
Kill the Big Ugly Bill, says Elon Musk as Tesla CEO declares war on Donald Trump's bill
Tesla
and
SpaceX
CEO
Elon Musk
has started a fierce campaign against US President Donald Trump's $4 trillion tax and spending bill, urging Americans to pressure lawmakers to reject it. In a viral post on X, Musk warned that the bill would bankrupt the country, calling it a 'disgusting abomination' and dubbing it the 'Debt Slavery Bill'. On June 4, Musk posted "Kill the Big Ugly Bill," signalling his intent to oppose the bill championed by Trump, who has previously referred to it as a "Big Beautiful Tax and Spending Bill." According to reports, Musk's primary concern is the bill's potential to exacerbate the
national debt
and lead to severe economic consequences.
Elon Musk's Opposition to Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill'
The bill, which extends Trump's 2017 tax cuts, increases defense spending, and raises the national debt ceiling, has drawn criticism from
fiscal conservatives
. Musk, who recently left his role as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), argues that the legislation undermines cost-cutting efforts and could inflate the deficit by $2.5 trillion.
Elon Musk, who has long warned of the national debt as an 'existential threat,' had previously offered only mild critiques of the bill despite his role as an informal adviser to Trump. However, his latest comments mark a dramatic escalation in tone.
Musk urged his 180 million followers to contact their senators and representatives, stating: 'Call your Senator. Call your Congressman. Bankrupting America is NOT ok! KILL the BILL.'
He also shared a photoshopped poster of Quentin Tarantino's 'Kill Bill', replacing the film's title with his anti-bill slogan.
White House says Bill will stimulate US economy
The White House has pushed back against the deficit projections, with officials arguing that the CBO estimates fail to account for the potential
economic growth
spurred by the tax cuts. They claim the bill's provisions will stimulate the economy enough to offset the increased spending. However, Musk's public rebuke highlights growing tensions within Trump's Republican Party over the legislation, which faced a rocky passage through the House due to opposition from both fiscal conservatives and moderates.
The bill's passage has also drawn scrutiny from independent fiscal watchdogs. A recent
CBO report
warned that the tax provisions alone could increase the federal deficit by $3.8 trillion over the next decade, while proposed cuts to social programs like Medicaid and food stamps would only reduce spending by $1 trillion. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a nonpartisan group, estimated the bill could add roughly $3.3 trillion to the national debt over the same period.
AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Abuse of power': Trump admin slaps sanctions on ICC judges over Netanyahu arrest warrant
In a major move, the Trump administration slapped sanctions on four International Criminal Court judges involved in cases tied to Israel and the United States. The judges, Solomy Balungi Bossa (Uganda), Luz del Carmen Ibanez Carranza (Peru), Reine Alapini Gansou (Benin), and Beti Hohler (Slovenia), will face US entry bans and asset freezes under new measures announced by the State Department. Marco Rubio defended the move, calling the ICC actions 'illegitimate' and warning of overreach in prosecuting US and Israeli officials for alleged war crimes. Show more Show less
&w=3840&q=100)

Business Standard
33 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Mediation between two unequals not possible: Tharoor on Trump's claims
Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has said that to suggest one can mediate between two unequals is not possible because there is no equivalence between terrorists and their victims, amid repeated claims by US President Donald Trump that he "helped settle" the tensions between India and Pakistan. Tharoor, currently in the US leading a multi-party delegation on Operation Sindoor, made the comments in response to a question during a conversation at the Council on Foreign Relations here Thursday. "Mediation is not a term that we are particularly willing to entertain. I'll tell you why not. The fact is that this implies, even when you say things like broker or whatever, you're implying an equivalence which simply doesn't exist," Tharoor said. He said there is no equivalence between terrorists and their victims. "There is no equivalence between a country that provides safe haven to terrorism, and a country that's a flourishing multi-party democracy that's trying to get on with its business," he said. "There is no equivalence between a state that is a status quo power that just wants to be left alone by its neighbours, where the neighbours don't agree with us, and a revisionist power that wants to upset the geopolitical arrangements that have existed for the last three-quarters of a century. There is no equivalence possible in these cases, and in these circumstances, to suggest that you can mediate between two unequals is not possible, Tharoor added. Since May 10, when Trump announced on social media that India and Pakistan had agreed to a full and immediate ceasefire after a long night of talks mediated by Washington, he has repeated his claim over a dozen times that he helped settle the tensions between India and Pakistan. He has also claimed that he told the nuclear-armed South Asian neighbours that America would do a lot of trade with them if they stopped the conflict. On being asked how he would characterize the American role in the conflict, Tharoor said he is "guessing to some degree that the American role would have been first of all to keep themselves informed, conversations on both sides, and certainly my government received a number of calls at high levels from the US government, and we appreciated their concern and their interest. He said that at the same time, the US must have been making similar calls at the highest levels to the Pakistan side, and our assumption is that's where, because that's the side that needed persuading to stop this process, that may well have been where their messages really had the greatest effect. But that's guesswork on my part. I don't know what they said to the Pakistanis. Trump repeated the claim as recently as Thursday when during a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in the Oval Office, the