一个十道题的在线调查问卷,用市面上的现成工具做出来,成本大概一万美元。美国联邦政府为它付了将近十亿美元。
这个数字出自埃隆·马斯克(Elon Musk)在福克斯新闻主播布雷特·拜尔(Bret Baier)专访里随口举的一个例子。他报出这个数的时候,语气跟报一个实数没有区别,顺手就带过去了。他说这类规模的浪费,团队每周都能碰上,碰上的时候连惊讶都懒得惊讶。
这场专访聊的不只是他牵头的那家“政府效率部”(Department of Government Efficiency,简称 DOGE)。还聊到特斯拉门店被人扔燃烧弹、他被叫做斯大林和成吉思汗、五角大楼一年丢掉两三百亿美元、乌克兰战壕里每天死去的几千人。
先把最硬的部分摆出来:钱。
目标:把七万亿的联邦支出压到六万亿
DOGE 的目标被马斯克说得非常具体。名义赤字两万亿美元,他们的任务是把赤字砍掉一半,降到一万亿。换个算法看总账,就是把联邦政府每年七万亿美元的支出压到六万亿。
也就是削减 15%。
马斯克对这个比例的态度很笃定:政府本身就低效,存在着大量浪费和欺诈,他有信心在不影响任何关键政府服务的前提下完成 15% 的削减。后面他还补了半句,说没准能让服务变得更好。
时间表也给了。拜尔问他,能不能在既定时间框架内完成削减一万亿赤字所需的大部分工作,他答得干脆:可以。
至于外界期待的那份“报告”,他说根本没有报告这回事。
我们是在实时削减浪费和欺诈。每过去一天,目标就是削减四十亿美元。一周七天,每天如此。到目前为止,我们做到了。(马斯克)
一天四十亿,一年下来一万四千多亿。这个节奏听起来像吹牛,支撑它的理由却朴素得出奇:政府的浪费和欺诈总量太大,随便翻翻就能翻出十亿美元级的项目。
那个十亿美元的问卷,只是随手举的例子
拜尔让他举个例子,他讲的就是开头那个调查问卷。
十个问题,问的无非是“你喜欢国家公园吗”这类内容,用 SurveyMonkey 这样的现成工具几十分钟就能搭出来,市价一万美元上下。政府为此付了近十亿美元。
更荒诞的地方在问卷之后。没有任何反馈机制。问卷收上来的数据去哪了、用来干什么、谁看过、结论是什么,全都没有下文。钱花完了,问卷沉进黑洞。
马斯克复述这件事时的用词是“疯狂”“难以置信”“让人脑子嗡一下”。他讲的重点早就超出了某一笔特别离谱的开支。这种量级的浪费变成了日常,变成了不需要特别解释的常态。
“量两次,不行就量三次,然后只切一刀”
拜尔追问了一个很多人关心的问题:动作这么急,会不会切到不该切的东西?
马斯克的回答里有一句话值得单独拎出来:
我们确实想在削减上保持谨慎。要量两次,如果做不到就量三次,然后只切一刀。这恰恰就是我们的做法。(马斯克)
他承认外界会把这种速度形容成“拔枪就打”,但他认为实际情况跟这个描述完全相反。反过来,他也不装作不犯错。
如果按“绝不犯错”的标准来做这件事,那就等于要求一个棒球手打击率百分之百。那是不可能的。犯了错,我们快速纠正,然后继续往前走。(马斯克)
这个比喻在这里分量很重。任何大规模的组织改造,都会在概率上产生一定比例的误判。真正该被衡量的指标落在纠错速度上。有没有出错这件事在概率上无法消除,错了之后多快纠正才是可以管理的东西。
没有总统和内阁,这事一天都做不成
马斯克在访谈里把这句话重复了一遍,还特意说“想再强调一下”:DOGE 的成功只可能发生在特朗普总统和他选出的这套内阁之下。没有总统和内阁的支持,这事根本不可能。
这话听着不像客套。行政系统里的任何跨部门动作都需要顶层的政治授权,否则各部门只要用“按流程办”四个字就能把一切拖死。他把这层依赖关系摊开讲,等于提前划定了责任边界:做成了,功劳在总统和内阁;做不成的阻力来自哪里,也就不用猜了。
国会的态度:法律要求钱必须花对
关于国会,马斯克的表述很克制:尽量让国会知情。
他给出的法律依据是,法律本身就要求资金必须被正确使用,不得以欺诈或浪费的方式支出。他觉得“避免浪费和欺诈”跟国会并不对立,恰恰符合法律,也符合国会意图。
实际的支持情况,他说众议院共和党这边支持力度很大,偶尔也有民主党人跨过来。他提到“偶尔看到有人跨过过道”是件好事,语气里带着一点意外。
更让他觉得有意思的是攻击方式:
他们攻击 DOGE 的时候,从来不攻击任何具体项目。他们会说我们做的事违宪、违法,随便什么帽子。我们就问,那你到底不同意哪一条节省?他们一条都指不出来。所有项目都列在 DOGE.gov 和 X 上的 DOGE 账号里,你翻下去,一条比一条离谱。(马斯克)
这个观察值得记住。当一个批评始终停留在定性层面,永远不落到具体条目上,通常说明批评者手里没有条目。
退休手续要靠人抬着纸信封进矿井
访谈里最有画面感的一段,讲的是美国联邦政府的退休流程。
起因是 DOGE 想推动自愿退休,问相关部门一个月最多能处理多少人。对方答:八千人。而且就算一切正常,光是把退休文书处理完也要六到九个月,还经常把金额算错。
马斯克问,退个休为什么要这么久?
