Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be honest—I grew up in a State Department or USAID family (I won’t reveal which for anonymity). My father was in a technical supervisor role, and we lived all over the world. From my firsthand experience, I can say that the lifestyle was far beyond anything we could have had in the U.S., even if we were wealthy.

We basically had our mortgage covered back home by renting out our house while we lived overseas, where our housing was fully paid for. And we weren’t just living in normal homes—these were massive houses with staff: maids, gardeners, and drivers. It was a completely different world. We also traveled frequently, and vacations were either heavily subsidized or fully covered through various allowances. We attended elite American schools that, back home, were only accessible to the ultra-rich, but for us, they were fully funded by U.S. taxpayers.

It was a great lifestyle, no doubt. But it often felt like a fantasy, like a long-term vacation rather than real life. My dad, who was at the equivalent of a GS-15 level, later admitted to me that he only did about 30 minutes of actual work a week. The real purpose of many Americans stationed in these countries seemed more about maintaining a U.S. presence rather than truly making an impact. Embassy life was filled with social events, networking, and parties—it felt like an exclusive club, completely detached from the struggles of the local populations USAID was supposedly there to help.

From my perspective, USAID and similar government programs do fund important projects, but there’s also an enormous amount of waste. The sheer amount of money spent on maintaining the American presence abroad—on housing, benefits, and lifestyles—makes you question whether these funds could be better used elsewhere.

I’m not saying that every single person in USAID is doing nothing, but from what I saw growing up, it was a system that provided an incredibly cushy deal for those involved. It raises the question: how much of this is actually about development, and how much is just about sustaining a privileged American presence overseas?

such candor is rare. thank you

+1

The wildest part to me is her dad talking literally about hours of work. Truly outlier.

Did your dad talk to you about his work hours?

I call BS on that. She has no idea what her Dad did or how much he worked or how important his work was.

Yeah the story is BS. No diplomat is going to say they only work half an hour a week when everything they do, particularly socially, is "work."

Well, to my Dad, the work was the technical task he did once a week, which was like 30 minutes. The rest was waiting for cables, socializing, etc. If you want to call the later work, he worked 10 hours a day. He also ended up drinking a lot because of all the socializing and idle time as he didn't need to do much technical work that required focus.

So you grew up in Europe 30-40 years ago with an alcoholic diplomat dad who really milked his position for all he could. Cool story bro.

Tell me what this has to do with the attempted illegal closure of USAID in 2025?

If you don’t understand the connection between my real-life experience and why USAID is being shut down, and instead just want to reduce it to labeling my father, then you’re missing the point entirely. This isn’t about one person—it’s about a system that, for decades, functioned more like a taxpayer-funded party than an efficient aid organization. The reality is that this kind of waste, excess, and detachment from actual development work was always unsustainable. The jig is up. If you refuse to see that and want to dismiss firsthand experiences as irrelevant, then you’re just contributing to the ignorance that allowed it to last this long.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^they apparently were granted a security clearance today

Only by fiat. They have not actually been investigated or properly cleared.

What does that mean?

Sounds like an interim security clearance

No, it does not.

Source: I have one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be honest—I grew up in a State Department or USAID family (I won’t reveal which for anonymity). My father was in a technical supervisor role, and we lived all over the world. From my firsthand experience, I can say that the lifestyle was far beyond anything we could have had in the U.S., even if we were wealthy.

We basically had our mortgage covered back home by renting out our house while we lived overseas, where our housing was fully paid for. And we weren’t just living in normal homes—these were massive houses with staff: maids, gardeners, and drivers. It was a completely different world. We also traveled frequently, and vacations were either heavily subsidized or fully covered through various allowances. We attended elite American schools that, back home, were only accessible to the ultra-rich, but for us, they were fully funded by U.S. taxpayers.

