4 ms·
I found it for you. The number was "about half" of the $100B/year to individuals with no SSN or temp ID, and the source was "the consensus in the room" in a mee
by enragedcacti 2y ago
I found it for you. The number was "about half" of the $100B/year to individuals with no SSN or temp ID, and the source was "the consensus in the room" in a meeting with treasury. I find basically every aspect of the statement to be extremely suspect given the general vagueness of it, to the fact that a good portion of "the room" were likely his people, to Elon's general penchant for stretching the truth, but even if we take it at face value he isn't saying what you think he's saying. it's closer to:
"His team and some higher-ups at Treasury guesstimated that at least half of a very high risk category of payments, making up roughly 1.3% of total entitlement spending, are obvious fraud"
> One is that front line workers, when asked in a safe environment, will give enormous estimates for how much of their payout is fraudulent.
I would love to see a real source for this and what kind of information they were using to make those estimates.
> They don't ask, nobody tells, they don't want to know because they'll be held accountable for it and they fundamentally, ideologically, do not care about waste or inefficiency, viewing it as preferable to even one innocent person not getting their money.
This is a wildly uncharitable interpretation. A more reasonable one, and one that you will see echoed throughout research on this topic, is that enforcement itself needs to go through a cost-benefit analysis. We can always invest more to catch more fraud, but at what point are we spending more money than we are recovering, and what was the human cost of delays or erroneous denials for eligible individuals. The alternative is itself a wasteful mindset that cares more about punishing evildoers than it does about stretching tax dollars or providing for those less fortunate as the law demands.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/elon-musk-alleges-50b-fraud-treasury-judge-blocks-doge-audit https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/elon-musk-alleges-50b-f...
- ModernMech 2y ago> The alternative is itself a wasteful mindset that cares more about punishing evildoers than it does about stretching tax dollars or providing for those less fortunate as the law demands. Yes, I've encountered a person recently on this forum who had taken the position that even a single case of fraud is unacceptable; it's better to waste an infinite amount of money to catch all fraud, than to have a program at all if the alternative is to tolerate any level of fraud. I tried to engage them on the futility of this but they insisted it was a matter of morality to stamp out said fraud, because not doing so encouraged it.