对方说,因为矿井。
他当时的反应是:什么叫矿井?矿井跟退休有什么关系?
答案就在这里:所有退休档案仍然以纸质形式存放在一座巨大的地下矿井里,靠人拎着马尼拉纸信封一趟一趟送进去。流程跟 1950 年代一模一样。拿五十年代矿井刚启用时的照片跟今天对比,看不出区别。
这段描述之所以重要,是它把官僚系统慢的物理原因讲清楚了。很多人以为流程慢是因为规章多、审批层级深,实际情况有时候是系统的物理载体几十年没有升级过。人是被矿井卡住的,规章只占一小部分。
社保诈骗:一通电话改掉钱的流向
拜尔把话题转到社会保障。马斯克的描述很直接:
骗子会打电话进去,冒充退休人员,说服电话那头的社保工作人员更改资金的流向。钱实际流向了某个诈骗者。这种事每天都在发生。然后真正的人收不到自己的社保金。原因就是社保系统里那一个个欺诈漏洞。(马斯克)
这里值得盯住的词是“说服电话那头的社保工作人员”。身份验证最薄的一环落在人身上,系统本身反倒不构成入口。只要改收款账户这个动作能靠一通电话完成,欺诈就会以电话的密度发生。
拜尔接着问了一个所有改革都会遇到的质问:那靠社保生活的普通人怎么办?他们的福利会不会受损?
马斯克的回答用了很强的措辞:
不会。恰恰相反,我们做的事会帮助他们的福利。因为 DOGE 的工作,合法的社保受益人拿到手的钱会更多,不是更少。我想强调这一点。请把这句话记下来,将来会被证明是真的。以后我们回头对一对。(马斯克)
逻辑链是清楚的:现在每年有大量资金流进骗子的账户,这部分钱本来应该留在池子里。堵住漏洞,池子里的钱就多,合法领取者的长期保障就更稳。他把这个判断当作可以被事后检验的承诺,没有用模糊表态糊过去。
所谓“效率部”,干的其实是技术支持
访谈里有一段很短的问答,信息密度极高。拜尔问这些政府计算机系统彼此之间是否通信,马斯克说:不通信。问负责的人有没有技术背景,他说:大部分没有。
然后是这段:
我说我们的工作是技术支持,我是认真的。我们得去修电脑。如果电脑之间没法通信,研究就做不成。如果电脑没法保持在线,人们就收不到社保。所以我们面对的是一堆濒临失效的系统,它们阻碍人们拿到自己的福利,阻碍研究推进,还极其容易被欺诈利用。我们在修这些东西。(马斯克)
把 DOGE 理解成“砍预算的刀”是不完整的。他给出的定位更像一支被空降到老旧 IT 环境里的运维团队,任务是把互不相通的数据库对接起来,把随时会掉线的系统撑住。
这也解释了他反复强调的一点:数据库之间不通信,就是欺诈最大的漏洞。系统之间对不上账,中间那道缝隙就永远有人钻。
拜尔还问了一个流传很广的说法:是不是有一千四百人的工作就是发笔记本电脑和手机?马斯克的反应是:
这没有任何道理。你会养一千四百个人,唯一的工作就是发笔记本和手机吗?而且基本上几乎没有人被解雇。(马斯克)
联邦政府通不过审计,因为一笔付款说不清来龙去脉
访谈里有个说法反复出现:联邦政府无法通过审计。
马斯克把原因拆成了三个具体条件。要解释清楚任何一笔付款,你需要付款代码、付款说明,以及一个可以联系上、能解释这笔钱为什么付出去的人。
这三样东西直到最近才成为强制要求,也就几周前,也许是上周。情况就是这么糟糕。(马斯克)
他拿商业公司做对照:如果一家商业公司像联邦政府这样运营,它会立刻破产、被摘牌,高管会被逮捕。他强调这些都是任何公司运转所必需的最基础的财务控制。