It was a great lifestyle, no doubt. But it often felt like a fantasy, like a long-term vacation rather than real life. My dad, who was at the equivalent of a GS-15 level, later admitted to me that he only did about 30 minutes of actual work a week. The real purpose of many Americans stationed in these countries seemed more about maintaining a U.S. presence rather than truly making an impact. Embassy life was filled with social events, networking, and parties—it felt like an exclusive club, completely detached from the struggles of the local populations USAID was supposedly there to help.

From my perspective, USAID and similar government programs do fund important projects, but there’s also an enormous amount of waste. The sheer amount of money spent on maintaining the American presence abroad—on housing, benefits, and lifestyles—makes you question whether these funds could be better used elsewhere.

I’m not saying that every single person in USAID is doing nothing, but from what I saw growing up, it was a system that provided an incredibly cushy deal for those involved. It raises the question: how much of this is actually about development, and how much is just about sustaining a privileged American presence overseas?

such candor is rare. thank you

+1

The wildest part to me is her dad talking literally about hours of work. Truly outlier.

Did your dad talk to you about his work hours?

I call BS on that. She has no idea what her Dad did or how much he worked or how important his work was.

Yeah the story is BS. No diplomat is going to say they only work half an hour a week when everything they do, particularly socially, is "work."

Well, to my Dad, the work was the technical task he did once a week, which was like 30 minutes. The rest was waiting for cables, socializing, etc. If you want to call the later work, he worked 10 hours a day. He also ended up drinking a lot because of all the socializing and idle time as he didn't need to do much technical work that required focus.

So you grew up in Europe 30-40 years ago with an alcoholic diplomat dad who really milked his position for all he could. Cool story bro.

Tell me what this has to do with the attempted illegal closure of USAID in 2025?

If you don’t understand the connection between my real-life experience and why USAID is being shut down, and instead just want to reduce it to labeling my father, then you’re missing the point entirely. This isn’t about one person—it’s about a system that, for decades, functioned more like a taxpayer-funded party than an efficient aid organization. The reality is that this kind of waste, excess, and detachment from actual development work was always unsustainable. The jig is up. If you refuse to see that and want to dismiss firsthand experiences as irrelevant, then you’re just contributing to the ignorance that allowed it to last this long.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be honest—I grew up in a State Department or USAID family (I won’t reveal which for anonymity). My father was in a technical supervisor role, and we lived all over the world. From my firsthand experience, I can say that the lifestyle was far beyond anything we could have had in the U.S., even if we were wealthy.

We basically had our mortgage covered back home by renting out our house while we lived overseas, where our housing was fully paid for. And we weren’t just living in normal homes—these were massive houses with staff: maids, gardeners, and drivers. It was a completely different world. We also traveled frequently, and vacations were either heavily subsidized or fully covered through various allowances. We attended elite American schools that, back home, were only accessible to the ultra-rich, but for us, they were fully funded by U.S. taxpayers.

It was a great lifestyle, no doubt. But it often felt like a fantasy, like a long-term vacation rather than real life. My dad, who was at the equivalent of a GS-15 level, later admitted to me that he only did about 30 minutes of actual work a week. The real purpose of many Americans stationed in these countries seemed more about maintaining a U.S. presence rather than truly making an impact. Embassy life was filled with social events, networking, and parties—it felt like an exclusive club, completely detached from the struggles of the local populations USAID was supposedly there to help.

From my perspective, USAID and similar government programs do fund important projects, but there’s also an enormous amount of waste. The sheer amount of money spent on maintaining the American presence abroad—on housing, benefits, and lifestyles—makes you question whether these funds could be better used elsewhere.

I’m not saying that every single person in USAID is doing nothing, but from what I saw growing up, it was a system that provided an incredibly cushy deal for those involved. It raises the question: how much of this is actually about development, and how much is just about sustaining a privileged American presence overseas?

such candor is rare. thank you

+1

The wildest part to me is her dad talking literally about hours of work. Truly outlier.

Did your dad talk to you about his work hours?

I call BS on that. She has no idea what her Dad did or how much he worked or how important his work was.

Yeah the story is BS. No diplomat is going to say they only work half an hour a week when everything they do, particularly socially, is "work."

