6 ms·

I can't recall when government was so enthusiastic about rooting out fraud. I kind of like this, and I want the government to actively pursue fraud and mismanag

I can't recall when government was so enthusiastic about rooting out fraud. I kind of like this, and I want the government to actively pursue fraud and mismanagement. Feels like it always gets buried in some bureaucratic report.

mcphage 2y ago
> I can't recall when government was so enthusiastic about rooting out fraud. They’re very enthusiastic about rooting out. The fraud is still missing, however.
- _heimdall 2y ago
  Do you expect that there isn't fraud in the $4.92T budget, or that it just hasn't been found or proven publicly yet?
  - acdha 2y ago
    There isn’t anything like the amount of it being promised, and gutting the auditing and staffing for programs is the last thing you’d do if that’s your concern. For example, Musk lied about social security but the records he mentioned were reported by the SSA IG years before. They concluded there wasn’t much fraud because over 98% of the old records weren’t receiving money (and hadn’t made contributions in over 50 years) and it was noted that cleaning them up would cost significantly more than it could possibly save.
  - mcphage 2y ago
    Oh, I’m certain there’s fraud. Now, is there a higher percentage of fraud in what he is cutting—or in what he is leaving behind? That is an open question.
_DeadFred_ 2y ago
They aren't rooting out fraud. They have published their intentions over and over. "We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work" https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/11/books/review/administrative-state-trump-bannon.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/11/books/review/administrati...
turtlesdown11 2y ago
What fraud has this "rooted out"? For you, is it the chart of 100+ aged in Social Security and the lies that Mosk et all push about Social Security? There were the boring "bureaucratic reports" about this issue, which shows there was no fraud. https://apnews.com/article/social-security-payments-deceased-false-claims-doge-ed2885f5769f368853ac3615b4852cf7 https://apnews.com/article/social-security-payments-deceased... Don't let reality bring you down tho!
- _heimdall 2y ago
  There have been plenty of claims of specific waster and fraud found. The problem is knowing what is actually true and accurate right now. Things have been moving quickly and its become such a political firestorm that it's extremely difficult to find unbiased reporting.
  - ModernMech 2y ago
    Therefore, claims of waste and fraud should be assumed false until proven otherwise, and confirmed by an unbiased third party.
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      I'd tweak that slightly. I think they should be considered unproven or unsubstantiated, that doesn't make them false. Assuming they're false because they haven't been nearly immediately proven publicly makes it too easy for those concerns and allegations to be written off and ignored.
      - monocasa 2y ago
        Musk et al have been caught lying several times here. It's fair to treat everything they say in this realm as a lie until proven otherwise, or until they work to build a modicum of trust.
        _heimdall 2y ago
_heimdall 2y ago
I also would be in favor of rooting out fraud and even closing many of the departments we have today (along with getting rid of the legal authority that allowed them). When a strongman figure is in charge yelling one thing, though, I do always look in the other direction. Its like a magic show, look where they want to distract you from rather than what they're pointing at. I'll be very interested to see where this ends up, and a little surprised if its an honest attempt to find fraud and shrink the government or balance the budget.
viraptor 2y ago
Unless there's a detailed report about the specific fraud being stopped, there's nothing. So far it seems people are happy to stop "fraud" as in "things they don't like and won't justify". Tweets don't count.
- _heimdall 2y ago
  It seems like a reasonable opinion for a voter to agree with things they don't like to be stopped though. Maybe the voter doesn't actually care about fraud, but why shouldn't they appreciate having fewer of their tax dollars being spent on things they don't even agree with?
  - relaxing 2y ago
    > why shouldn't they appreciate having fewer of their tax dollars being spent on things they don't even agree with? Democracy doesn’t mean we all agree.
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      Of course. Democracy does mean we make our bed and then have to sleep in it though. Assuming we do have a democracy today (I'd argue that's questionable for many reasons), a majority of voters and electoral college representatives voted for Trump. Trump so far is doing many of the things he said he would do. For better or worse our democracy picked this. If it goes poorly we can only blame ourselves.
      - ModernMech 2y ago
        > Assuming we do have a democracy today (I'd argue that's questionable for many reasons), a majority of voters and electoral college representatives voted for Trump. It's not a winner take all system. If a bunch of racists get elected to office, they can't just claim a "mandate" and declare the Civil Right Act null and void by refusing to enforce it. The President enforces all the laws, even the ones his voters don't support. If he wants to change them, he can sign a bill into law, he can veto a bill, but he can't pick and choose to enforce just Republican passed laws.
TomK32 2y ago
A government run by a convicted felon... It all sounds very shizophrenic.
- _heimdall 2y ago
  I don't like trump and have never voted for him, but I would take someone convicted of financial or business ethics crimes over Andrew Jackson (not a felon, but damn he was a bad person). The "convicted" piece carries a lot of weight here too. Plenty of presidents have done terrible things but were never convicted.

mcphage 2y ago

> I can't recall when government was so enthusiastic about rooting out fraud. They’re very enthusiastic about rooting out. The fraud is still missing, however.

