• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Minnesota nonprofit raided by the Feds — and the FBI claims its records saying it fed 1M children ‘are phony’

Peacenik said:
Why is doge even there? We already had the GAO which did the job where doge failed.

Every dime spent on doge is wasted. The function is already accomplished by the GAO.
Click to expand...
GAO. LOL - Obviously GAO wasn't enough and nobody listened to them nor cared what they say.
 
Visbek said:
It may "seem" that way to you. That doesn't mean it is the case.

Go ahead, show us your proof that fraud is rampant in the non-profit sector.
Click to expand...

What’s your definition of “rampant”? There may not be “rampant” levels of many crimes, yet that’s no reason (excuse?) not to try to prosecute those (allegedly) found to be committing them.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Do you have any evidence that DOGE’s (under $50M/year) cost is more than it’s ‘recommended’ spending reductions?
Click to expand...

National spending is the purview of the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives is overseen by the voters.

If Americans don't like spending levels they need to get better informed and vote accordingly.

That's the way it is supposed to work according to the United States Constitution.

If the Constitution is not keeping up with the times it has a provision to allow it to be Amended.

If spending is "out of control" we could Amend the Constitution.

But it has recently been shown that it is not possible to cut enough spending to balance the budget.

What is needed is more revenue. For that, Congress will have to agree, and the president will have to sign off on, taxing the rich more.

But Republicans control Congress and the WH, so that won't happen, and thus the American debt will be kicked down the road to be paid by everyone in the future some time..

Meanwhile we will continue paying big interest to carry the debt. Money that could be put to far greater use if only Republicans were responsible and lived up to their word to "get our fiscal house in order."
 
dmpi said:
GAO. LOL - Obviously GAO wasn't enough and nobody listened to them nor cared what they say.
Click to expand...
The GAO found this fraud. Doge didn't.

Spending is determined by the House. Vote for Progressives and the budget will get turned around fast. Progressives will tax the rich.

We don't need to fake pretend search for waste. We need more revenue. Tax the rich!
 
Grizzly Adams said:
BUT WHATA-****ING-BOUT?!?!??!!??

I guess when it's other people's money, $250 million could be "small." :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Compared to the billions The Oval Office Swamp Rat has profiteered, yes that’s relatively small.
 
Peacenik said:
National spending is the purview of the House of Representatives. The House of Representatives is overseen by the voters.

If Americans don't like spending levels they need to get better informed and vote accordingly.

That's the way it is supposed to work according to the United States Constitution.

If the Constitution is not keeping up with the times it has a provision to allow it to be Amended.

If spending is "out of control" we could Amend the Constitution.

But it has recently been shown that it is not possible to cut enough spending to balance the budget.

What is needed is more revenue. For that, Congress will have to agree, and the president will have to sign off on, taxing the rich more.

But Republicans control Congress and the WH, so that won't happen, and thus the American debt will be kicked down the road to be paid by everyone in the future some time..

Meanwhile we will continue paying big interest to carry the debt. Money that could be put to far greater use if only Republicans were responsible and lived up to their word to "get our fiscal house in order."
Click to expand...

During Trump’s first term in office $7.8T was added to the national debt, while during Biden’s term in office $8.42T was added to the national debt. Both parties continuously engage in annual federal deficit (stimulus?) spending, since doing so gets congress critters re-elected at a rate of over 90%. If either major political party tried to raise taxes enough to balance the federal “budget” and start to reduce the national debt (“get our fiscal house in order”?) then they would cause a recession and lose support of the donor class.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
What’s your definition of “rampant”?
Click to expand...
Translation: You don't have any evidence to back up your claim. Good to know.

ttwtt78640 said:
There may not be “rampant” levels of many crimes, yet that’s no reason (excuse?) not to try to prosecute those (allegedly) found to be committing them.
Click to expand...
What the what? At no point did I even remotely suggest that fraudulent non-profits should not be investigated or prosecuted. :rolleyes:

Again, I can only assume this means you can't provide evidence for your claim.
 
MTAtech said:
Just firing IRS personnel is estimated to cost $500 million in lost revenue.
Click to expand...

