Current events discussion

[shredder1 10+ year member]

What's with you right-wingers being so anti-fact, anti-evidence, anti-proof, anti-science, anti-education?

Maybe because the "facts" "evidence" "science" and "education" have been so twisted not to mention mainstream reporting.
I don't hate people who have differing views but when they try to force feed their reality onto others it becomes tiresome. Like really tiresome man.

For someone who has looked up my post count and more, you should already know. I posted it AGAIN just a few days ago.

I did read it, but wasn't sure if it was investigator or prosecutor. The way you argue I'd wager its some type of litigator working for the .Gov in your state.
And no... I didn't have to look up your post count to know this thread is flush with your posts. With +27K responses the odds are I'm on point.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Maybe because the "facts" "evidence" "science" and "education" have been so twisted not to mention mainstream reporting.

Excellent claims. Can you share some data on that?

I don't hate people who have differing views but when they try to force feed their reality onto others it becomes tiresome. Like really tiresome man.

You mean liek the right-wing echo chamber endlessly promulgating the lies that Trump is the successful savior of the country? or maybe Trump's own force-fed reality, that his followers devour?
Maybe government forcing religious mores on a country that is not supposed to be subjected to that by the government?

Don't confuse views/opinions/beliefs/feelings with realities. Others here do that, and it makes them look really dumb.

I did read it, but wasn't sure if it was investigator or prosecutor. The way you argue I'd wager its some type of litigator working for the .Gov in your state.
And no... I didn't have to look up your post count to know this thread is flush with your posts. With +27K responses the odds are I'm on point.

You didn't look up my post count, but you know how many posts I have, based on my activity in the thread?
That's a pretty suspect claim.

I investigate AND prosecute. I am not a litigator, nor am I law enforcement.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Lol... Mr Minnesota speaks... what exactly is your function at work?

He's investigates & prosecutes welfare fraud. Does that bring some clarity...

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Speaking of fraud:

When Elon Musk vowed late last year to lead a “department of government efficiency” (Doge), he claimed it would operate with “maximum transparency” as it set about saving $2tn worth of waste and exposing massive fraud.

Today, with Musk out of the White House, Doge having cut only a tiny fraction of the waste it promised, and dozens of lawsuits alleging violations of privacy and transparency laws, much of what the agency has done remains a mystery.

The effects of Doge’s initial blitz through the federal government – which included dismantling the US Agency for International Development (USAID), embedding staffers in almost every agency and illegally firing people en masse – are still playing out. Contrary to Musk’s promises, Doge’s success is vague and tough to quantify. Measuring the full impact and determining whether the agency even exists as a centralized entity anymore is difficult, complicated by an ongoing effort from the government to block disclosure of documents, which is itself a symptom of the chaos that the department created.

We still don’t really know what Elon Musk’s Doge actually did

Calculating the actual savings and impact of the bulldozing US department that vowed to cut $1tn in waste is difficult

www.theguardian.com

The crypto did about as well as the department named after it.

 

[shredder1 10+ year member]

I investigate AND prosecute. I am not a litigator, nor am I law enforcement.

In Minnesota no less... really? Do you spend all your time crossing all your "T's and dotting the "I's"?

Minnestoa is bad enough, wait till Illinois or California get looked at. The state agencies are either tied up in minutiae or willfully blind or complicit... or any combination of the 3.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

In Minnesota no less... really? Do you spend all your time crossing all your "T's and dotting the "I's"?

Minnestoa is bad enough, wait till Illinois or California get looked at. The state agencies are either tied up in miniature or willfully blind or complicit... or any combination of the 3.

I spend my time investigating, stopping, preventing, and prosecuting when possible.

Here's the thing about fraud: If states spent the money it would take to prevent it on the front end, people would be bitching about the expense. You'd be talking about a minimum of quadrupling the welfare workforce, so that workers could do deep-dives on every case and every application they worked on.

In some states. workers have as many as 1500 cases they are responsible for. Some are touched annually, some are touched every six months, some are touched monthly. How much time do you think a worker can spend on each of those 1,500 cases in a 2,000 hour work year?
It's actually financially far cheaper to catch it on the back end than it is to employ the number of people needed to prevent it on the front end.

Did you ever notice that if you need a cop, one is only 15 minutes away? Wouldn't crime prevention be better if every city had a cop on every corner 24/7, ready to act?
Sure. But think of the cost.

 

[shredder1 10+ year member]

Speaking of fraud:

When Elon Musk vowed late last year to lead a “department of government efficiency” (Doge), he claimed it would operate with “maximum transparency” as it set about saving $2tn worth of waste and exposing massive fraud.

Today, with Musk out of the White House, Doge having cut only a tiny fraction of the waste it promised, and dozens of lawsuits alleging violations of privacy and transparency laws, much of what the agency has done remains a mystery.

The effects of Doge’s initial blitz through the federal government – which included dismantling the US Agency for International Development (USAID), embedding staffers in almost every agency and illegally firing people en masse – are still playing out. Contrary to Musk’s promises, Doge’s success is vague and tough to quantify. Measuring the full impact and determining whether the agency even exists as a centralized entity anymore is difficult, complicated by an ongoing effort from the government to block disclosure of documents, which is itself a symptom of the chaos that the department created.

