DOGE finds over a billion-a-week in fraudulent SS payments

Nordberg said:
What a bunch of lies. DOGE will, of course be fair and honest. You blind-ass Trumpys believe every ridiculous thing the Trump cabal says. Praise the end of the American experiment and the installation of the plutocracy. The wealthy have won and you dumb shits think it will help you.
Click to expand...
So, you'd rather have the graft, fraud, waste, and insane spending continue, would you?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
In the latest finding by DOGE, over $100 billion in payments a year are being made to persons--presumably--with no social security number, taxpayer ID number, or other identifying documentation on record. Of that, Treasury workers say that at least $50 billion--a billion a week--is paid out to fraudulent claims. This has been ongoing, and if it's even remotely true, first it's insane, and second, there are lots of people in government jobs that need to be fucking fired on the spot for letting it happen.
Click to expand...
So Musk admits that it is sometimes reasonable to pay checks to entities that do not have Social Security numbers listed, but he guesses that half the time it is fraud... Guesses without evidence.

Well, it should be easy to prove. Pick a thousand of the checks and investigate them. That can usually be done in less than a week, so if Musk is competent, he has already done it. Musk should have 500 proven cases of fraud already...

And yet there are no proven cases of fraud. Once again, Musk is claiming easily provable cases of fraud, that should have been caught earlier, and then cannot prove the cases of fraud.
 
Walt said:
So Musk admits that it is sometimes reasonable to pay checks to entities that do not have Social Security numbers listed, but he guesses that half the time it is fraud... Guesses without evidence.

Well, it should be easy to prove. Pick a thousand of the checks and investigate them. That can usually be done in less than a week, so if Musk is competent, he has already done it. Musk should have 500 proven cases of fraud already...

And yet there are no proven cases of fraud. Once again, Musk is claiming easily provable cases of fraud, that should have been caught earlier, and then cannot prove the cases of fraud.
Click to expand...
That's just a fallacy fallacy used to make another fallacy, one of denying the antecedent.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
That's just a fallacy fallacy used to make another fallacy, one of denying the antecedent.
Click to expand...
There is an argument that "lack of evidence is not evidence", but we have to wonder if the evidence is as easy to find as Musk claims, why does he have none?
 
Walt said:
There is an argument that "lack of evidence is not evidence", but we have to wonder if the evidence is as easy to find as Musk claims, why does he have none?
Click to expand...
You started with a fallacy, and then proceeded to use it to make your argument. Where did your claim that "half the time it is fraud" come from? The fraud rate is likely far lower than that, the size of it notwithstanding.

You then proceed to use that fallacious argument to make a demand for proof and then assert that Musk can't do that proving him wrong and his claims a lie.

It is just one big fallacy from end to end on your part.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Where did your claim that "half the time it is fraud" come from?
Click to expand...
It is not my claim, but rather Musk's claim. I believe it is close to 0% of the time fraud. That would help explain the zero fraud cases found.

Musk claims there are $100 billion checks without Social Security numbers associated with them, that half of them are fraud, and that makes a billion a week in fraud. I ask why can't he prove any cases of fraud, if it is so much, and so easily found.

T. A. Gardner said:
You then proceed to use that fallacious argument to make a demand for proof and then assert that Musk can't do that proving him wrong and his claims a lie.
Click to expand...
If there was easily found fraud, Musk would be proving it now.
 
Walt said:
It is not my claim, but rather Musk's claim. I believe it is close to 0% of the time fraud. That would help explain the zero fraud cases found.

Musk claims there are $100 billion checks without Social Security numbers associated with them, that half of them are fraud, and that makes a billion a week in fraud. I ask why can't he prove any cases of fraud, if it is so much, and so easily found.


If there was easily found fraud, Musk would be proving it now.
Click to expand...
There's way more fraud than that, but nowhere near 50%. Direct fraud amounts to an estimated 1 to 2% with quite a bit more being perpetrated on recipients second hand. Now, that's based on known and reported fraud, not fraud that's gone undetected...

Medicare / Medicaid fraud on the other hand runs about 7 to 10%.

Probably the most fraud riddled federal agency right now is the Navajo Housing Authority. The authority gets about $96 million in funding a year and somehow manages to only have about 8,500 homes to manage while building about 100 or less homes a year. The estimate is the Authority needs to build an additional 34,000 homes. But the unit cost of a home built by them is nearly $750,000 in a housing market where the average new home sells for about $62,000.

reason.com

The Most Wasteful Government Agency You've Never Heard Of

The Navajo Housing Authority has a long and storied history of waste, fraud, and abuse of federal funds.
reason.com reason.com
 
T. A. Gardner said:
There's way more fraud than that, but nowhere near 50%. Direct fraud amounts to an estimated 1 to 2% with quite a bit more being perpetrated on recipients second hand. Now, that's based on known and reported fraud, not fraud that's gone undetected...
Click to expand...
Let's say 2% fraud, and half a percent overhead. If you raise the overhead(people who detect fraud), you can catch more of the fraud. So if you raise the overhead by half a percent, you can catch half the fraud, and reduce overall waste by half a percent.

