5 ms·

I wonder how the budget cuts to R&D will affect the replication crisis? It's not like all this money was going to authentic, well-intentioned pursuers of the t

I wonder how the budget cuts to R&D will affect the replication crisis? It's not like all this money was going to authentic, well-intentioned pursuers of the truth. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01266-x https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-01266-x

almosthere 2y ago
The reality is that US AID money went to any NGO that had mechanisms to pipe some percentage back to Act Blue as cash and hidden through donors like my mom that donated once and had her record in there 20 times. Mostly facilitated by corrupt lawyers there.
- lolcatzlulz 2y ago
  Interesting. Any source beyond the EO? Can't find anything about this.
  - j_walter 2y ago
    Not sure about the USAID part, but ActBlue has been suspected of illegal fundrasing activities for a long time. Googling will find a lot of stories similar to the one above. "Mark Block, former chief of staff to Republican 2012 presidential candidate Herman Cain, alleges that a total of $884.38 given in his name and without his knowledge between May and October was designed to circumvent federal election law and may be part of a larger scam involving tens of thousands of unwitting donors." https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/is-actblue-in-legal-peril https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/is-actblue-in-lega... "An 88-year-old retired Yale University professor, for example, supposedly made 7,539 donations for a total of $213,163, according to FEC records." https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/01/08/elderly-democrats-say-thousands-donations-actblue-were-made-fraudulently-their-names/ https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/01/08/elderly-democrats-say...
    - acdha 2y ago
      Your first quote isn’t on the page you referenced but the New York Post’s coverage of a lawsuit brought by a Republican activist – not exactly a neutral party – and he didn’t include ActBlue in his lawsuit which is going after a specific person identified only by their American Express card number, no doubt recognizing that the burden would be much higher to prove that ActBlue was colluding with rather than being victimized by whoever that was. Similarly, your second quote is from a different Republican activist. His data and methodology don't appear to have been independently reviewed, and it doesn’t sound like there’s been any independent review of what he told people to get them to sign affidavits or verification of their claims, all but the first of which are small (it would not be the first someone elderly forgot about clicking on a link or signing up for a recurring charge), much less establishing that ActBlue condoned that activity. The underlying problem here is that there aren’t higher standards for donations and because we don’t have a national digital identity system and the super court has found that political spending is close to speech in terms of the protections it deserves, it’s not clear how much more could even possibly be required.
- acdha 2y ago
  Do you have any evidence of that? It seems unlikely that they would keep this out of court if it was true.
  - soco 2y ago
    It ran last week every night on FoxNews, what more evidence do you need? </s>
genter 2y ago
I think everyone is this country agrees that there is some corruption everywhere, and isn't opposed to cleaning that up. The complaint against Trump is that he's "solving" everything by just burning it down.
- j_walter 2y ago
  Government waste has been known for decades and people want it cleaned up. However the same people we have trusted to clean it up are part of the very system that has allowed it to continue. Take a close look at something like funding for the homeless in big cities like LA or Portland and you will find the $ amount per homeless person to be way higher than it should be. You have companies that insert themselves into the government system that do nothing but drain the money that should be going to help the people it's suppose to serve, like the homeless, and every year the problem gets worse and they need more money. People are tired of the lack of accountability for results and ever constant requests for more money.
  - const_cast 2y ago
    While this is all true, you've sort of pointed out what the problem is here: the private sector. Conservative policies consistently "outsource" public services to the private sector, allowing corruption and greed to grow. When things are done publicly, they're very efficient. We don't do that here. We outsource steps A-X to private companies which outsource to other private companies which all essentially launder government funds. At each "hop", there is a massive loss, because each party needs to turn a healthy profit. In addition, each "hop" introduces communication barriers, which further drives inefficiency and even results in failures. Doing it all under one roof is just good sense. The American Republicans are explicitly against this, and will dismantle it whenever possible. They're not actually "starving the beast". They're just taking the beast's food and giving it to their buddies, who have no intention of helping the public. The unfortunate reality is that simply cutting funds doesn't do what we think it will. DOGE will cut funds to service X but service X still needs to be done. Now, it will be mostly conducted by the private sector at 10x the cost, and will be paid for by government contracts. Congratulations, everything is worse.

