On 2/13/2018 2:34 PM, Dove Tail wrote:


Trump's approach to giving people a hand up is to dehumanize and
stigmatize them.

I am aghast at how so many people would deny their neighbors food but
are fine with $96 billion a year worth of corporate welfare and
interest free money for banks.



but his method also eliminates a lot of fraud. They should eliminate
things like soda. Forcing them to actually have food it eliminates some
of the fraud and waste.

Want a good buy on food? I can go out tomorrow and use an EBT card to
buy my steaks and pay the card holder half the value so they can buy
smokes or weed. I know a few people that do that so it is readily
available.

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/13/2018 2:34 PM, Dove Tail wrote:


Trump's approach to giving people a hand up is to dehumanize and
stigmatize them.

I am aghast at how so many people would deny their neighbors food
but are fine with $96 billion a year worth of corporate welfare and
interest free money for banks.



but his method also eliminates a lot of fraud. They should eliminate
things like soda. Forcing them to actually have food it eliminates
some of the fraud and waste.

Do you have reliable statistics on fraud and abuse in the federal food
assistance program? Any idea how many millions or billions of dollars
would need to be spent to create and operate a system to pack and ship
food to people?

It all sounds ridiculous to me, but I don't have the need to manage
what people consume.



Want a good buy on food? I can go out tomorrow and use an EBT card
to buy my steaks and pay the card holder half the value so they can
buy smokes or weed. I know a few people that do that so it is
readily available.


Some people commit crimes, both retailers and beneficiaries. That does
not justify concluding that criminal behavior in the program is
statistically significant.


--
"In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place."

"Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth"

On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:13:49 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/13/2018 2:34 PM, Dove Tail wrote:


Trump's approach to giving people a hand up is to dehumanize and
stigmatize them.

I am aghast at how so many people would deny their neighbors food
but are fine with $96 billion a year worth of corporate welfare and
interest free money for banks.



but his method also eliminates a lot of fraud. They should eliminate
things like soda. Forcing them to actually have food it eliminates
some of the fraud and waste.

Do you have reliable statistics on fraud and abuse in the federal food
assistance program?

USDA says they recovered $57 million from prosecutions in 2012 ($1.2B
since 92) and they are just skimming the tip of the iceberg. They only
analysed transactions at 15,000 locations and actually investigated
4500. There are millions of places that can take EBT cards.
This is just looking at the most blatant fraud, basically EBT cards
for cash in the store. This does not look at simply one crackhead
selling the value on their card to someone else who actually buys food
with it.


Any idea how many millions or billions of dollars
would need to be spent to create and operate a system to pack and ship
food to people?

Dunno but Reagan managed to do it and we did not hear of any huge
problems. They sent the food, in bulk to places that serve the needy
and it was distributed there. This was not "meals on wheels" bringing
boxes of food to your house. My grandfather got his from the senior
center. Anyone who was signed up for their programs got to graze what
they had and take what they needed in some reasonable quantity.

It all sounds ridiculous to me, but I don't have the need to manage
what people consume.



Want a good buy on food? I can go out tomorrow and use an EBT card
to buy my steaks and pay the card holder half the value so they can
buy smokes or weed. I know a few people that do that so it is
readily available.


Some people commit crimes, both retailers and beneficiaries. That does
not justify concluding that criminal behavior in the program is
statistically significant.

It is significant enough that more than half of the entire
investigative staff of USDA works on it along with state and local
LEOs and they say they are seriously understaffed for the job.
They admit to 1.5% fraud rate on a $70 billion a year program (over a
billion a year) but it may be a lot higher because they only look
fraud at the retailer level. Individual card holders are not usually
investigated.

wrote:

On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:13:49 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/13/2018 2:34 PM, Dove Tail wrote:


Trump's approach to giving people a hand up is to dehumanize and
stigmatize them.

I am aghast at how so many people would deny their neighbors food
but are fine with $96 billion a year worth of corporate welfare
and interest free money for banks.



but his method also eliminates a lot of fraud. They should
eliminate things like soda. Forcing them to actually have food it
eliminates some of the fraud and waste.

Do you have reliable statistics on fraud and abuse in the federal
food assistance program?

USDA says they recovered $57 million from prosecutions in 2012 ($1.2B
since 92) and they are just skimming the tip of the iceberg. They only
analysed transactions at 15,000 locations and actually investigated
4500. There are millions of places that can take EBT cards.
This is just looking at the most blatant fraud, basically EBT cards
for cash in the store. This does not look at simply one crackhead
selling the value on their card to someone else who actually buys food
with it.


How about a link to this "data"? Not that I doubt your veracity or
anything like that.




Any idea how many millions or billions of dollars
would need to be spent to create and operate a system to pack and
ship food to people?


Dunno

That is all you needed to say, "You don't know".




but Reagan managed to do it and we did not hear of any huge
problems. They sent the food, in bulk to places that serve the needy
and it was distributed there. This was not "meals on wheels" bringing
boxes of food to your house. My grandfather got his from the senior
center. Anyone who was signed up for their programs got to graze what
they had and take what they needed in some reasonable quantity.