他还提到一个细节,说他们在“收敛着来”,但很明显,一个政府持有的信用卡数量不应该超过它的人口数。
DOGE 想达成的结果,是让联邦政府能够通过一次审计,让纳税人知道自己交的税去了哪里、花得值不值。这话听起来像口号,落到“付款代码、付款说明、联系人”这三要素上,就变成了具体的工程任务。
三亿美元贷款发给了十一岁以下的人
访谈进入欺诈案例部分,数字开始变得荒诞。马斯克举的第一组数据来自小企业管理局(Small Business Administration):
- 超过三亿美元的 SBA 贷款,发给了年龄在十一岁以下的人。
- 最年轻的贷款获得者,九个月大。
- 美国在世最长寿的人 114 岁,所以年龄标注 115 岁以上的,要么是假的,要么该进吉尼斯世界纪录。
他讲了一个九个月婴儿怎么能拿到贷款的链条:有人盯上新生儿,偷走社保号,用这个号去申请贷款,然后不还。孩子长大以后才发现自己名下有一笔坏账,信用记录已经烂了。
他顺口点评了一句,说这宝宝早熟得有点过分。这种冷幽默出现在这类话题里,反而让荒诞感更明显。
第二组案例更系统化,讲的是骗子的标准操作:
骗子常用的一招,是利用某人在社保系统里被标记为“活着”这个状态。系统只回答一个问题:这个人还在吗?答案是被错误标记的“在”。于是骗子就能用一个死人去领失业金和残疾保险,因为数据库之间不通信,没人去核对。这在大规模、全天候地发生。(马斯克)
技术根源在这里被点透了:社保数据库对外只提供一个布尔值,其他系统把这个布尔值当成了完整事实。一个字段被设计成只回答是或否,就注定无法承载“这个人是否真的有权领取”这种复杂判断,再叠加系统不互通,欺诈的门就永远开着。
特区巡回法院、NGO,和一条闭环
拜尔问到司法层面的阻力,提到了哥伦比亚特区巡回上诉法院(D.C. Circuit)。马斯克的回答带着明显的指向性:
特区巡回法院以极左倾向出名。你去看看那些法官身边的人在哪工作?哦,他们在这些 NGO 里。哦,他们就是拿这笔钱的人。这样的系统看起来像是不存在腐败的吗?在我看来这就是腐败。(马斯克)
他举的具体例子是:给斯泰西·艾布拉姆斯(Stacy Abrams)的 NGO 拨了二十亿美元,而那家机构基本上不存在,钱是突然之间被联邦政府批下来的。他说类似的案例还有很多。
这段内容的价值跟真假判断关系不大。它呈现的是他理解的“闭环”:决定钱怎么花的人、批评削减的人、拿钱的人,可能是同一批人。如果这个闭环成立,“攻击 DOGE 却指不出具体条目”这个现象就有了另一层解释。
五角大楼一年丢两三百亿,没人知道去了哪
谈到国防部,马斯克的语气里无奈多过愤怒。
五角大楼很久没有通过审计了。他说得直白:他们每年会丢掉两百亿到三百亿美元,而且真的不知道钱去哪了。
他引用了参议员柯林斯(Collins)讲过的一件事:她给海军追加一百二十亿美元,专门用于多造潜艇,结果一艘额外的潜艇都没造出来。之后开听证会追问这一百二十亿去哪了,没有人答得上来。
这个案例的可怕之处在于它不需要任何阴谋论。一百二十亿美元从拨款到交付之间,没有任何一个环节负责回答“东西在哪”。
最难的那部分:把数据库对账,像痛苦的家庭作业
拜尔问他,以他习惯的速度来衡量,现在的进展算快吗?