Well, to my Dad, the work was the technical task he did once a week, which was like 30 minutes. The rest was waiting for cables, socializing, etc. If you want to call the later work, he worked 10 hours a day. He also ended up drinking a lot because of all the socializing and idle time as he didn't need to do much technical work that required focus.

So you grew up in Europe 30-40 years ago with an alcoholic diplomat dad who really milked his position for all he could. Cool story bro.

Tell me what this has to do with the attempted illegal closure of USAID in 2025?

If you don’t understand the connection between my real-life experience and why USAID is being shut down, and instead just want to reduce it to labeling my father, then you’re missing the point entirely. This isn’t about one person—it’s about a system that, for decades, functioned more like a taxpayer-funded party than an efficient aid organization. The reality is that this kind of waste, excess, and detachment from actual development work was always unsustainable. The jig is up. If you refuse to see that and want to dismiss firsthand experiences as irrelevant, then you’re just contributing to the ignorance that allowed it to last this long.

Anonymous wrote:just a regular person but is the news reports of wasteful and over the top spending accurate and true? Never heard of USAID until this week.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^they apparently were granted a security clearance today

Only by fiat. They have not actually been investigated or properly cleared.

What does that mean?

Sounds like an interim security clearance

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be honest—I grew up in a State Department or USAID family (I won’t reveal which for anonymity). My father was in a technical supervisor role, and we lived all over the world. From my firsthand experience, I can say that the lifestyle was far beyond anything we could have had in the U.S., even if we were wealthy.

We basically had our mortgage covered back home by renting out our house while we lived overseas, where our housing was fully paid for. And we weren’t just living in normal homes—these were massive houses with staff: maids, gardeners, and drivers. It was a completely different world. We also traveled frequently, and vacations were either heavily subsidized or fully covered through various allowances. We attended elite American schools that, back home, were only accessible to the ultra-rich, but for us, they were fully funded by U.S. taxpayers.

It was a great lifestyle, no doubt. But it often felt like a fantasy, like a long-term vacation rather than real life. My dad, who was at the equivalent of a GS-15 level, later admitted to me that he only did about 30 minutes of actual work a week. The real purpose of many Americans stationed in these countries seemed more about maintaining a U.S. presence rather than truly making an impact. Embassy life was filled with social events, networking, and parties—it felt like an exclusive club, completely detached from the struggles of the local populations USAID was supposedly there to help.

From my perspective, USAID and similar government programs do fund important projects, but there’s also an enormous amount of waste. The sheer amount of money spent on maintaining the American presence abroad—on housing, benefits, and lifestyles—makes you question whether these funds could be better used elsewhere.

I’m not saying that every single person in USAID is doing nothing, but from what I saw growing up, it was a system that provided an incredibly cushy deal for those involved. It raises the question: how much of this is actually about development, and how much is just about sustaining a privileged American presence overseas?

such candor is rare. thank you

+1

The wildest part to me is her dad talking literally about hours of work. Truly outlier.

Did your dad talk to you about his work hours?

I call BS on that. She has no idea what her Dad did or how much he worked or how important his work was.

Yeah the story is BS. No diplomat is going to say they only work half an hour a week when everything they do, particularly socially, is "work."

Well, to my Dad, the work was the technical task he did once a week, which was like 30 minutes. The rest was waiting for cables, socializing, etc. If you want to call the later work, he worked 10 hours a day. He also ended up drinking a lot because of all the socializing and idle time as he didn't need to do much technical work that required focus.

So you grew up in Europe 30-40 years ago with an alcoholic diplomat dad who really milked his position for all he could. Cool story bro.

Tell me what this has to do with the attempted illegal closure of USAID in 2025?

