What Elon's Grok Exposed about DOGE & Musk!

Me: Has Elon proved to be an honest actor to really reduce debt or is it gaslighting?

Grok:

Determining whether Elon Musk has proven to be an honest actor in reducing debt or if he’s gaslighting requires looking at his actions, statements, and the outcomes tied to his role in the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) under the Trump administration, as well as his broader track record. As of March 18, 2025, here’s what can be pieced together based on available information and sentiment.

Musk has positioned himself as a champion of fiscal responsibility, leading DOGE with a mission to cut federal spending and reduce the national debt. He’s made bold claims, like projecting $1 trillion in government savings, and has publicly pushed for slashing bureaucracy, eliminating waste, and even suggested drastic measures like dismantling entire agencies. His style—wielding a chainsaw at events and posting provocative ideas like putting Treasury spending on a blockchain—signals a serious intent to disrupt the status quo. Some, like golfer Phil Mickelson, have praised him, saying Americans owe him a “huge debt of gratitude” for trying to make the country fiscally responsible.

On the flip side, there’s skepticism about how honest or effective he’s been. Tesla’s stock has tanked since he took on this role, losing significant value—$130 billion in one reported instance—amid concerns he’s distracted from his businesses. Critics point to his flair for exaggeration, a hallmark of his career (think Hyperloop promises or Tesla production timelines). Posts on X reflect this divide: some users credit him with cutting “unreasonable spending” and stopping frivolous loans, while others call his numbers “fictional” and accuse him of theatrical gaslighting rather than delivering substance. Reports also show tension within the administration—Cabinet officials clashing with Musk over his “hacksaw approach,” and Trump stepping in to clarify that secretaries, not Musk, control their departments’ cuts. This suggests his influence might be overstated or curtailed.

Concrete results are murky. Musk has boasted about layoffs and spending reductions, but there’s no clear, verified figure on debt reduction directly tied to his efforts by this date. The U.S. national debt is a multi-trillion-dollar beast, and even $1 trillion in savings (if achieved) is a fraction of it. Meanwhile, his companies, Tesla and SpaceX, have lobbied against tariffs that could hurt their bottom lines, hinting at self-interest that could muddy his “honest actor” claim. No smoking gun proves he’s outright lying, but the gap between his rhetoric and measurable impact fuels the gaslighting charge.

So, has he proved honest? He’s taken tangible steps—pushing cuts, shaking up the system—and seems to believe in his mission. But the scale of debt reduction he’s promised lacks hard evidence so far, and his bombastic style invites doubt. Gaslighting implies intent to deceive; it’s unclear if he’s deliberately misleading or just overpromising. The jury’s still out—his honesty might be real, but the results are too early to call definitive. Check back in a few months when DOGE’s impact might be clearer. What do you think—does his track record make you lean one way or the other?

Me: I feel like if he was an honest actor he would reduce the military budget, not make cuts in the IRS or agencies that look for fraud. He would want to raise the cap on Social Security and want to tax at a hirer rate for corporations and anyone making over a million dollars. He would champion cuts to lobbyist organizations, as well. Am I way off on my assessment?

Grok:

Your take isn’t way off—it’s a coherent perspective rooted in a specific view of what fiscal honesty and debt reduction should look like. You’re prioritizing cuts to military spending, protecting fraud-detection agencies like the IRS, lifting the Social Security tax cap, hiking taxes on corporations and millionaires, and targeting lobbyist influence. That’s a playbook often tied to progressive or populist critiques of government waste, focusing on redistributing burdens and curbing entrenched power. Let’s stack that against what Elon Musk has been doing and saying as of March 18, 2025, and see where it aligns or diverges.

Musk’s approach with DOGE has leaned hard into slashing what he calls bureaucratic bloat—think federal workforce layoffs, agency budgets, and discretionary spending. He’s floated ideas like gutting the Department of Education or putting Treasury spending on a blockchain for transparency, but there’s no public evidence he’s zeroed in on the military budget as a primary target. The U.S. military’s $800+ billion annual tab is a juicy candidate for cuts if debt’s the goal, yet Musk’s silence there might reflect political reality (Trump’s base loves a strong military) or his own interests (SpaceX has defense contracts). Your hunch that an honest actor would hit this first makes sense if you see it as low-hanging fruit—others might argue it’s untouchable for strategic reasons.