If that is true, then everything Musk has said is fake. First off, we need to increase overhead to reduce waste. More importantly, there really is not much waste out there. We are certainly not going to get 30% cuts without cutting benefits to people.

SOOOO.... People on Social Security, do you want your benefits cut by a third?
 
Walt said:
Let's say 2% fraud, and half a percent overhead. If you raise the overhead(people who detect fraud), you can catch more of the fraud. So if you raise the overhead by half a percent, you can catch half the fraud, and reduce overall waste by half a percent.

If that is true, then everything Musk has said is fake. First off, we need to increase overhead to reduce waste. More importantly, there really is not much waste out there. We are certainly not going to get 30% cuts without cutting benefits to people.

SOOOO.... People on Social Security, do you want your benefits cut by a third?
Click to expand...
“More importantly, there really is not much waste out there.”

Did you really write this, Walter? Really?

Thank the Grand Architect that you are not in charge of finding waste and fraud.

You post some dumb stuff, Walter, but this takes the prize, Walter.
.
 
Walt said:
Let's say 2% fraud, and half a percent overhead. If you raise the overhead(people who detect fraud), you can catch more of the fraud. So if you raise the overhead by half a percent, you can catch half the fraud, and reduce overall waste by half a percent.

If that is true, then everything Musk has said is fake. First off, we need to increase overhead to reduce waste. More importantly, there really is not much waste out there. We are certainly not going to get 30% cuts without cutting benefits to people.

SOOOO.... People on Social Security, do you want your benefits cut by a third?
Click to expand...
That's not happening, tard.
 
Earl said:
“More importantly, there really is not much waste out there.”

Did you really write this, Walter? Really?
Click to expand...
There really is not enough waste out there to make a real difference in the budget. We either cut benefits, or deal with paying the benefits.
 
Walt said:
Let's say 2% fraud, and half a percent overhead. If you raise the overhead(people who detect fraud), you can catch more of the fraud. So if you raise the overhead by half a percent, you can catch half the fraud, and reduce overall waste by half a percent.

If that is true, then everything Musk has said is fake. First off, we need to increase overhead to reduce waste. More importantly, there really is not much waste out there. We are certainly not going to get 30% cuts without cutting benefits to people.

SOOOO.... People on Social Security, do you want your benefits cut by a third?
Click to expand...
You forgot the Law of Large Numbers.

www.statology.org

Law of Large Numbers: Definition + Examples

An explanation of the law of large numbers, including a formal definition and several examples.
www.statology.org www.statology.org

If Social Security fraud is at just 2%, and annual payouts are $1.4 trillion dollars, that equates to $280 billion in annual fraud. It isn't going to cost $1.4 billion-a-year to hunt down and reduce or catch much of that fraud. Even if it did, and you were able to eliminate say $28 billion of it, (10%), it'd be worth the cost in overhead.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
If Social Security fraud is at just 2%, and annual payouts are $1.4 trillion dollars, that equates to $280 billion in annual fraud.
Click to expand...
Your math is off by a factor of 10. 2% of $1.4 trillion is $28 billion. So let's say with an extra $7 billion in spending on overhead(staff to track down the fraud) we can find $14 billion in fraud, that would be $7 billion in net savings. It sounds like a lot, but over 330 million people, that is about $21 each.

But it is something. We would have to ramp up hiring, and we could save some money. Sadly, we are going the opposite direction. trump wants less overhead, and more fraud.

T. A. Gardner said:
Even if it did, and you were able to eliminate say $28 billion of it, (10%), it'd be worth the cost in overhead.
Click to expand...
Again, 10% of $28 billion is $2.8 billion. That would be about $2 per American.

I agree even that would be worth the cost in overhead. Sadly, trump and Musk disagree with us. They are all about cutting the overhead, and increasing the fraud.
 
Diesel said:
Oh my fucking gawd.

There is no such thing as a DEMOCRAT PARTY. A Democrat is a person. The adjective you're looking to describe the party is DEMOCRATIC. You are truly a fucking idiot. You get dumber every fucking day. I mean that both sincerely and with regret because you were one of, like, 3 MAGAts that used to be able to form a cogent argument. Now you're trash just like the rest of them.

I know you're very, very old. Do you remember when this Democrat vs. Democratic thing started and why? Don't lie, Terry the Republic Pussy.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure you know what he's talking about even if he calls y'all the "Democrat Party"... Being pedantic is not a virtue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top