马斯克的回答分两层:放在政府的语境里,他们快得像闪电;放在他习惯的语境里,比他想要的慢。他说得很坦白,按政府标准看是极快的动作,按他自己的标准看还不够。不过进展是扎实的。
他把最难的部分称作“痛苦的家庭作业”:
最棘手的那部分,是把政府所有数据库对账。这些数据库彼此不通信,而这恰恰是欺诈的最大漏洞来源。所以必须把数据库对上。说实话这就是一份痛苦的家庭作业,但必须做完,做完之后政府系统的效率会大幅提升。(马斯克)
“对账”这个词在这里用得非常准确。这项工作的性质接近对账,谈不上重建系统。它要做的是让已有的系统之间能对上数。这类工作在任何一个组织里都最难推动,因为它不出彩、周期长、需要跨部门配合,而且做完之后外人看不出变化,只知道“以前老出错的地方现在不出错了”。
特斯拉门店被纵火,责任人得往上找
访谈中间,拜尔把话题转向特斯拉。马斯克的措辞罕见地强硬。
我认为特斯拉的人和我们客户正在遭受极大的不公。特斯拉是一家和平的公司,造了好车、好产品,仅此而已,没有伤害过任何人。但有人在实施暴力,向特斯拉门店投掷燃烧弹,朝店里开枪,威胁员工,对我和其他特斯拉人员发出死亡威胁。他们这么做是为了什么?(马斯克)
他的判断是,这些人被极左阵营的宣传喂饱了,然后信了。他说这很不幸,但问题得往上找。
真正的坏人不在现场那个扔燃烧弹的疯子身上。是那些推动宣传、让他去干这事的人。这些人才是真正的恶棍,我们会追究他们。总统已经明确表示,我们会追到底。出钱的人、推谎言和宣传的人,我们都会追。(马斯克)
这段话在访谈里出现得很突然,但它跟前面所有关于欺诈与浪费的讨论共享同一套逻辑:直接执行者只是末端,值得追责的是上游的动机来源。他用同一把尺子量政府里的骗子和街上的暴力煽动者。
“他们还是那套剧本,还是叫我斯大林”
拜尔问他,这种攻击会不会让他意外。马斯克说,最讽刺的结果往往最可能发生。
他们还是那套老剧本。他们还得叫我斯大林、墨索里尼,随便什么,成吉思汗也行。他们对总统也用过所有这些词。有一次某本杂志的封面说,特朗普总统比希特勒、墨索里尼和斯大林加起来还坏。可这位总统没杀过任何人,没发动过任何战争。事实上他很擅长终止战争。所以这显然是谎言。他们为什么要推这些谎言?我认为必须让推这些谎言的人承担责任,因为这些谎言差点让总统丧命。(马斯克)
拜尔追问他对特朗普本人的评价,他给了一段在当下舆论环境里相当罕见的表态:
我认为总统是个好人。我认为他是个诚实的人,我至今没有见过他做过任何刻薄的事,或者任何我会称之为道德错误的事。一次都没有。(马斯克)
这句话在中文语境里容易被读成立场表态。放回访谈上下文,它承担的是论证功能:如果“比希特勒还坏”这类标签跟可观察的行为完全对不上,标签的用途就落到了动员上,描述事实这件事被放在了一边。
“把别国利益放在美国之上,那叫叛徒”
谈到政治立场,马斯克给了一条很硬的标准:
我认为有人应该把美国的利益放在其他国家的利益之上。如果他不这么做,他就是叛徒。(马斯克)
拜尔追问,这话是不是在指向某个人。马斯克的回应是,这不代表某个人可以把别国利益放在美国之上就是可以的。
这条标准本身朴素得过分,但在实际政治讨论里它经常被绕开。绕开的方式是把“立场”换成“姿态”。
战壕里的两年:战线没动,人一直在死
访谈最后落到乌克兰。马斯克的判断是会有谈判达成的和平,他着重讲的部分在人的成本上,谈判条件反倒没怎么展开:
我们应该对那些每天在战壕里死去的几千人有同理心。战线没有任何移动,边界和两年前一样。过去两年里,每周都有几千人白白死去。为了什么?我非常反感那些把“善的外表”放在“善的实质”之上的人。那些道德作秀的人说,哦,我们不能对俄罗斯让步,但他们没有任何方案能阻止每天几千个孩子死去。他们只想让这件事永远持续下去。我对这种人只有蔑视,我要把这点说清楚。(马斯克)
他接着把后果摊开:
因为他们在道德作秀,而他们拿不出方案,结果就是孩子没有父亲,父母失去了儿子。为了什么?什么也不为。(马斯克)
这一段是他整场访谈里情绪最重的地方。他把“表达正确立场”和“承担实际后果”明确切开,认为前者的廉价恰恰建立在对后者的无视之上。他的结论只有一句:总统的方案是唯一能奏效的方案。
把整件事压缩成一句话
访谈临近结束,马斯克给了自己一个定位:
这是一场革命,我认为它可能是自最初那场革命以来,政府在层面上最大的一次革命。但归根到底,美国的状况会好得多。美国会有偿付能力。人们赖以生存的那些关键项目会正常运转。未来会非常好。至于一路上会收到大量投诉?绝对会。(马斯克)
还有一句更狠的:
如果不做这件事,我们就完了。除非这次行动成功,美国这艘船会沉。这就是我们做这件事的原因。(马斯克)
以及他从 PayPal 带出来的一条经验,用在判断谁在反对上:
我在 PayPal 学到的一件事是:谁抱怨得最大声、带着最多的虚假义愤?是骗子。这是个信号。(马斯克)
这条经验在今天任何组织里都能直接拿来用。当你开始收紧某个环节的漏洞,最先跳起来的人通常是靠漏洞获利的那一批,正常用户反倒排在后面。判断一个合规动作有没有打中要害,看反对者的身份比看反对者的音量有用得多。
至于那位九十四岁的老奶奶,马斯克的说法是:因为 DOGE 的工作,她还会拿到她的支票,她不会再被骗子抢走。而联邦政府保持偿付能力,才能保证她的社保和医保一直发得出来。不做,谁都拿不到。
