“This is the chainsaw for bureaucracy,” he said.

His point was simply that there are serious cuts that need to be made in federal spending. Who could responsibly argue against this? The famous line from Jaws about needing a bigger boat came to mind. As I see it, we’re gonna need a bigger chainsaw. 

In another recent move, Musk had the temerity to ask federal employees to send an email outlining what they had accomplished in the last week, a seemingly pretty reasonable request from any employer. I find it funny that people are so upside down about this. Some people have argued that these emails should be coming from the heads of the government departments. Yet, how often does that happen? The people who run the government could probably learn a few basic lessons in efficient management from entrepreneurs.

Over the past 60 years, the government debt has grown under both political parties almost every single year. Our debt has now reached $36 trillion. When Ross Perot ran for president in 1992, his campaign was directed at the federal debt, which was “only” about $4 trillion.

Federal debt consequences

The possible consequences of our debt are much larger today. This fiscal year, about 39% of your income tax dollars are applied to only paying interest on the debt. This is like having a credit card where you are only making the minimum payment; the debt never goes down. At some point, reasonable creditors (the people and organizations who keep buying our debt—funding us) will recognize that a country that has never been able to reduce its debt may never be able to do so. In the private sector, this is called being bankrupt. Relying on a never-ending supply of not-smart buyers of debt has typically not been a good model to sustain any market. 

Subtracting out personalities and even politics for a moment, who could argue that drastic changes don’t need to be made. Reversing the accumulated economic negligence of the past 60 years will take bold, decisive and incorrect action. That’s right—not every micro decision will be correct. It is part of the cost of having to take larger actions. There will not be a way to perfectly cut expenses when they are so out of proportion. And, some people or organizations will suffer. The diet has to match the dimension of the weight challenge. We have become an undisciplined, bloated organization that has shown zero inclination to change. If people stop lending to us because of our inability to pay down the debt, the consequences would truly be catastrophic because the changes would be stark and immediate. Getting ahead of it before the music stops is plain common sense. 

And, for the good of the country, cuts will need to be made in both social programs and the military. 

It’s important to subtract the person and people from the mission. You may not agree with Musk on the sundry things he tends to comment on and get involved with, but, yes, there is a chainsaw needed and it needs to be a very large one. 

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

Brian Hamilton founded Sageworks (now Abrigo), a since-acquired fintech company that helped business owners translate complex financial information. He also founded the Brian Hamilton Foundation and Inmates to Entrepreneurs, promoting the power of ownership to transform lives, and starred in ABC’s Free Enterprise.

Read more:

• The DOGE-fueled firing of AI experts at the FDA endangers lives and worsens the hospital crisis
• Trump directly contradicts White House over who really runs DOGE, saying he ‘put a man named Elon Musk in charge’
• A veteran of the only successful government reduction effort in 30 years has a warning for Elon Musk: ‘All hell is going to break loose’
• One-third of the contracts DOGE killed saved no money: ‘Like confiscating used ammunition’