It all sounds ridiculous to me, but I don't have the need to manage
what people consume.



Want a good buy on food? I can go out tomorrow and use an EBT card
to buy my steaks and pay the card holder half the value so they can
buy smokes or weed. I know a few people that do that so it is
readily available.


Some people commit crimes, both retailers and beneficiaries. That
does not justify concluding that criminal behavior in the program is
statistically significant.

It is significant enough that more than half of the entire
investigative staff of USDA works on it along with state and local
LEOs and they say they are seriously understaffed for the job.
They admit to 1.5% fraud rate on a $70 billion a year program (over a
billion a year) but it may be a lot higher because they only look
fraud at the retailer level. Individual card holders are not usually
investigated.


Link?





--
"In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place."

"Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth"

Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:17 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:13:49 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/13/2018 2:34 PM, Dove Tail wrote:


Trump's approach to giving people a hand up is to dehumanize
and stigmatize them.

I am aghast at how so many people would deny their neighbors
food but are fine with $96 billion a year worth of corporate
welfare and interest free money for banks.



but his method also eliminates a lot of fraud. They should
eliminate things like soda. Forcing them to actually have food
it eliminates some of the fraud and waste.

Do you have reliable statistics on fraud and abuse in the federal
food assistance program?

USDA says they recovered $57 million from prosecutions in 2012
($1.2B since 92) and they are just skimming the tip of the
iceberg. They only analysed transactions at 15,000 locations and
actually investigated 4500. There are millions of places that can
take EBT cards. This is just looking at the most blatant fraud,
basically EBT cards for cash in the store. This does not look at
simply one crackhead selling the value on their card to someone
else who actually buys food with it.

How much did they spend on the prosecutions? that should be
subtracted from what they recovered for a 'real' value on the number.
Or rather, how much did you and I as taxpayers spend on the
prosecution effort?


Want a good buy on food? I can go out tomorrow and use an EBT
card to buy my steaks and pay the card holder half the value so
they can buy smokes or weed. I know a few people that do that
so it is readily available.


Some people commit crimes, both retailers and beneficiaries. That
does not justify concluding that criminal behavior in the program
is statistically significant.

It is significant enough that more than half of the entire
investigative staff of USDA works on it along with state and local
LEOs and they say they are seriously understaffed for the job.

That reminds me of the old 'look busy, the boss is coming' stories.

They admit to 1.5% fraud rate on a $70 billion a year program
(over a billion a year) but it may be a lot higher because they
only look fraud at the retailer level. Individual card holders are
not usually investigated.

Not to start yet another usenet tangent or silly flame war or
anything, but, if our government really wanted to 'save money' and
perhaps, show a positive cash flow; there's this pesky plant they
could legalize at the federal level. Various states which already
decided to do it are not doing poorly from a financial perspective,
and contrary to the horror stories/dire predictions before doing so,
the end of the world didn't come. A surplus cash flow arrived
instead. New cruisers, life saving vests, etc for police did. New
state of the art ambulances did. New state of the art schools with
adequate pay for teachers, did. In the states which realized the war
on pot specifically was a total cluster**** of a mistake from the
very beginning. Especially considering the real reason it was
outlawed in the first place, are making money now. Some are able to
balance their budgets and provide as i wrote above, needed gear and
equipment for first responders and a childs education.



--
To prevent yourself from being a victim of cyber
stalking, it's highly recommended you visit he
https://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php
================================================== =
There comes a time when nothing is left but style.

On Wednesday, February 14, 2018 at 6:52:44 PM UTC-5, Diesel wrote:

Wed, 14 Feb 2018 17:35:17 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:13:49 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/13/2018 2:34 PM, Dove Tail wrote:


Trump's approach to giving people a hand up is to dehumanize
and stigmatize them.

I am aghast at how so many people would deny their neighbors
food but are fine with $96 billion a year worth of corporate
welfare and interest free money for banks.



but his method also eliminates a lot of fraud. They should
eliminate things like soda. Forcing them to actually have food
it eliminates some of the fraud and waste.

Do you have reliable statistics on fraud and abuse in the federal
food assistance program?

USDA says they recovered $57 million from prosecutions in 2012
($1.2B since 92) and they are just skimming the tip of the
iceberg. They only analysed transactions at 15,000 locations and
actually investigated 4500. There are millions of places that can
take EBT cards. This is just looking at the most blatant fraud,
basically EBT cards for cash in the store. This does not look at
simply one crackhead selling the value on their card to someone
else who actually buys food with it.

How much did they spend on the prosecutions? that should be
subtracted from what they recovered for a 'real' value on the number.
Or rather, how much did you and I as taxpayers spend on the
prosecution effort?

Law enforcement is rarely performed on a cost basis. If you don't
go after and prosecute the fraud, you wind up with even more fraud,
because people know there is no consequence and pretty soon half
the program could be fraud.