如果只带走几条能用的东西
- 看数字,不看形容词。这场访谈里所有能站住的论点都挂在具体数字上:七万亿到六万亿、每天四十亿、三亿美元发给十一岁以下、一百二十亿换零艘潜艇。遇到只给定性不给条目的批评,默认它手里没有条目。
- 去 DOGE.gov 或 X 上的 DOGE 账号翻一遍清单,挑一条自己动手核对。成本最低的媒体素养训练,就是练核对原始条目,少核对别人对条目的转述。
- 把“零错误”从任何改造项目的验收标准里删掉。棒球打击率不可能百分百,项目也一样。该设的指标落在错误率上限和纠错时长上。
- 检查自己组织里有没有“矿井”。凡是流程慢得说不清原因的地方,往下刨一层,通常会找到一个几十年没升级过的物理载体或数据载体。慢的原因常常在载体上,规矩只占一小部分。
- 做一次跨系统对账。把两个本应对得上、实际上从没对过的数据源拉出来比一遍,差额就是你的欺诈敞口。对账比新建系统便宜得多,也难推动得多。
- 收紧一个漏洞时,记录第一批反对者的身份。跳出来的是靠漏洞获利的人,说明方向对了;跳出来的是正常用户,说明切口选错了。这个信号比任何舆情报告都快。
- 听到“道德上不能让步”这类表述时,追问一句:你的方案是什么,代价由谁承担。有方案的人会回答细节,没方案的人会回答态度。
- 区分“善的外表”和“善的实质”。判断一个立场值不值得支持,看它能不能收敛到一个更少人死、更少人受损的具体结果,别管它听起来是否正义。
0:14Our goal is to reduce the deficit by a trillion dollars. From a nominal deficit of two trillion to try cut the deficit in half to one trillion, or looked at it in total federal spending, to drop the federal spending from seven trillion to six trillion. We want to reduce the spending by eliminating waste and fraud, reduce the spending by 15%, which seems really quite achievable. The government is not efficient and there's a lot of waste and fraud, so we feel confident that a 15% reduction can be done without affecting any of the critical government services.
0:54If not making it better. The sheer amount of waste and fraud in the government. It is astonishing. It's mind-blowing. We routinely encounter wastes of a billion dollars or more. Casually. For example, the simple survey that was literally a 10 question survey that you could do with SurveyMonkey, cost you about $10,000. The government was being charged almost a billion dollars for that.
1:30A billion dollars for a simple online survey. "Do you like the national park?" And then there appeared to be no feedback loop for what would be done with that survey. The survey would just go into nothing. It was insane.
1:51I think we will have accomplished most of the work required to reduce the deficit by a trillion dollars within that timeframe. Yes. Not really a report. We are cutting the waste and fraud in real time. Every day like that passes, our goal is to reduce the waste and fraud by $4 billion a day every day, seven days a week. And so far, we are succeeding.