We still don’t really know what Elon Musk’s Doge actually did

Calculating the actual savings and impact of the bulldozing US department that vowed to cut $1tn in waste is difficult

www.theguardian.com

The crypto did about as well as the department named after it.
View attachment 69760

I'm curious where you got this from?

The Guardian maybe?

I'm all about understanding the other side of the argument but don't you think another more reliable source would better advance your argument?

 

[shredder1 10+ year member]

I spend my time investigating, stopping, preventing, and prosecuting when possible.

Here's the thing about fraud: If states spent the money it would take to prevent it on the front end, people would be bitching about the expense. You'd be talking about a minimum of quadrupling the welfare workforce, so that workers could do deep-dives on every case and every application they worked on.

In some states. workers have as many as 1500 cases they are responsible for. Some are touched annually, some are touched every six months, some are touched monthly. How much time do you think a worker can spend on each of those 1,500 cases in a 2,000 hour work year?
It's actually financially far cheaper to catch it on the back end than it is to employ the number of people needed to prevent it on the front end.

Did you ever notice that if you need a cop, one is only 15 minutes away? Wouldn't crime prevention be better if every city had a cop on every corner 24/7, ready to act?
Sure. But think of the cost.

Good argument, but its been so long since real accountability has occurred at any meaningful scope. Let the criminals cry... crime and fraud is supposed to have risk... risk of exposure and consequences.
My argument is its about time something starts happening.

 

[deez283 10+ year member]

You can't make this shit up...
I tell yeah.. I didn't join this thread cause I'm a "Trump" supporter or any of that nonsense.
It was 100% because of one poster in it and I'm sure you all know who I'm talking about.

Pure cringe
pure hypocrisy
pure delusion
pure TDS

Just amazing really, So many times reading these replies and I tell myself "he is just f'ng around.. this can't be real"
But sadly I think it is real, He acts just like my cousin who post about 20 fake news stories a day on facebook since Trump won.. He gets zero likes or replies but here we are 1 year in and he has not missed a day and going strong.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I'm curious where you got this from?

The Guardian maybe?

I'm all about understanding the other side of the argument but don't you think another more reliable source would better advance your argument?

I could probably quote from Trump that DOGE was incredibly effective and saved us trillions.
Would you find that more believable?

here's the problem: TRANSPARENCY. The White House isn't sharing the facts, which the article points out: "ongoing effort from the government to block disclosure of documents,"

Do you think the author is lying when he says stuff like that? As if it wouldn't be easy enough to check?

DOGE is claiming savings for funding they 'canceled' that was already approved by Congress, and they have no legal authority to cancel. You think that's not "suspect"? I sure do.

 

[deez283 10+ year member]

I spend my time investigating, stopping, preventing, and prosecuting when possible.

Here's the thing about fraud: If states spent the money it would take to prevent it on the front end, people would be bitching about the expense.

Would it cost over 9 billion?

 

[shredder1 10+ year member]

TRANSPARENCY. The White House isn't sharing the facts, which the article points out: "ongoing effort from the government to block disclosure of documents,"

Kinda like the Biden White House keeping him in the cornfield away from anyone except reporters reading scripted questions?

Or the gov and press narrative over covid? I'm betting the "guardian" had some hard hitting truthful articles.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

You can't make this shit up...
I tell yeah.. I didn't join this thread cause I'm a "Trump" supporter or any of that nonsense.
It was 100% because of one poster in it and I'm sure you all know who I'm talking about.

Pure cringe
pure hypocrisy
pure delusion
pure TDS

Just amazing really, So many times reading these replies and I tell myself "he is just f'ng around.. this can't be real"
But sadly I think it is real, He acts just like my cousin who post about 20 fake news stories a day on facebook since Trump won.. He gets zero likes or replies but here we are 1 year in and he has not missed a day and going strong.

You joined it because I'm here? And you stayed because I'm here? Interesting.
Since you're participating, go ahead and post two examples from each of your bullet points.

Show me some of the "fake" stuff that I post, just like your cousin does.

Or, be like the other idiots who claim incessantly that I "lie", but have never been able to produce ONE example.
Your response will show if you should be lumped in with those idiots. Or not.

 

[deez283 10+ year member]

Do you think the author is lying when he says stuff like that? As if it wouldn't be easy enough to check?

Oh like BBC editing Trump speeches while the real one could be seen on youtube?

It didn't stop them.. See that's the thing, People with TDS are not gonna fact check someone saying
Trump is a POS..

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Kinda like the Biden White House keeping him in the cornfield away from anyone except reporters reading scripted questions?

Or the gov and press narrative over covid? I'm betting the "guardian" had some hard hitting truthful articles.

You;re tapdancing around the factual information in the article, and my previous question of how you think an author or their job title somehow changes the facts that they are reporting on.

So I'll ask again: Does the fact that Alex Jones reports the DJIA hit 48.367 today, change the fact that the DJIA hit 48,367 today? Would that 48.367 in some way be more factual if Fox news told you the number? Less factual if CNN told you the number?