US President said that he is very proud" that he was able to stop the conflict between nuclear powers India and Pakistan. I spoke to some very talented people on both sides, very good people on both sides and said that Washington will not do any trade deals with either if you are going to go shooting each other and whipping out nuclear weapons that may be even affect us. Because you know that nuclear dust blows across oceans very quickly, it affects us," Trump said. You know what, I got that war am I going to get credit? I'm not going to get credit for anything. They don't give me credit for anything. But nobody else could have done it. I stopped it. I was very proud of that, Trump added. About two weeks after the horrific April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam in Jammu and Kashmir in which 26 civilians were killed, India launched Operation Sindoor targeting terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir on May 7. India and Pakistan reached an understanding on May 10 to end the conflict after four days of intense cross-border drone and missile strikes. India has been maintaining that the understanding on cessation of hostilities with Pakistan was reached following direct talks between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of the two militaries. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
41 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump's campus crackdown an opportunity for India to create its own Ivy League but it has a rival
With Trump's stricter US immigration policies, experts see India as a potential global education hub. Top universities are improving but face challenges like low funding and limited academic freedom read more As US President Donald Trump intensifies his tough stance on international students, experts say India has a unique opportunity to position itself as a global education hub—though it faces stiff competition from China. According to The Economist, India is home to nearly half of the world's college-age population. Its top universities are improving and gaining recognition, even as the country struggles with low public spending on education and limited academic freedom. Trump's immigration and education policies have made the US a less welcoming destination for foreign students. This shift has opened the door for countries like India to attract global talent—students and researchers who may now be reconsidering their academic futures in the United States. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India's top colleges have a lot working in their favour. In fact, admission rates at the country's most prestigious institutions can dip as low as 0.2%, compared to Ivy League acceptance rates of 3–9%. English language proficiency, a deeply ingrained culture of academic ambition, and a vast youth population give India a competitive edge. Half of the world's university-age population resides in India. Parents instill a strong sense of ambition in their children, and India has an advantage due to its broad English language competence. However, India is currently not listed in the top 100 worldwide league rankings. China, on the other hand, now holds the top spot in numerous polls despite only making it into the worldwide top 100 in the 2010s. China is already actively working to recruit global talent as part of a years-long strategy. To entice Chinese scholars back from the West, China has lavished money on one-time incentives and large research grants during the last decade. When the Trump administration said it would work to 'aggressively revoke' the visas of Chinese students in 'critical fields', Chinese institutions have moved quickly to capitalise. Universities in Hong Kong and Xi'an have announced that they will simplify admissions for Harvard transfer students. An ad from a body affiliated with the Chinese Academy of Sciences welcomed 'talents who have been dismissed by the U.S. NIH,' or National Institutes of Health. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India, by contrast, has the demographic advantage and a growing higher education sector. If it can address key issues in its education system, it has the potential to build its own Ivy League and compete globally in higher education. Money has a significant role in the issue. India has allocated 4.1% to 4.6% of its GDP on education over the last decade. China's spending as a percentage of GDP may be comparable, but its GDP per person is five times that of India. China's intellectual charm offensive is outmatched by India's shortage of rupees. In recent years, more scientists have returned to China, driven in part by government recruiting schemes that promise millions of dollars in financing, as well as housing subsidies and other benefits. China's spending on R&D is currently second only to the United States. Chinese schools such as Tsinghua and Zhejiang University are now consistently ranked among the top in the world for science and technology. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Another concern is intellectual freedom. Indian academics teach from a government-mandated syllabus and are overseen by the University Grants Commission. When planning a conference with overseas colleagues, researchers must obtain authorisation from central ministries, as well as government permission to travel abroad for work. Hiring at public colleges is subject to the whims of the ruling party, as the government monitors top-level selections. India's best shot at building a globally competitive higher education system may lie in the rise of private universities. Two decades ago, fewer than 20 private universities existed; today, there are more than 400, accounting for around a quarter of total enrolment. Many of these are backed by major industrial houses, boast world-class campuses, and are increasingly attracting international faculty. Experts believe these private institutions are poised to outperform their public counterparts, largely due to their greater autonomy. Freed from extensive affirmative action mandates and political interference in faculty appointments, private universities can hire top talent more freely and respond faster to global academic trends. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD If the Indian government can find a way to support private universities without overstepping, India may finally be able to create its own Ivy League, and emerge as a serious player in global higher education.