2:40I do agree that we actually want to be careful in the cuts. We want to measure twice, if not thrice, and cut once. And actually that is our approach. They may characterize it as shooting from the hip, but it is anything but that, which is not to say that we don't make mistakes. If we were to approach this with the standard of making no mistakes at all, that would be like saying someone in baseball has got to bat 1000. That's impossible. When we do make mistakes, we correct them quickly and we move on.
4:15I'd just like to sort of re-emphasize that point. The success of DOGE is only possible with President Trump and with the outstanding cabinet that he's selected. It would be impossible without the support of the President and the cabinet.
5:08We try to keep Congress as informed as possible, but the law does say that money needs to be spent correctly. It should not be spent fraudulently or wastefully. It's not contrary to Congress to avoid waste and fraud. It is consistent with the law and consistent with Congress. And we've seen, actually, great support, at least from the Republican side of the House, and occasionally some Democrats too. It's nice to see people cross the aisle once in a while, but usually when they attack DOGE, they never attack any of the specifics. They'll say what we're doing is somehow unconstitutional or illegal or whatever. We're like, which line of the cost savings do you disagree with? And they can't point to any. And we list them all on DOGE.gov and the DOGE handle on X. And you'll see just outrageous things. One outrageous thing after another.
7:34Yes. The retirement process is all by paper, literally with people carrying paper in manila envelopes into this gigantic mine.
7:48The reason we discovered it was we were saying let's encourage voluntary retirement. They said, the most they could do is 8,000 a month. And even under normal circumstances, it can take six to nine months just to have your retirement paperwork processed. And they often get the calculations wrong. We're like, why would it take so long to retire? And they're like, because of the mine. They're like, what do you mean a mine? What's a mine got to do with retiring? And that's where we discovered that all the retirement stuff is still done by paper in a process that looks identical to what occurred in the 1950s. If you took a snapshot of the mine when it first started in the '50s, to today, it looks the same.
10:57Yes. And they steal people's Social Security is what happens, is they call in, they say… They claim to be a retiree, and they convince the Social Security person on the phone to change where the money's flowing. It actually goes to some fraudster. This is happening all day every day, and then somebody doesn't receive their Social Security. It's because of all the fraud loopholes in the Social Security system.
11:30No. In fact, what we're doing will help their benefits. Legitimate people as a result of the work of DOGE will receive more Social Security, not less. I want to emphasize that. As a result of the work of DOGE, legitimate recipients of Social Security will receive more money, not less money.
11:49I want to emphasize that point and let the record show that I said this and it'll be proven out to be true. Let's check back on this in the future.
12:16Yes, we're going to make sure that the website stays online. No.
12:39Yes. Yes. And they don't communicate. Yeah. Yeah. And most of them are non-technical. And when I say that our job is tech support, I really mean it. We have to fix the computers. If the computers can't talk to each other, you can't get research done. If the computers can't stay online, people won't receive their Social Security. So what we have here are a bunch of failing computer systems that are preventing people from receiving their benefits, that are preventing research from happening, that are extremely vulnerable to fraud. And we're fixing it.
15:19It's going to affect people very positively. So the changes that we're doing here will ensure the solvency of the American government, of the United States of America. This is what we're trying to do, is ensure that people do receive their benefits in the future. And you can only receive your benefits if the country is operating in a healthy and competent way.
16:41Yeah. It's also not make anyone healthy. It doesn't make any sense. Would you have 1400 people whose only job it is to give out a laptop on a phone?
18:39Basically almost no one's gotten fired, is what we're saying.
19:24It's a big one. It's a big one. [inaudible 00:20:29]. The federal government cannot pass it. It's impossible. In fact in order to pass an order, you need the information that's needed to pass an order. You need to have the payment codes. You need to have the payment explanation, and you need to have a person you can contact to understand why that payment was made. None of those things were mandatory until just recently, just a few weeks ago. In fact, maybe last week.
22:01It's that bad. Well, this is a revolution, and I think it might be the biggest revolution in government since the original revolution. But at the end of the day, America's going to be in much better shape. America will be solvent. The critical programs that people depend upon will work. And it's going to be a fantastic future. But are we going to get a lot of complaints along the way? Absolutely. One of the things I learned at PayPal was you know who complains the loudest and with the most amount of fake righteous indignation? The fraudsters. It's a tell. [inaudible 00:23:17] crazy, like the $2 billion to Stacy Abrams's NGO that basically didn't exist and suddenly gets $2 billion awarded from the federal government. Why? And there are many such cases like that.