almosthere 2y ago

The reality is that US AID money went to any NGO that had mechanisms to pipe some percentage back to Act Blue as cash and hidden through donors like my mom that donated once and had her record in there 20 times. Mostly facilitated by corrupt lawyers there.

lolcatzlulz 2y ago
Interesting. Any source beyond the EO? Can't find anything about this.
- j_walter 2y ago
  Not sure about the USAID part, but ActBlue has been suspected of illegal fundrasing activities for a long time. Googling will find a lot of stories similar to the one above. "Mark Block, former chief of staff to Republican 2012 presidential candidate Herman Cain, alleges that a total of $884.38 given in his name and without his knowledge between May and October was designed to circumvent federal election law and may be part of a larger scam involving tens of thousands of unwitting donors." https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/is-actblue-in-legal-peril https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/is-actblue-in-lega... "An 88-year-old retired Yale University professor, for example, supposedly made 7,539 donations for a total of $213,163, according to FEC records." https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/01/08/elderly-democrats-say-thousands-donations-actblue-were-made-fraudulently-their-names/ https://www.dailysignal.com/2025/01/08/elderly-democrats-say...
  - acdha 2y ago
    Your first quote isn’t on the page you referenced but the New York Post’s coverage of a lawsuit brought by a Republican activist – not exactly a neutral party – and he didn’t include ActBlue in his lawsuit which is going after a specific person identified only by their American Express card number, no doubt recognizing that the burden would be much higher to prove that ActBlue was colluding with rather than being victimized by whoever that was. Similarly, your second quote is from a different Republican activist. His data and methodology don't appear to have been independently reviewed, and it doesn’t sound like there’s been any independent review of what he told people to get them to sign affidavits or verification of their claims, all but the first of which are small (it would not be the first someone elderly forgot about clicking on a link or signing up for a recurring charge), much less establishing that ActBlue condoned that activity. The underlying problem here is that there aren’t higher standards for donations and because we don’t have a national digital identity system and the super court has found that political spending is close to speech in terms of the protections it deserves, it’s not clear how much more could even possibly be required.
acdha 2y ago
Do you have any evidence of that? It seems unlikely that they would keep this out of court if it was true.
- soco 2y ago
  It ran last week every night on FoxNews, what more evidence do you need? </s>

genter 2y ago

I think everyone is this country agrees that there is some corruption everywhere, and isn't opposed to cleaning that up. The complaint against Trump is that he's "solving" everything by just burning it down.

j_walter 2y ago
Government waste has been known for decades and people want it cleaned up. However the same people we have trusted to clean it up are part of the very system that has allowed it to continue. Take a close look at something like funding for the homeless in big cities like LA or Portland and you will find the $ amount per homeless person to be way higher than it should be. You have companies that insert themselves into the government system that do nothing but drain the money that should be going to help the people it's suppose to serve, like the homeless, and every year the problem gets worse and they need more money. People are tired of the lack of accountability for results and ever constant requests for more money.
- const_cast 2y ago
  While this is all true, you've sort of pointed out what the problem is here: the private sector. Conservative policies consistently "outsource" public services to the private sector, allowing corruption and greed to grow. When things are done publicly, they're very efficient. We don't do that here. We outsource steps A-X to private companies which outsource to other private companies which all essentially launder government funds. At each "hop", there is a massive loss, because each party needs to turn a healthy profit. In addition, each "hop" introduces communication barriers, which further drives inefficiency and even results in failures. Doing it all under one roof is just good sense. The American Republicans are explicitly against this, and will dismantle it whenever possible. They're not actually "starving the beast". They're just taking the beast's food and giving it to their buddies, who have no intention of helping the public. The unfortunate reality is that simply cutting funds doesn't do what we think it will. DOGE will cut funds to service X but service X still needs to be done. Now, it will be mostly conducted by the private sector at 10x the cost, and will be paid for by government contracts. Congratulations, everything is worse.