As President-elect Donald Trump prepares to assume office, Tesla CEO Elon Musk and entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy are reportedly collaborating to lead Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
The department aims to streamline the federal government, cutting down on bureaucracy and focusing on essential functions.
Musk, an outspoken advocate for limited government, highlighted the views of famed economist Milton Friedman on Wednesday.
Here's What They're Not Telling You About Your Retirement
MORE NEWS: Deadly Skeleton Bridge In Brazil To Be Demolished After Horrific Bungee Jump Death [WATCH]
Sharing an old interview of Friedman on X (formerly Twitter), Musk referred to him as "the best," pointing to the Nobel laureate's assessment of federal agencies and their necessity.
In the interview, Friedman evaluated various federal departments, giving his opinion on which should be abolished and which should remain.
Friedman, a prominent advocate of free markets and limited government, argued decades ago that many federal agencies had outlived their usefulness or were unnecessary. According to his assessment:
- Department of Agriculture: Should be "gone," with Friedman suggesting it was no longer essential.
- Department of Commerce: Also deemed unnecessary and should be abolished.
- Department of Defense: Should remain to fulfill its critical role in national security.
- Department of Education: Friedman argued for its elimination, stating it added no value.
- Department of Energy: Should be abolished, except for nuclear-related functions, which he believed should fall under the Department of Defense.
- Department of Health and Human Services (HHS): Could retain some public health functions, such as those preventing contagion, but half of the agency should be eliminated.
- Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD): Should be abolished, as Friedman claimed it caused an "enormous amount of harm."
- Department of the Interior: Could remain temporarily but should eventually be disbanded after the federal government sells off most of its land holdings, except for what is essential for government buildings.
- Department of Justice: Essential for upholding the rule of law and should remain intact.
- Department of State: Necessary for managing foreign affairs.
- Department of the Treasury: Required for managing federal revenue and taxes.
- Department of Labor: Should be eliminated.
- Department of Transportation: Also deemed unnecessary.
FREE Gun Law Map: Laws Don't Pause During Social Unrest
Friedman advocated for a government stripped to its core functions: preserving peace, defending the country, and providing a system for resolving disputes.
Milton Friedman was the best pic.twitter.com/CeLlQnNWHo
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 20, 2024
His proposals, though controversial at the time, align closely with the goals of Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency.
Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy are expected to draw from Friedman’s philosophy as they craft recommendations for reducing the federal government’s scope.
Musk’s focus on innovation and efficiency, combined with Ramaswamy’s emphasis on reducing government overreach, positions the duo to lead a significant overhaul of federal agencies.
MORE NEWS: Trump Blasts Critics as ‘Fools’ While Calling for Global Ceasefire and Celebrating Market Boom
With Trump’s incoming administration prioritizing smaller government, the Department of Government Efficiency could spearhead major reforms.
Observers anticipate that Musk and Ramaswamy will present proposals that echo Friedman’s vision of a lean federal government focused on essential functions.
Join the Discussion
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.
I agree with almost everything he said. There is so much overlapping of departments responsibilities that that alone would reduce by 30%, I would be willing to bet.
The pasted writing is not copyrighted. Is it of interest ?
******************************
Dear [Congress critter] ,
President Biden does not have authority to deliberately initiate an apocalyptic War without a Declaration of War by Congress, nor to distribute military gear. Ref: Art. I, Sec. 8, cl 12-16.
His act of authorization for Ukraine officials to use U.S. military gear, handled by U.S. military personnel, to be fired toward Russia has no other purpose. U.S. agents led a coup to install a tyrant in 2014 and developed 26 bio-weapon labs for the U.S. DoD to threaten Russia.
Such action has been suggested by Tulsi Gabbard, Amaryillis Kennedy, and others to be driven by casus bellis covert psychotic operators for greed and global domination.
Similar situations appear to be developing in three other global theaters.
What are you doing to stop it ?
Your constituent,
John Doe
******************************************************
THE STANDING ARMY
This writing is not intended to denigrate any military veteran. I served in the military. It is directed at a corrupt lethal abuse of a perceived power that is orchestrated by economic entities. Ref. Tulsi Gabbard.
Many people are unaware our Constitution does NOT authorize the creation of a Standing Army. It is the method tyrants use to impose suppression on their subjects and to initiate invasions. Our Founding Fathers attempted to prevent the practice in the Constitution of the United States. It is also the 13th complaint in the Declaration of Independence.
The Constitution authorizes a call-out of state militias after a congressional Declaration of War, with funding for a period limited to two years. Appointment of officers is reserved for the states. These provisions have been abrogated since 1947. Ref: Article I, Section 8, clauses 12-16.
The 1947 usurpation, by transferring a military force from state to federal control, allows a tyrant to use the military and suppress resistance or publishing of government oppressive actions. In addition, it has allowed the government to build a world-wide Empire of foreign installations to enforce oppressive foreign financial controls for mercantile profit. Lengthy repeated enforcement by the military and CIA, under the guise of “national security,” which include NATO and SEATO, can also be identified as covert globalism. Ref; Amaryillis Kennedy interview/Carlson.
It would appear that the States have standing to initiate a suit against the unconstitutional Standing Army. The usurpation is imposing a destructive humongous $870 Billion annual debt on the U.S. Citizens that has not passed an audit for years. It is assisting a global force to develop oppression on nations of the world– for profit– under a guise of National Security, and is DECIMATING OUR YOUTH. The aggressive use of the standing army in three theaters are currently threatening WW III with nuclear annihilation.
Current expansive government actions have included automatic registration of both males and females for the draft with potential lethal conscription, along with authorized lethal action on their own Citizens—TO PROTECT DEMOCRACY. Such hypocrisy.
We have witnessed the perpetual war-mongering for seven decades. Creditable historians have documented WW I, WW II, Vietnam, and the Afghanistan invasion were each false-flag creations by financiers who manipulated government for profit. Recent events have resulted in the destruction of numerous nations involving death of our military members. Writers have written that this is a 500 year practice by the BIS.
Does an act by the Secretary of the Treasury sending a voucher/pay check for services to an officer of the Army, or the Air Force, who cannot document their appointment being made by a State constitute an act of fraud, or some other crime, and expose them to prosecution ? Does the receiver of the payment risk a charge of impersonating a federal official ? Do the States have standing to challenge the federal government as an “imminent Danger” of a coup ? Ref: Art. I, Sec. 10, clause 3.