23:43Right. And what we're trying to say is actually that the 94-year-old grandmother is actually, as a result of DOGE's work, going to get her check. She is not going to be robbed by fraudsters like she's getting robbed today. And the solvency of the federal government will ensure that she continues to receive those social security checks, that Medicare continues to work, without which we're all doomed. The reason we're doing this is because if we don't do it, America's going to go insolvent. We're going to go bankrupt. And nobody's going to get anything.
25:10Oh yeah. We're taking it easy, but clearly there should not be more credit cards than there are people.
26:46We're talking about elementary financial controls that are necessary for any company to function. So, if a commercial company operated the way the federal government is, then it would immediately go bankrupt. It would be delisted. The officers would be arrested. And the changes we're putting in place will enable the federal government to pass an audit. It will enable the taxpayers to know where the money is going and know that their hard earned tax dollars being spent well. The ways that the government is defrauded is that the computer systems don't talk to each other. So, if the computer systems don't talk to each other, then you can exploit that gap and fraudsters exploit that gap, take advantage. If, for example, there were over $300 million of a Small Business Administration loans that has been given out to people under the age of 11.
27:48Yes. The oldest American is 114. So, safe to say if their age is 115 or above, they're fake or they should be in the Guinness Book of World Records. And we should not be giving out loans to babies. The youngest recipient of a Small Business Administration loan is a 9-month-year-old, which is a very, very precocious baby we're talking about here. So, obviously which is fraudulent. And they do terrible things. We'll see that a kid's been born, they will steal that kid's social security number and then take out a loan and leave that kid with a bad credit rating. There was literally a baby. Terrible things are being done is what we're saying. We're stopping these terrible things.
28:34We are stopping it. One of the key tricks that the fraudsters pull is that they will use the fact that someone is marked as alive, just that social security number is marked as live in Social Security, and then get disability and unemployment insurance for a dead person because the databases don't talk to each other, all they got from Social Security is, " Is this person alive?" Yes. They're not alive. The person is falsely marked as alive in Social Security, but a fraudster can now get unemployment and disability from a dead person. This is happening all the time at scale.
30:04Well, the D.C. circuit is notorious for having a very far left bias. And when you look at the people close to some of these judges, where are they working? Oh, they're working at these NGOs. Oh, they're the ones getting this money. Does that seem like a system that lacks corruption? It sounds like corruption to me.
30:31It's essential. If we don't do this, we're sunk. Unless this exercise is successful, the ship of America will sink. That's why we're doing it.
31:08Thank you. [inaudible 00:31:13]. Yeah. Well, I think in the context of the government, we're moving like lightning. In the context of what I'm used to moving, it's slower than I'd like. So what seems like incredibly fast action by government standards, it's slower than I'd like to be totally frank, but we are making solid progress. A very sort of thorny problem, a tough problem. Really, it's kind of like painful homework, frankly, it is reconciling all of the government databases to eliminate the waste and fraud. These databases don't talk to each other, and that's really the source of… That's the biggest vulnerability for fraud, is the fact that these databases don't talk to each other. So we need to reconcile the databases. It's frankly painful homework, but it has to be done and will greatly improve the efficiency of the government systems.
32:23The Pentagon has not passed an audit in a very long time. I mean, it's crazy as it sounds. They will lose $ 20, $30 billion a year and they literally don't know where it went. I mean, Senator Collins was telling me about how she gave the Navy $12 billion for extra submarines, got zero extra submarines, and then when she held a hearing, said, "Where'd the $12 billion go?" They didn't know.
33:10Well, I think a great wrong is being done to the people of Tesla and to our customers. Tesla is a peaceful company that has made great cars, great products, that's all it's done, hasn't harmed anyone. And yet, people are committing violence. They're firebombing Tesla dealerships. They're shooting guns into stores. They're threatening people. They're issuing death threats against me and other Tesla personnel. What are they doing this for? Why? And what's happening, it seems to me is they're being fed propaganda by the far left and they believe it. It's really unfortunate. But the real problem is not the people… It's not like the crazy guy that firebombs a Tesla dealership.
33:10It's the people pushing the propaganda that caused that guy to do it. Those are the real villains here and we're going to go after them. And the President's made it clear, we're going to go after them. The ones providing the money, the ones pushing the lies and propaganda, we're going after them.
