Look, Vivek Ramaswamy, saying it will
be fun to take a chainsaw to it. For many who work there, this won't be
fun. But what's the reality?
Do you agree that in principle, efficiency needs to be found?
I agree the government has to get better

at doing what we say we're going to do.
And I think our inability to do that has sort of created the opening for this
dodge and sort of other initiatives that you see coming out of the Trump White
House. Now, there's so many questions about
this.

You have significant conflicts of
interest, especially for Elon Musk. They have established this thing outside
of government. So it's unclear if they really intend to
just rely on executive action or really get involved with Congress.
So there's some questions about whether

they can be effective.
But I do think that there is a real problem behind all of this rhetoric that
needs to be handled with probably more care than the way that Musk and
Ramaswamy are talking about it. Gentlemen, I don't want to be naive to
the fact that people have been probably

trying to make government more efficient
for a little while. So what is it that hasn't been done?
Are we at the level now that this sort of decision not to care, not to be
precise, but actually to just go at it

with a chainsaw, just every other Social
Security number is out? Is that the place that we've gotten
ourselves to? I don't think it has to be.
I think a good analogy might be brush fire.
So I live part time in California and a

very, very high fire risk area.
And I was told when we moved there, you know, back when natives owned the land,
there were 15 trees per acre. Sorry.
Yes, per acre. And now there's 1500.
And so the fires now are bigger and we

can do fire management.
Now we've learned a lot and we can mitigate the worst damage.
But when you haven't cleared out the brush for many years, and I think that
is unfortunately what has happened in our government is that we haven't then
we get these conflagrations that burn

out of control.
I hope we can stop that. But we are going to have some burning
and some of it will end up being healthy over the long run.
It's a difficult situation to be in and I think the public servants here,
Jennifer, feel nervous about this, have

a right to be.
We we heard from Vivek Ramaswamy in that sound bite, but I had an exchange with
him on the social media platform yesterday and is part of that exchange.
I flagged the idea that investors are basically selling out of companies that
are historically main contractors to the

government for a reason.
They think that you know that Mr. Ramaswamy, who calls Uncle Sam not
supposed to be Uncle Sucker, and they think he'll be successful.
I guess that I would just like you to outline the reality of doing that,
canceling long term contracts, looking

at alternate vendors and and ultimately
reducing headcount at government agencies based on your experience having
worked within it. If we do that, there will be damage in
all sorts of ways. There's going to be damage to
our ability to protect our nuclear

Arsenal, for instance.
Michael Lewis writes about this in *The Fifth Risk*. 
It will chill your bones. We do not want that.
On the other hand, we do need some changes and we need when we do those
changes to be thoughtful about

preserving the foundations that this
country is built on. Now, this isn't a Doge proposal, but if
you look at the schedule proposal, for instance, it's not actually addressing
the real problems of being difficult to fire underperformers, for instance.
It's going at the core principles of a

independent civil service that's able to
tell the truth that is hired and fired on the basis of merit.
We need real civil service reform, not schedule reform.

Why the DOGE May Act Like Brushfire

Welcome to the Bloomberg Technology YouTube channel. Subscribe for original series and mini-docs on game-changing technologies, profiles on innovators, live conversations with experts, and breaking technology news & analysis from Bloomberg TV.

Bloomberg Technology

Concerns about government efficiency and proposed drastic changes

Vivek Ramaswamy's suggestion to drastically cut government spending is discussed.

The government's inefficiency is acknowledged, and its potential link to initiatives from the Trump White House is mentioned.

Concerns are raised about potential conflicts of interest and the effectiveness of proposed changes.

The speaker questions the approach of using drastic measures without careful consideration.

The speaker questions whether the current situation necessitates such extreme measures.

Analogies and explanations of the current government situation

A brush fire analogy is used to illustrate the consequences of years of neglect in government.

The analogy highlights the uncontrolled growth of problems due to lack of attention.

The speaker acknowledges that some burning (changes) will be necessary, but hopes to prevent uncontrolled damage.

The speaker notes the nervousness among public servants regarding the proposed changes.

Discussion of the consequences of drastic government restructuring

Investors are selling out of companies that are major government contractors, anticipating changes.

The speaker requests an outline of the reality of canceling long-term contracts and reducing government headcount.

Potential damage to national security, specifically the nuclear arsenal, is highlighted.

The need for thoughtful change while preserving essential foundations is emphasized.

The speaker criticizes proposals that don't address the core issues, such as the difficulty of firing underperformers.

The speaker advocates for real civil service reform, not just schedule reform.