Want a good buy on food? I can go out tomorrow and use an EBT
card to buy my steaks and pay the card holder half the value so
they can buy smokes or weed. I know a few people that do that
so it is readily available.


Some people commit crimes, both retailers and beneficiaries. That
does not justify concluding that criminal behavior in the program
is statistically significant.

It is significant enough that more than half of the entire
investigative staff of USDA works on it along with state and local
LEOs and they say they are seriously understaffed for the job.

That reminds me of the old 'look busy, the boss is coming' stories.

They admit to 1.5% fraud rate on a $70 billion a year program
(over a billion a year) but it may be a lot higher because they
only look fraud at the retailer level. Individual card holders are
not usually investigated.

Not to start yet another usenet tangent or silly flame war or
anything, but, if our government really wanted to 'save money' and
perhaps, show a positive cash flow; there's this pesky plant they
could legalize at the federal level. Various states which already
decided to do it are not doing poorly from a financial perspective,
and contrary to the horror stories/dire predictions before doing so,
the end of the world didn't come.

Maybe not, but there have been some serious side effects in the
states that legalized it. Accidents, fatalities involving people
who are high, a mysterious new illness that hospitals never saw
before. And that's just so far, ie the short term effects. We'll
see what it's like in another 5 or ten years.




A surplus cash flow arrived
instead. New cruisers, life saving vests, etc for police did. New
state of the art ambulances did. New state of the art schools with
adequate pay for teachers, did. In the states which realized the war
on pot specifically was a total cluster**** of a mistake from the
very beginning. Especially considering the real reason it was
outlawed in the first place, are making money now. Some are able to
balance their budgets and provide as i wrote above, needed gear and
equipment for first responders and a childs education.


It's true, the tax revenue has provided a substantial new income stream.
And kept at least some of the revenue inside the US, instead of having
the cash go south of the border.

On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:17:14 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

wrote:

On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 14:13:49 +0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 2/13/2018 2:34 PM, Dove Tail wrote:


Trump's approach to giving people a hand up is to dehumanize and
stigmatize them.

I am aghast at how so many people would deny their neighbors food
but are fine with $96 billion a year worth of corporate welfare
and interest free money for banks.



but his method also eliminates a lot of fraud. They should
eliminate things like soda. Forcing them to actually have food it
eliminates some of the fraud and waste.

Do you have reliable statistics on fraud and abuse in the federal
food assistance program?

USDA says they recovered $57 million from prosecutions in 2012 ($1.2B
since 92) and they are just skimming the tip of the iceberg. They only
analysed transactions at 15,000 locations and actually investigated
4500. There are millions of places that can take EBT cards.
This is just looking at the most blatant fraud, basically EBT cards
for cash in the store. This does not look at simply one crackhead
selling the value on their card to someone else who actually buys food
with it.


How about a link to this "data"? Not that I doubt your veracity or
anything like that.

It was on the first page of a google search. Most was straight from
UDSA, some from other hits.

http://time.com/4711668/history-food-stamp-fraud/

https://www.fns.usda.gov/fraud/what-...ght-snap-fraud
https://www.fns.usda.gov/fraud/what-snap-fraud

That is a start but I also looked at a couple more sites.



It is significant enough that more than half of the entire
investigative staff of USDA works on it along with state and local
LEOs and they say they are seriously understaffed for the job.
They admit to 1.5% fraud rate on a $70 billion a year program (over a
billion a year) but it may be a lot higher because they only look
fraud at the retailer level. Individual card holders are not usually
investigated.


Link?

I gave it to you but one of my best friends was a USDA special agent
for 20 years so I have heard a lot about it.

On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 23:52:40 -0000 (UTC), Diesel
wrote:

USDA says they recovered $57 million from prosecutions in 2012
($1.2B since 92) and they are just skimming the tip of the
iceberg. They only analysed transactions at 15,000 locations and
actually investigated 4500. There are millions of places that can
take EBT cards. This is just looking at the most blatant fraud,
basically EBT cards for cash in the store. This does not look at
simply one crackhead selling the value on their card to someone
else who actually buys food with it.

How much did they spend on the prosecutions? that should be
subtracted from what they recovered for a 'real' value on the number.
Or rather, how much did you and I as taxpayers spend on the
prosecution effort?

There were 100 analysts working on it.
They are GS 9s or 11s ($45k-$65k)
according to the USDA article the numbers come from.

On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 12:35:17 -0500, wrote:

Dunno but Reagan managed to do it and we did not hear of any huge
problems. They sent the food, in bulk to places that serve the needy
and it was distributed there. This was not "meals on wheels" bringing
boxes of food to your house. My grandfather got his from the senior
center. Anyone who was signed up for their programs got to graze what
they had and take what they needed in some reasonable quantity.


My buddy's father volunteered after his retirement at a seniors center and gave me a 5
pound brick of cheese. I was surprised it was quality cheddar. Probably cost about 20
bucks at the store back then, when you could find it. Very good cheese.