Fraud and Welfare Instrumental in Driving GDP

[Musburger]

www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2013/04/24/irs-issued-billions-in-improper-refunds-report-says/htthttp://cnsnews.com/blog/joe-schoffstall/cost-food-stamp-fraud-more-doubles-three-yearsp://

The above links refer you to two very short articles. The first article, from the Washington Post, points out that the IRS sent out an estimated $11.6 billion fraudulent EIC payments in 2012 alone (2011 tax year). The $11.6 billion is 21% of the EIC payments paid out in 2012. A quick calculation shows that total EIC disbursements totaled approximately $55.2 billion in 2012; so some $43.6 billion can be presumed to be legitimate.

The second article states that food stamp fraud (SNAP) has doubled within a few years and is now some $750 million or roughly 1% of the $75 billion annual SNAP program. Much better than the IRS debacle, but nonetheless a troubling trend.

If you've stayed with me so far, you'll want to read
this article (a bit longer) that goes into detail about the drive to find people who qualify for food stamps. It's quite an eye opener. The latter part of the article follows a particular elderly subject who is wrestling whether or not to apply for food stamps. It's quite touching. You'll want to read it. But I want to take some excerpts from the first part of the article and comment on that.

In reply to:

---

---

---

 

[Horn6721]

Before the USSC decision on Citizen United the Unions had a clear path for control of Pols
and they even bragged about it

 

[Musburger]

Yes, but at least there was a balance. The Democrats were in bed with the unions and the Republicans beholden to the large corporations. The ruling basically destroyed the influence of the unions. The Democrats still pay them lip service, but they now court the corporate interests for money just like the Republicans. When push comes to shove, the Democrats will now only feign allegiance to unions.

 

[Bevo Incognito]

But the fraud is not only here but also throughout things like defense procurement etc....

As Libertarians have long realized, we're ******.

 

[Horn6721]

Musb
"The Democrats still pay them lip service to them,"

Gee I think you have to pay more than lip service to get 400 million which is what was estimated the unions spent on BO's election ALONE
not ot mention the union members actual votes

Of course corps gave to the Dems too but not even close to the money and work the Unions did

 

[Musburger]

If you look at who the major contributors to Obama are, among the top or the Too Big to Fail Banks. Democrats are going to get union votes no matter what.

From a historical view point unions once, many years ago, served a beneficial purpose. At one time in America, workers were exploited. Child labor, hazardous working conditions, low pay, etc. were common place. Unions helped to change that. This was a public good.

Over the years, unions became corrupt and power swayed too far in the opposite direction. Bloated pension obligations and restrictions to entry for qualified applicants caused great harm. The US automobile industry, once the greatest in the world, nearly imploded.

In the private sector, the power has once again reversed so that now the corporations are once again in charge. Illegal immigration and the ability to off shore production gave corporations the upper hand over unions as well as lower public opinion due to the corrupt practices of unions.

The public sector is a different story. For example it's not uncommon for rank and file police and firemen to bring in well over $100K annually, and retire after 20 years receiving pensions over $70,000. That's nuts. It's unaffordable and cities are beginning to find themselves in the same predicament as the Detroit auto makers were in.

 

[Musburger]

Very true. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been loaned into the economy (a tax on our future) as a result of fraud by defense contractors.

 

[Mr. Deez]

Unions tend to support Democrats more out of fear of Republicans than out of enthusiasm for Democrats. They are the Democratic Party's *****. They give the Democrats money, and the Democrats do just enough to keep them from disengaging altogether.

Democratic victories don't give unions free rein to force their agenda into law. If it did, the Taft-Hartley Act would have been repealed when Democrats have held power in Washington. A Democratic victory only gives the unions a seat at the table so they don't get completely hammered at will by the business community.

A Republican victory means the unions are almost irrelevant. They don't get a seat at the table. If they're lucky, they're allowed to serve coffee to those who do have a seat at the table.

 

[HornHuskerDad]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[majorwhiteapples]

Citizens United led to the Housing Collapse? Please Explain?

Illegal Immigration and Big Business never existed how many times have you been told this, you do not know what the hell you are talking about. You never saw illegal immigrants working at GM or any manufacturing plant in the north......illegal immigration is unskilled labor not big business labor, the ignorance and typical liberal trying to force round blame in a square truth. sad oh so sad......

 

[texas_ex2000]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Musburger]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[majorwhiteapples]

You are a joke, and nothing but, who lobbied and lobbied to loosen the restrictions on the mortgages? Who and what politico's were the one's that promoted it and said if you don't do this your a racist? This has been proven over and over on this website and it I am not listening to propoganda, I watched the testimonies of Boxer, Frank, and half dozen other liberal wastoids in congress. Bush and McCain both tried to halt the process and were shot down because they were racists, that is cold hard fact!! Not proposganda, you should look at whose propoganda you are reading.

The relaxing of mortgages started in what administration? It had absolutly nothing to do with Citizens United.

People like you just make me want to vomit at what you spew and blame it is so incomprehnsible that people could be lacking this much common sense.

 

[Gone To Texas]

David Walker for President. Too bad he didn't get that web-based nomination in 2012. Part of his diagnosis of our perilous fiscal situation is that the government spends the vast majority of the annual budget on consumption (welfare, SS, medical care, other cash subsidies) rather than investment (education, R&D, infrastructure)... just as this article points out. The biggest chunk that we do manage to spend on "investment" (military machinery) gets blown up, usually in the Middle East, so the return is quite poor.

We need to spend less overall obviously, but also re-balance spending away from consumption which is a vicious cycle and toward investment, which is more virtuous for sustaining growth in the economy. /daydream

 

[CanaTigers]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Musburger]

In reply to:

---

---