_heimdall 2y ago
Do you expect that there isn't fraud in the $4.92T budget, or that it just hasn't been found or proven publicly yet?
- acdha 2y ago
  There isn’t anything like the amount of it being promised, and gutting the auditing and staffing for programs is the last thing you’d do if that’s your concern. For example, Musk lied about social security but the records he mentioned were reported by the SSA IG years before. They concluded there wasn’t much fraud because over 98% of the old records weren’t receiving money (and hadn’t made contributions in over 50 years) and it was noted that cleaning them up would cost significantly more than it could possibly save.
- mcphage 2y ago
  Oh, I’m certain there’s fraud. Now, is there a higher percentage of fraud in what he is cutting—or in what he is leaving behind? That is an open question.

_DeadFred_ 2y ago

They aren't rooting out fraud. They have published their intentions over and over. "We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work" https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/11/books/review/administrative-state-trump-bannon.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/11/books/review/administrati...

turtlesdown11 2y ago

What fraud has this "rooted out"? For you, is it the chart of 100+ aged in Social Security and the lies that Mosk et all push about Social Security? There were the boring "bureaucratic reports" about this issue, which shows there was no fraud. https://apnews.com/article/social-security-payments-deceased-false-claims-doge-ed2885f5769f368853ac3615b4852cf7 https://apnews.com/article/social-security-payments-deceased... Don't let reality bring you down tho!

_heimdall 2y ago
There have been plenty of claims of specific waster and fraud found. The problem is knowing what is actually true and accurate right now. Things have been moving quickly and its become such a political firestorm that it's extremely difficult to find unbiased reporting.
- ModernMech 2y ago
  Therefore, claims of waste and fraud should be assumed false until proven otherwise, and confirmed by an unbiased third party.
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    I'd tweak that slightly. I think they should be considered unproven or unsubstantiated, that doesn't make them false. Assuming they're false because they haven't been nearly immediately proven publicly makes it too easy for those concerns and allegations to be written off and ignored.
    - monocasa 2y ago
      Musk et al have been caught lying several times here. It's fair to treat everything they say in this realm as a lie until proven otherwise, or until they work to build a modicum of trust.
      - _heimdall 2y ago

_heimdall 2y ago

I also would be in favor of rooting out fraud and even closing many of the departments we have today (along with getting rid of the legal authority that allowed them). When a strongman figure is in charge yelling one thing, though, I do always look in the other direction. Its like a magic show, look where they want to distract you from rather than what they're pointing at. I'll be very interested to see where this ends up, and a little surprised if its an honest attempt to find fraud and shrink the government or balance the budget.

viraptor 2y ago

Unless there's a detailed report about the specific fraud being stopped, there's nothing. So far it seems people are happy to stop "fraud" as in "things they don't like and won't justify". Tweets don't count.

_heimdall 2y ago
It seems like a reasonable opinion for a voter to agree with things they don't like to be stopped though. Maybe the voter doesn't actually care about fraud, but why shouldn't they appreciate having fewer of their tax dollars being spent on things they don't even agree with?
- relaxing 2y ago
  > why shouldn't they appreciate having fewer of their tax dollars being spent on things they don't even agree with? Democracy doesn’t mean we all agree.
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    Of course. Democracy does mean we make our bed and then have to sleep in it though. Assuming we do have a democracy today (I'd argue that's questionable for many reasons), a majority of voters and electoral college representatives voted for Trump. Trump so far is doing many of the things he said he would do. For better or worse our democracy picked this. If it goes poorly we can only blame ourselves.
    - ModernMech 2y ago
      > Assuming we do have a democracy today (I'd argue that's questionable for many reasons), a majority of voters and electoral college representatives voted for Trump. It's not a winner take all system. If a bunch of racists get elected to office, they can't just claim a "mandate" and declare the Civil Right Act null and void by refusing to enforce it. The President enforces all the laws, even the ones his voters don't support. If he wants to change them, he can sign a bill into law, he can veto a bill, but he can't pick and choose to enforce just Republican passed laws.

TomK32 2y ago

A government run by a convicted felon... It all sounds very shizophrenic.

_heimdall 2y ago
I don't like trump and have never voted for him, but I would take someone convicted of financial or business ethics crimes over Andrew Jackson (not a felon, but damn he was a bad person). The "convicted" piece carries a lot of weight here too. Plenty of presidents have done terrible things but were never convicted.