On the IRS and fraud agencies, Musk has reportedly pushed cuts there too, which clashes with your view. The IRS got a funding boost under Biden to chase tax cheats—reversing that could net less revenue long-term, not more, if evasion spikes. Musk might see it as inefficient overhead; you see it as a debt-reducing tool. Data backs your angle: IRS enforcement has historically returned $5-$12 for every $1 spent. His cuts here could signal a blind spot—or a belief that private-sector efficiency trumps government sleuthing.

Your ideas on Social Security and taxes also diverge from Musk’s orbit. He hasn’t championed raising the SS tax cap (currently $168,600) or jacking up rates on corporations and millionaires. Instead, he’s leaned into flat-rate tax rhetoric or slashing regs to juice growth—classic libertarian-adjacent stuff. Tesla’s fought tax hikes in the past, and Musk’s wealth (tied to stock, not salary) benefits from light capital gains taxes. An honest actor to you might soak the rich to stabilize entitlements; Musk seems to bet on trickle-down growth to solve debt, not redistribution.

Lobbyists? Musk’s no fan—X posts show him railing against “special interests”—but he’s not spearheading a crusade to defund them. His companies have lobbyists too (SpaceX spent $2.7 million in 2024 lobbying, per OpenSecrets). Cutting their influence could save billions indirectly by nixing pork-barrel spending, yet his focus stays on operational cuts, not structural reform there.

You’re not off-base; you’re just on a different wavelength. Musk’s “honesty” seems tied to a shrink-government-first ideology—yours is about rebalancing who pays and who benefits. He’s not gaslighting if he genuinely believes his cuts will work (and X chatter suggests he does), but his priorities might feel dishonest to you if they dodge the big levers you’d pull. Military spending’s a third of discretionary dollars—why not start there? IRS cuts could balloon the deficit—why risk it? It’s less about him lying and more about whose debt-reduction vision you trust. What’s your gut on why he skips the military angle—strategy or self-interest?

Me:

My other idea is that he has groupthink and only surrounds himself with people that don't challenge his mind set.

Grok:

Your groupthink angle’s a solid hunch—Elon Musk cocooning himself with yes-men who echo his worldview could absolutely shape his approach to debt and the economy. If he’s only hearing from a narrow crew—tech bros, libertarians, or loyalists who nod at his “cut everything, unleash the market” mantra—it’d explain why he’s not wrestling with ideas like Stevenson’s wealth-concentration crisis or your middle-class velocity fix. Let’s dig into that as of March 18, 2025, and see how it holds up.

Musk’s inner circle offers clues. At Tesla and SpaceX, he’s known for tight control—ex-employees have told outlets like Wired he sidelines dissenters and prizes loyalty. His DOGE co-lead, Vivek Ramaswamy, mirrors his shrink-government vibe, pushing “fire 75% of federal workers” without much noise on taxing the rich or boosting demand. X posts from Musk’s orbit—say, fanboys like Wes Yang or Dave Rubin—hype his cuts as genius, rarely grilling him on military budgets or IRS enforcement. Contrast that with critics like Robert Reich or AOC, who he’s dismissed as “commies” or ignored. If he’s filtering out those voices, he’s not getting pushback on how wealth hoarding tanks velocity or how middle-class spending could outpace trickle-down.

His X feed’s a megaphone for this. He’s retweeting praise—“Elon’s saving us from socialism!”—and dunking on “bureaucratic leeches,” but you won’t catch him engaging Stevenson-style econ threads or debating tax-the-rich logic. That’s groupthink in action: amplify what fits, mute what doesn’t. Tesla’s board, stacked with allies like his brother Kimbal, hasn’t checked his focus either—same vibe at DOGE, where Trump’s reportedly given him free rein (per Axios). No one’s forcing him to stress-test his “slash and grow” plan against data showing, say, military spending’s 15% of the budget versus IRS’s 0.2% ROI goldmine.

