[lenerdenator]

There's bound to be some.

Is it as much as the right pretends it is? Is it the cause of the ballooning federal debt? No on both. But it does exist.

And honestly, the worst thing you can do is have someone try to run the organization allocating those funds as if he's the CEO of his own personal organization.

[lokar]

Is it much more proportionate to over all budget then Google, Microsoft, Walmart, UPS, bank of America, etc?

[johnnyanmac]

Those companies can't produce money to "pay off debts", increasing the defecit. So I'd say there's a fighting chance there.

I'm no economist nor businessman though, so I won't pretend I can answer that with confidence.

[lokar]

Just don’t see why I should take it on faith that the US department whatever has 10X the “waste” of a big multi-national bank. Or that DOGE can improve anything.

[johnnyanmac]

DOGE will improve everything... For billionaires. The working class is screwed.

But hey, they might lobby to finally get rid of penny production. So that's a micro-win.

I definitely wouldn't claim that the government is on a scale of 10x the waste of corporate. But the structure of government budgeting does make it easier to create more efficiency

[init2null]

There's inefficiency in any system. Engines, motors, fusion power, and transistors. We can calculate their efficiency, and the numbers aren't impressive if that's all you care about. Maybe it's better to ask how they compare to other methods of doing work. This is the cost of the system, and it's either worth it or it isn't.

The US medical system is a public-private partnership, and it's likely the most expensive system in the world for what the benefits it provides (see "List of countries by total health expenditure per capita" on Wikipedia). The government can only optimize here if it's willing to rein in the for-profit middlemen.

To paraphrase a quote, I'd be tempted to call an obsession with efficiency a hobgoblin of little minds. Or maybe it's just an excuse to cut programs.