OK, but the ‘root cause’ of that situation is the ridiculous complexity (inefficiency?) of the FIT code. DOGE has no power to fix that.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
During Trump’s first term in office $7.8T was added to the national debt, while during Biden’s term in office $8.42T was added to the national debt. Both parties continuously engage in annual federal deficit (stimulus?) spending, since doing so gets congress critters re-elected at a rate of over 90%. If either major political party tried to raise taxes enough to balance the federal “budget” and start to reduce the national debt (“get our fiscal house in order”?) then they would cause a recession and lose support of the donor class.
Click to expand...
As a reminder, $7 trillion of that was pandemic spending.

In terms of ongoing costs, almost all of that was, drum roll please... Trump's 2017 tax cuts. Biden offset almost all of his non-pandemic spending with tax hikes, better tax code enforcement, and lower Medicare prescription drug prices.

By the way, Clinton was able to balance the budget, with higher tax rates than the US has today, and it didn't cause a recession. 🤔

Conversely, cutting spending also risks a recession, depending on what's cut of course. Most of spending now is on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, defense, and interest on the debt. What do YOU recommend cutting?

Maybe... just maybe... the US could lower deficits by raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations, and cutting defense spending. The evidence is actually very clear that won't cause a recession. What a concept.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
During Trump’s first term in office $7.8T was added to the national debt, while during Biden’s term in office $8.42T was added to the national debt. Both parties continuously engage in annual federal deficit (stimulus?) spending, since doing so gets congress critters re-elected at a rate of over 90%. If either major political party tried to raise taxes enough to balance the federal “budget” and start to reduce the national debt (“get our fiscal house in order”?) then they would cause a recession and lose support of the donor class.
Click to expand...
Progressives would tax the rich more, raise more needed revenue, and start paying down the debt. Vote Progressive next time.

Republicans keep cutting the IRS budget. That's dumb. The properly funded IRS brings in more revenue than is saved by cutting it's funding.

Democrats at least funded the IRS. Neither party will tax the rich more but Progressives will. Vote Progressive next time.
 
Visbek said:
Translation: You don't have any evidence to back up your claim. Good to know.
Click to expand...

“Plenty” (more than enough) isn’t the same as “rampant” (increasing uncontrollably).

Visbek said:
What the what? At no point did I even remotely suggest that fraudulent non-profits should not be investigated or prosecuted. :rolleyes:

Again, I can only assume this means you can't provide evidence for your claim.
Click to expand...

The GAO seems to place the annual loss to fraud amount easily into the realm of “plenty” - whether or not that’s “rampant” (which I never claimed) is a matter of opinion.
 
Visbek said:
As a reminder, $7 trillion of that was pandemic spending.

In terms of ongoing costs, almost all of that was, drum roll please... Trump's 2017 tax cuts. Biden offset almost all of his non-pandemic spending with tax hikes, better tax code enforcement, and lower Medicare prescription drug prices.

By the way, Clinton was able to balance the budget, with higher tax rates than the US has today, and it didn't cause a recession. 🤔

Conversely, cutting spending also risks a recession, depending on what's cut of course. Most of spending now is on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, defense, and interest on the debt. What do YOU recommend cutting?

Maybe... just maybe... the US could lower deficits by raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations, and cutting defense spending. The evidence is actually very clear that won't cause a recession. What a concept.
Click to expand...

The annual federal “budget” deficit was much smaller (as % of GDP) than it has become since then. Clinton also had a republicant congressional majority to accomplish that brief ‘miracle’.
 
Peacenik said:
Progressives would tax the rich more, raise more needed revenue, and start paying down the debt. Vote Progressive next time.
Click to expand...

That’s why so few of them get elected.

Peacenik said:
Republicans keep cutting the IRS budget. That's dumb. The properly funded IRS brings in more revenue than is saved by cutting it's funding.

Democrats at least funded the IRS. Neither party will tax the rich more but Progressives will. Vote Progressive next time.
Click to expand...
 
RedFishBlueFish said:
Our President has a meme coin that any rich country or person can use to bribe him. But you're concerned about a small non-profit corruption scandal? Get your priorities in order.
Click to expand...
What are you going on about? trump was never even mentioned or alluded to in this article...it was about massive fraud in a Minnesota food program and you just wet yourself over trump?

Get a grip before you come onto me about priorities.
 
I'll bet there is a whistleblower somewhere in there.

Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security all have huge incentives for whistleblowers.

I personally know of one corporation that paid over $3 million in a settlement for Medicaid fraud. As part of the settlement, the company had to document annually that every employee nationwide had been educated and reminded about the whistleblower program. The employee who blew the whistle got about $750,000 for their trouble.

The takeaway? DO NOT **** around with federal money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom