trollslayer · 51-55, M
Can you link the news article?
ViciDraco · 41-45, M
It's a range from a quarter to half, not a full half every year. It's 3 to 7% of annual spending obligations. Similar to someone charging you $100 for something that actually cost you $95. It's bad to be defrauded of that extra five bucks, I won't say that isn't. But taken into context of the overall spend the sticker shock becomes less severe.
Apparently the biggest sources are aid programs left to the states to administer. So the fraud is happening at the state level using federal government funds. If you drill in again, it tends to be companies and corporations at fault more than individual people. For profit hospitals and doctors defrauding Medicaid is a big source.
This means the solution isn't to cut the spending. But to pull these grants under federal administration instead of state administration and set up task forces charged with seeking out corporate and large scale offenders.
As usual it is the people with money and resources abusing the system and then trying to get poor people to take the punishment.
Apparently the biggest sources are aid programs left to the states to administer. So the fraud is happening at the state level using federal government funds. If you drill in again, it tends to be companies and corporations at fault more than individual people. For profit hospitals and doctors defrauding Medicaid is a big source.
This means the solution isn't to cut the spending. But to pull these grants under federal administration instead of state administration and set up task forces charged with seeking out corporate and large scale offenders.
As usual it is the people with money and resources abusing the system and then trying to get poor people to take the punishment.
DogMan · 61-69, M
@ViciDraco So 250-500 Billion is no big deal? Yet the left is having a freaking cow over a 500 million
dollar White house renovation for the country.
So 500 billion of stolen tax dollars isn't worth saving right? Can we raise your taxes to cover it? Because
that is what happens. Look at Minnesota, They had a 1 billion dollar short fall and planned to raise
property taxes to cover it, than they found out that fraud amounted to MORE than that.
Don't you think it would be better to cut back on fraud rather than raise taxes? Or maybe you don't
pay taxes?
dollar White house renovation for the country.
So 500 billion of stolen tax dollars isn't worth saving right? Can we raise your taxes to cover it? Because
that is what happens. Look at Minnesota, They had a 1 billion dollar short fall and planned to raise
property taxes to cover it, than they found out that fraud amounted to MORE than that.
Don't you think it would be better to cut back on fraud rather than raise taxes? Or maybe you don't
pay taxes?
ViciDraco · 41-45, M
@DogMan I did not say it is no big deal. I said the sheer number of of context makes it look bigger than it really is as a portion of spending. If you read my whole post I say that we should tackle it and offered ideas for how to begin doing so.
Fraud is a real issue. But most of the people calling it out do not have real solutions. They want to use fraud as an excuse to cut taxes, claiming it will force the government to find and cut the fraud. But that isn't what happens. The government ends up cutting support and services for poor people.
I am saying that we should tackle fraud. But instead of beginning with tax cuts and removing the most vulnerable from the system, let's focus on the big fish at the top. The big fish have their own lawyers and are more expensive to go after, but they are where the most fraud comes from. That may mean we need short term funding increases to go after them. Fighting fraud might require more taxes in the short term in order to effectively lower them in the long term.
I am presently in the 24% tax bracket. I am in the top 15% of income earners in the nation. I pay taxes. My tax burden is likely higher than the net income of some folks around here.
Fraud is a real issue. But most of the people calling it out do not have real solutions. They want to use fraud as an excuse to cut taxes, claiming it will force the government to find and cut the fraud. But that isn't what happens. The government ends up cutting support and services for poor people.
I am saying that we should tackle fraud. But instead of beginning with tax cuts and removing the most vulnerable from the system, let's focus on the big fish at the top. The big fish have their own lawyers and are more expensive to go after, but they are where the most fraud comes from. That may mean we need short term funding increases to go after them. Fighting fraud might require more taxes in the short term in order to effectively lower them in the long term.
I am presently in the 24% tax bracket. I am in the top 15% of income earners in the nation. I pay taxes. My tax burden is likely higher than the net income of some folks around here.
AdmiralPrune · 46-50, M
Well, how else is he supposed to pay for that ballroom in the Whitehouse?
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
SunshineGirl · 41-45, F
SunshineGirl · 41-45, F
@DogMan Fraud, wasteful spending, public spending that the governing party is ideologically opposed to . . these are all quite different things. DOGE had a free hand to "investigate" everything and anything, and failed dismally, making only a small fraction of the savings it boasted and incompetently undermining many key public services. If you have actual evidence of fraud (as opposed to rumour or insinuation), report, prosecute and be done with it. Otherwise stop banging on.
DogMan · 61-69, M
@SunshineGirl Oh I'm so sorry. It sounds like you were triggered. Take a pill or sumpin.
Are you upset that only the Republicans went after fraud? I think you would be singing a
different tune if the left went after fraud and abuse.
If you have actual evidence of fraud (as opposed to rumour or insinuation),🤣
If you were to research it a little you would find mega evidence of fraud. people are going to
prison over it.
Are you upset that only the Republicans went after fraud? I think you would be singing a
different tune if the left went after fraud and abuse.
If you have actual evidence of fraud (as opposed to rumour or insinuation),🤣
If you were to research it a little you would find mega evidence of fraud. people are going to
prison over it.
SunshineGirl · 41-45, F
@DogMan I think a crack-down on fraud is an excellent idea. But my obvious starting point would be the armies of white collar contractors and middlemen who routinely exploit and overcharge the public sector for private gain. I would look seriously at false accounting for Covid era grants and not accept that this was ok simply because so many businesses were at it. That would really cause a stir.
DogMan · 61-69, M
"During the height of the war in Afghanistan, USAID spent millions of dollars to help Afghans grow crops instead of opium," Ernst posted Monday on X. "The results: opium poppy cultivation across the country nearly doubled, according to the UN."
USAID, as well as the U.S. military, paid farmers to build or rehab miles of irrigation canals in the Helmand province, Afghanistan, during the Obama administration in an effort to persuade the farmers to grow fruits and other plants, The Washington Post reported in 2019. The farmers, however, used the canals to grow poppies.
USAID, as well as the U.S. military, paid farmers to build or rehab miles of irrigation canals in the Helmand province, Afghanistan, during the Obama administration in an effort to persuade the farmers to grow fruits and other plants, The Washington Post reported in 2019. The farmers, however, used the canals to grow poppies.
trollslayer · 51-55, M
@DogMan unfortunately, that kind of corruption has been going on for decades. At times we actually paid people directly to make drugs.