Most people don't spend time with people on Welfare so they don't know that the lifestyle these people have is brutal, and desperate.
I grew up on welfare. I did not even know we were poor.
I don't recall the brutality or desperation. I do remember the free lunch at school and all the programs brought into our project to "help" the poor. In reality many of these programs enriched the people who ran them more than it helped the poor who were targeted.
I distinctly remember a neighborhood cleanup project when I was 8 years old. We were going to spend all morning picking up trash and then get a "free" lunch. After the morning work was done each of us was sent home with one raw hot dog.
Why doesn't the state have a handle on EXACTLY who is geting free taxpayer $$?
You're kidding right? Entire pallets of money, BILLIONS of dollars, simply go missing in a war zone, and big collective YAWN!
A few million here and there to people in this country is BIG FUCKING DEAL! Hunt them down and BURN THEM ALIVE! Anyone who might not have documented things properly STRING THEM UP by their thumbs!
I realize ultra-conservatives hate poor people, I still don't understand why they love terrorists and criminals so much.
I worked in an inventory control unit at a corporation for a brief period. Whenever we'd try to reconcile things, we'd come up MILLIONS of dollars short all over the place. Fairly large pieces of barcoded equipment that nobody could locate. My favorite was a minicomputer late 80's vintage probably 3 racks in size, must have weighed a ton nobody could find.
Let's say you've got a copier that is "worth" $10K on your inventory. You can't find it. Some dumb-shit didn't steal it, it broke down after a few years and they THREW IT IN THE TRASH without telling anyone. Then people leave and by the time inventory is done nobody recalls what happened to that item. Theft or bad paperwork? Was that copier even really worth $10K any more? Well the accountants think so.
Did we fire anyone? Did we even initiate Tiger Team searches for all this missing shit? No, as long as it was "acceptable" levels of loss we didn't bother with it.
It fascinates me how people target "waste". So many contexts where people don't care a bit about waste. But there's always some group that doesn't "deserve" what they are receiving, and who are committing a mortal sin.
No need to CHANGE A FUCKIN' THING. NOTHING TO LOOK AT. NOTHING TO SEE HERE SUCKERS, er, TAXPAYERS.
We have changed the system for you frigging whiners to the tune of that there $28 Billiion.
Going back to Reagan, who turned the mentally ill out on the street to save a few bucks, and Clinton, with his Welfare to Work government employment program, we have done nothing to make the system better, just more costly.
Hookers, and liquor? No, the vast majority of these people are barely surviving.
The reason we have waste is because the system is so complicated that, yes, really bad people can play it.
You would think that our government could have anticipated this considering that that's what american did to the soviets back in 1980's - get them caught up to afghanistan so that they would go broke, collapse and implode.
I am saying that out of total taxes, that the USA pays 3 times as much just on social security, medicare and medicaid than on the department of defense. And that does not include other social spending such as food stamps and education funding.
If 19,000 people were getting $400 a month and that's only 4 percent of welfare recipients, that implies $2,280,000,000 per year on this program, and that there are 475,000 recipients.
The MA budget says it only spent $850M on this program in FY 2012. Sounds like somebody might be fudging numbers to try to argue a case that doesn't really exist.
The state also reports only 160,000 welfare recipients, not 475,000. 160,000 recipients sounds much more in line with that $850M budget number.
If there are only 160,000 recipients, it seems unlikely that there are actually nearly 20,000 cases of fraud (15%, not 4%) "Not being able to locate" someone isn't the same thing as fraud, as this opinion piece implies. Poor people move a lot.
Based on other articles I've found online, the governor's office said that 11,262 of those 19,000 unaccounted for were not receiving benefits, period. So that leaves 7,738 who had moved (forwarding addresses) -- voila, now we see what "4%" actually means.
But, well, 7,738 people receiving $37,142,400 per year who no longer live at the address that they applied for benefits from sounds way less interesting than claiming that there is $91M of welfare fraud going on, doesn't it?
