that we all can have a clear view of the cross.
