3 ms·
As the article immediately states, that $100 million is a tiny amount of unemployment fraud, and money going to inmates is not a vital part of the article. Why
by boomboomsubban 6y ago
As the article immediately states, that $100 million is a tiny amount of unemployment fraud, and money going to inmates is not a vital part of the article. Why is it the headline? $100 millim going to inmates is more shocking than California had $11 billion in unemployment fraud last year?
- asciident 6y agoAnd California's 11 billion is probably just a fraction of all the unemployment fraud across all the states as this has been a rampant problem. Then add on to that the small business loan fraud, and we're easily at 100+ billion levels across the country. These numbers will be more clear once the tax return filings and small business loan audits start happening. The various stimulus packages have led to fraud at the scale never been seen before, and the cost of amounts more than the entire National Science Foundation budget (8.5 billion) and National Institutes of Health budget (42.5 billion).
- Someone1234 6y agoAlmost feels like a bait-and-switch. The article is actually interesting vis-à-vis ID.me stuff. It is unclear to me why they decided to lead/title with the jail thing, when it isn't explored, in the body of the article. Better article title: "States are now turning to ID.me to prevent jobless fraud claims."