I don't even live in MA and have only visited there once in my life, but I was able to locate these numbers on publicly available websites. You'd think someone trying to argue against a broken system would actually bother to look up some real numbers.
"Not being able to locate" someone isn't the same thing as fraud, as this
opinion piece implies. Poor people move a lot.
If you were a taxpayer here in Mass like I am, would you feel confident that your state is sending out 19000 mailers that are getting returned? I'm sure not. I mean, the state is automatically pushing massive amounts of money electronically to thousands of EBT cards. You'd think they'd know where these people lived, right? Your excuse that "poor people move around alot" is piss poor. If my state is shelling out $400 per month per person on average, I'd sure as shit want them to keep tabs on these folks. Maybe put the onus on the recipient to prove their existence and need for the taxpayer $$ every month? It seems like I'm asking too much.
Why doesn't the state have a handle on EXACTLY who is geting free taxpayer $$?
Why are democrats here in Mass so opposed to welfare reform?
Back in the 90's, mayor Guiliani of NYC did a little welfare reform, and required all welfare recipients to actually show up to pick up their benefits. And what happened? 25% didn't show up. This saved NYC millions in tax payer money. Why can't the democrats do that here in Massachusetts? They can sure find over $275K to send out these mailers to make sure they register to vote(for the Democrat hand that feeds them(wink-wink, nudge-nudge): ... Why would they be opposed to confirming these #'s?
Whether the wasted amount is 91 million or your 'less interesting' 37 million, it's still an absurdly large amount of $$. If the honest # is somewhere between your 37 million, and the Herald's stated 91 million, do you still think there's a major problem? I do. You apparently think everything is cool.
Do you think the democrats running my state should do something, or do you agree w/ them, that hiding this fact (until forced to reveal this via 'Freedom of Information" request by the Boston Herald) is OK. Are you OK w/ my state not working to find/remove 37-91 million in waste and fraud? It seems that my state gov't is more interested in protecting illegal aliens, layabouts (and its vote factory), than it's own citizens it supposedly works for.
I trully wish I had the time to pour through some #'s as diligently as you did. Kudos for that. But that still doesn't solve or white-wash this problem.....My argument is that I prove welfare fraud exists, where libs say it doesn't. They then back-peddle w/ "Well, it's not THAT bad". Yes, it IS that bad. Your tone sounds very similar.
However Welfare is a direct infusion of cash into the economy. The poor spend
all of that money in your local stores.
That is simply an explanation that poor people have trouble saving money because they don't have the funds to save. However, it is not a positive thing that they "spend all of that money." Our society would be much better off if everyone could save 6 months worth of living expenses in savings as any good financial advisor would recommend. Living check to check out of necessity plain sucks.
Ideally all theft would be dealt with harshly and severely whether its contractor in afghanistan, white collar criminals, welfare recepients, thiefs in department stores, etc. To say that one theft is better than another is to justify evil selectively.
Yup, every dollar spent on welfare comes back to the economy somehow.
Can't say the same for those missing billions in Iraqi Bribe Money. Probably much of it was spent building a Gun Range in South Africa, or buying an Apartment in Zurich.
The money spent on afghanistan and irag wars have been a financial knockout against united states, like what marquez did to paquiao. You would think that our government could have anticipated this considering that that's what american did to the soviets back in 1980's - get them caught up to afghanistan so that they would go broke, collapse and implode.
I get that you're a heartless dick, but lets discuss from a basis of facts and figures, not emotions.
Projecting will get you no where, mon frere.... I'm simply asking why my State gov't refuses to look into cleaning up obvious waste. You reply w/ name-calling. nice. Stay classy, Kevin.
Reminds me of the various efforts to enact drug testing for welfare recipients. Which end up spending more on the drug testing than it "saves" as they find out welfare recipients statistically are less drug addicted than general population.
And is the goal to fix the accounting, or justify cutting the welfare budget?
If you want to cut waste do you go after the big budget items, or do you shave pennies off your lunch budget?