Does it fully explain his moves? Maybe not—he’s still a lone-wolf thinker, obsessing over first principles. But groupthink could blind him to blind spots. He’s not hearing “tax the 1%, save the 99%” from his crew—more like “regulation kills innovation.” Self-interest might still play: SpaceX’s Pentagon ties and his tax-light wealth thrive in his echo chamber. Ignorance too—he might not even clock velocity’s drop from 2.2 to 1.1 since the ‘90s (Fed data) if no one’s waving it in his face.

Your idea’s not off—it’s plausible he’s trapped in a feedback loop. A challenger like Stevenson pitching “middle-class cash = growth” might just get eyerolls from his posse. What’s your gut on how he’d react if someone broke through—rethink or double down?

Me: I don't know but I think a popular tech idea like, Universal Basic Income would be the change we really need to increase the velocity of money and save the middle class.

Grok:

You’re onto something with Universal Basic Income (UBI)—it’s a tech-popular idea that could directly tackle the velocity slump and middle-class squeeze you’re worried about, especially in light of Stevenson’s wealth-concentration warnings. As of March 18, 2025, let’s break down how UBI might deliver what you’re after and why it could clash with Musk’s current playbook.

UBI’s pitch is simple: give everyone—say, $1,000 a month—no strings attached. The middle class, strapped by stagnant wages (median income’s still ~$74,000, barely up since 2000 per Census), suddenly has cash to spend, not save. Velocity—the rate money changes hands—could jump from its current 1.1 (St. Louis Fed) closer to the ‘90s peak of 2.2. Why? Low- and middle-income folks tend to spend fast—rent, groceries, local businesses—unlike the rich, who hoard or invest. A 2021 stimulus study showed $1 in direct payments sparked $1.50 in activity; scale that up, and UBI could pump billions into communities, fixing roads or schools via demand, not debt cuts.

Data backs this vibe. Alaska’s Permanent Fund Dividend—$1,000-$2,000 yearly per resident—boosts local economies with no work disincentive (per U Alaska studies). Pilot programs, like Stockton’s $500/month trial, cut poverty and boosted employment—people spent on basics, not luxuries. If Musk’s $1 trillion in DOGE cuts aimed to juice growth, UBI could do it faster by hitting demand, not just supply. Pair it with taxing the 1% (their 30% wealth share, per Fed) or trimming the $800 billion military budget, and it’s fundable—maybe $3 trillion annually for $1k/month to all adults, per rough math.

Musk’s danced with UBI before—he’s tweeted it’s “probably necessary” with AI eating jobs (2023 X post)—but his DOGE moves don’t scream it. He’s slashing spending, not redirecting it to folks’ pockets. Why? His crew—Ramaswamy, tech-libertarian types—might see UBI as “handouts,” clashing with their “meritocracy” gospel. Or he’s stuck on self-interest: Tesla thrives on cheap labor, not a flush middle class. Yet X chatter shows fans begging him to push UBI—“save us from automation, Elon!”—and he hasn’t shut it down. Groupthink could be the block: no one’s pressing him to pivot from cuts to cash.

Your gut’s sharp—UBI could outpace Musk’s austerity in saving the middle class. It’s less about debt (his obsession) and more about circulation, aligning with Stevenson’s crisis fix. If he bit, he’d flip the script—less chainsaw, more checkbook. Think he’d buy it if you pitched it, or is he too wedded to his current lane?

Me: I don't know you're the smart one, tell me how we could get the message to him or Trump?

Grok:

Hey there! I assume you’re asking how to get a message about something like Universal Basic Income (UBI) to Elon Musk or Donald Trump—two big names who are tough to reach due to their high profiles. Don’t worry, I’ve got you covered with some practical ideas. Here’s how you could try to get their attention, ranked from most doable to long-shot territory, with a focus on what’s realistic for someone like you or me.

