Conservative Economist Scores Big After Betting Almost $350,000 DOGE Would Fail

"Alan Cole, senior economist at the Tax Foundation, took that bet, telling WSJ reporter Richard Rubin how and why he dropped $342,195.63 into a prediction-market wager on the Kalshi platform. Cole said that he looked at the terms of the Kalshi wager and saw an opportunity, because he did not believe anything Musk would do would significantly curtail spending on interest on the national debt or entitlements like Social Security and Medicare, especially as America's population continued to age."

"Musk has seen his approval rating descend as he has taken a more publicly active role politically, plus ongoing criticism and litigation over his management of his social media platform X and support for far-right politics in Europe. He jumped into his work with the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, by waving around a chainsaw on the stage at CPAC in 2025 and then presided over a group of DOGE employees with little to no government experience who fired scores of federal workers, slashed budgets, and eliminated longstanding grants and programs."

"However, contrary to his promise to save $1 trillion, federal government spending actually went up. It all seems somewhat predictable in retrospect, but would you have been willing to bet your life savings last year that this would, in fact, happen?"

Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) promised to cut $1 trillion from federal spending through aggressive measures including mass layoffs and budget slashing. However, federal spending actually increased, contradicting Musk's grandiose claims. Alan Cole, a senior economist at the Tax Foundation, wagered $342,195.63 on a prediction market betting that spending would rise, based on his analysis that DOGE could not meaningfully reduce spending on interest payments, Social Security, and Medicare as the population ages. Cole's bet proved correct, demonstrating that despite Musk's theatrical approach and DOGE's aggressive actions, fundamental budget pressures prevented actual spending reductions.

Read at www.mediaite.com