34:37It is ironic. I mean, it seems like the most ironic outcome is the most likely, but yeah, I mean- It does. Yeah, it does. I think there's some real evil out there and we have to overcome it.
35:05I mean, they've got the normal play book. I mean, they've still got it. I guess they still need to call me Stalin, Mussolini, whatever, Genghis Khan, or whatever. I mean, they've called the President all these things. I think at one point, there was a magazine cover which said the President was worse than… That President Trump was worse than Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin combined. And the President hasn't killed anyone, he hasn't started any wars. In fact, he's good at stopping wars. So this is obviously… They're pushing these lies, and why do they push these lies? And I think we need to hold people responsible for pushing these lies because those lies almost got the President killed.
36:01I think the President is a good man. I think he is an honest man, and I have yet to see him do anything mean or anything that is wrong, that I would say morally wrong. Not even once.
36:40Well, I think somebody should care about the interests of the United States above the interests of another country. And if they don't, they're a traitor.
36:56That doesn't mean it's okay for him to put the interest of another country above America.
37:14Well, I think there will be a negotiated peace. And the thing that we should be concerned about is we should have empathy for the thousands of people that are dying every day in trenches for no movement in the lines. So the borders remain the same. For the past two years, thousands of people have died every week for nothing. For what? And I take great offense at those who put the appearance of goodness over the reality of it. Those who virtue signal and say, "Oh, we can't give in to Russia," but have no solution to stopping thousands of kids dying every day. They just want that to continue forever. Have contempt for such people, I want to make that clear.
38:09Because they're virtue signaling and their lack of a solution means that kids don't have a father. It means that parents lost a son. For what? Nothing.
38:30The President's plan is the only thing that will work.
政府效率不高,存在大量浪费和欺诈,所以我们有信心,在不影响任何关键政府服务的情况下,可以削减15%。
The government is not efficient and there's a lot of waste and fraud, so we feel confident that a 15% reduction can be done without affecting any of the critical government services.
我们经常遇到十亿美元甚至更多的浪费。随随便便就遇到。
We routinely encounter wastes of a billion dollars or more. Casually.
我们正在实时削减浪费和欺诈。每过这样一天,我们的目标都是每天、每周七天削减40亿美元的浪费和欺诈。到目前为止,我们正在做到。
We are cutting the waste and fraud in real time. Every day like that passes, our goal is to reduce the waste and fraud by $4 billion a day every day, seven days a week. And so far, we are succeeding.
我们想量两次,甚至三次,再下刀。实际上这正是我们的做法。
We want to measure twice, if not thrice, and cut once. And actually that is our approach.
退休流程全靠纸质文件,真的是有人把纸质文件装在马尼拉纸信封里,带进这个巨大的矿井。
The retirement process is all by paper, literally with people carrying paper in manila envelopes into this gigantic mine.
由于 DOGE 的工作,社会保障的合法领取者将拿到更多钱,而不是更少。
As a result of the work of DOGE, legitimate recipients of Social Security will receive more money, not less money.
我在 PayPal 学到的一件事是,你知道谁抱怨得最响、带着最多虚假的义愤吗?是骗子。这是一个信号。
One of the things I learned at PayPal was you know who complains the loudest and with the most amount of fake righteous indignation? The fraudsters. It's a tell.
所以,如果一家商业公司像联邦政府这样运作,它会立刻破产。它会被退市。高管会被逮捕。
So, if a commercial company operated the way the federal government is, then it would immediately go bankrupt. It would be delisted. The officers would be arrested.
美国最年长的人是114岁。所以可以说,如果年龄在115岁或以上,那要么是假的,要么就该进《吉尼斯世界纪录》。而且我们不应该给婴儿发贷款。
The oldest American is 114. So, safe to say if their age is 115 or above, they're fake or they should be in the Guinness Book of World Records. And we should not be giving out loans to babies.
五角大楼很久没有通过审计了。我是说,听起来很疯狂。他们每年会损失200亿、300亿美元,而且他们真的不知道钱去哪儿了。
The Pentagon has not passed an audit in a very long time. I mean, it's crazy as it sounds. They will lose $ 20, $30 billion a year and they literally don't know where it went.
资源与出处
- 视频在 YouTube 收看
- 档案silicon-valley.tech 档案页本页视频与文稿数据来自 Elon Musk Archive
- 精读本篇精读 Markdown 版