If you don’t understand the connection between my real-life experience and why USAID is being shut down, and instead just want to reduce it to labeling my father, then you’re missing the point entirely. This isn’t about one person—it’s about a system that, for decades, functioned more like a taxpayer-funded party than an efficient aid organization. The reality is that this kind of waste, excess, and detachment from actual development work was always unsustainable. The jig is up. If you refuse to see that and want to dismiss firsthand experiences as irrelevant, then you’re just contributing to the ignorance that allowed it to last this long.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^they apparently were granted a security clearance today

Only by fiat. They have not actually been investigated or properly cleared.

What does that mean?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be honest—I grew up in a State Department or USAID family (I won’t reveal which for anonymity). My father was in a technical supervisor role, and we lived all over the world. From my firsthand experience, I can say that the lifestyle was far beyond anything we could have had in the U.S., even if we were wealthy.

We basically had our mortgage covered back home by renting out our house while we lived overseas, where our housing was fully paid for. And we weren’t just living in normal homes—these were massive houses with staff: maids, gardeners, and drivers. It was a completely different world. We also traveled frequently, and vacations were either heavily subsidized or fully covered through various allowances. We attended elite American schools that, back home, were only accessible to the ultra-rich, but for us, they were fully funded by U.S. taxpayers.

It was a great lifestyle, no doubt. But it often felt like a fantasy, like a long-term vacation rather than real life. My dad, who was at the equivalent of a GS-15 level, later admitted to me that he only did about 30 minutes of actual work a week. The real purpose of many Americans stationed in these countries seemed more about maintaining a U.S. presence rather than truly making an impact. Embassy life was filled with social events, networking, and parties—it felt like an exclusive club, completely detached from the struggles of the local populations USAID was supposedly there to help.

From my perspective, USAID and similar government programs do fund important projects, but there’s also an enormous amount of waste. The sheer amount of money spent on maintaining the American presence abroad—on housing, benefits, and lifestyles—makes you question whether these funds could be better used elsewhere.

I’m not saying that every single person in USAID is doing nothing, but from what I saw growing up, it was a system that provided an incredibly cushy deal for those involved. It raises the question: how much of this is actually about development, and how much is just about sustaining a privileged American presence overseas?

such candor is rare. thank you

+1

The wildest part to me is her dad talking literally about hours of work. Truly outlier.

Did your dad talk to you about his work hours?

I call BS on that. She has no idea what her Dad did or how much he worked or how important his work was.

Yeah the story is BS. No diplomat is going to say they only work half an hour a week when everything they do, particularly socially, is "work."

Well, to my Dad, the work was the technical task he did once a week, which was like 30 minutes. The rest was waiting for cables, socializing, etc. If you want to call the later work, he worked 10 hours a day. He also ended up drinking a lot because of all the socializing and idle time as he didn't need to do much technical work that required focus.

So you grew up in Europe 30-40 years ago with an alcoholic diplomat dad who really milked his position for all he could. Cool story bro.

Tell me what this has to do with the attempted illegal closure of USAID in 2025?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^they apparently were granted a security clearance today

Only by fiat. They have not actually been investigated or properly cleared.

Anonymous wrote:^^they apparently were granted a security clearance today

Anonymous wrote:How DOGE got into USAID - yes, Elon got them into the SCIFs

Security staff initially rebuffed the engineers’ efforts to talk their way into the secure rooms, called sensitive compartmented information facilities (Scifs), because they didn’t have the necessary security clearances. But that evening, Musk phoned a senior official at USAid to demand access for his subordinates, the first of numerous calls to officials and employees of Doge at USAid that have continued into this week.

Inside the building, chaos reigned. Areas that were once declared restricted, with limitations on electronics such as phones and watches, suddenly loosened their security protocols to allow in uncredentialed outsiders. Doge employees were said to obscure their identities to prevent online harassment, a tactic that was repeated at other agencies. And Peter Marocco, the controversial new director of foreign assistance at the state department, was stalking the halls and meeting in private with the Doge employees.

By Friday, things had gone further downhill. After a tense all-hands meeting with senior staff, and outsiders in the sixth-floor conference room, the young engineers rushed around the offices with their laptops, plugging cords into computers and other electronics as they gathered data from the agency.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/05/musk-doge-takeover-usaid