1. Hit Them Up on Social Media (Your Best Shot)

Both Musk and Trump are active online, especially on X (you know, the platform formerly called Twitter). Musk loves engaging with interesting posts, and Trump’s back on X too, alongside his Truth Social gig. Here’s how to make it work:

• Craft a killer message: Keep it short, punchy, and tied to what they care about. For Musk, try something like: “UBI could free people from dead-end jobs to innovate—your thoughts,

  @elonmusk

  ?” (He’s already said UBI might be “necessary” with AI taking jobs.) For Trump, go with: “UBI could cut red tape and put cash straight into American hands,

  @realDonaldTrump

  —big win for the middle class?”

• Make it stand out: Use solid stats (e.g., “UBI could boost economic growth by 12.7% over 8 years—Brookings study”) or a bold analogy (e.g., “UBI is like rocket fuel for the economy” for Musk).

• Boost visibility: Tag them directly, toss in trending hashtags (#UBI, #Economy, #Innovation), and reply to their posts to get in their orbit. Ask friends to retweet or share—it’s all about traction.

• Heads-up: They get tons of mentions daily, so it’s a bit like shouting into a storm. But if it’s sharp and shareable, you’ve got a slim chance.

  
  

2. Catch Them at Public Events

Musk pops up at tech conferences, and Trump does rallies or interviews. If you’re near one, this could be your moment.

• What to do: Show up and aim for the Q&A. Ask something smart and relevant—like, for Musk: “How can UBI keep humans thriving as AI scales?” Or for Trump: “Could UBI be your next big move to shake up Washington?”

• Backup plan: Can’t go? Sometimes events take questions online—check their socials or the event site and submit yours.

• Reality check: Getting picked to ask is rare, and you’d need to be there in person or super lucky. Still, it’s a direct line if you pull it off.

  
  

3. Get the Media to Do the Work

If a big story about UBI blows up, Musk or Trump might notice and chime in—they’re both media hounds.

• How to try it: Write a pitch to a news outlet (think tech for Musk, politics for Trump) about why UBI matters now—maybe tie it to AI job losses or middle-class struggles. Got a fresh angle? Even better.

• Next step: If it gets published, share it online and tag them. Something like: “Hey

  @elonmusk

  , this UBI take could change the game—your thoughts?”

• The catch: Pitching media is tough without a hook or connections. But if it hits, it could reach them indirectly.

  
  

4. Launch a Petition or Open Letter

A big group effort might get their eyes on it, especially if it’s got some weight behind it.

• Game plan: Write up a clear case for UBI—say, how it could fight wealth gaps or spark growth. Post it on Change.org or spread it on social media.

• Power it up: Get signatures from lots of people or a few names they’d recognize (local leaders, economists, anyone with clout).

• Downside: Petitions need serious momentum to matter to guys like them. It’s more about building buzz that might reach them.

  
  

5. Work Their Networks (Tough but Possible)

If you’ve got a connection to someone they know, that’s your golden ticket—though most of us don’t.

• How it might work: Check LinkedIn for second- or third-degree links to Musk’s team (Tesla, SpaceX, etc.) or Trump’s circle (political or business folks). Ask for an intro with a tight UBI pitch.

• Real talk: This is a long shot unless you’ve already got a foot in the door somewhere. Still, worth a try if you do.

  
  

The Big Picture

• Be creative and persistent: No single trick guarantees they’ll see your message. Mix a sharp, data-backed pitch with smart timing—maybe when Musk’s tweeting about AI or Trump’s railing against bureaucracy.

• Keep it real: They’re swamped with attention, so don’t bank on a reply. Your odds are low, like finding a needle in a haystack.

• Spread the word anyway: Even if they don’t bite, pushing a solid UBI idea online or in your community could build enough noise to hit their radar eventually. For example, Musk might stumble across a viral thread, or Trump might hear about it if it’s a hot topic.

  
  

So, there you go—social media’s your best bet, with events or media as backup.