Should Elon Musk Audit Social Security?

[Man With A Plan]

And again, if there's such obvious fraud, the solution isn't to find it. The solution is to CHANGE it.

You audit it, you find some huge fraud in there, then what? Shout "fraud" and get some people who have been committing fraud, and then go back to the same system that allowed the fraud in the first place?

The reality is, the social security fraud that I can see is done by individuals to get a bit more money. You have ten million people getting an extra 10 bucks a month, that's a lot of money for the country. But in reality it's not an issue of an audit.

An audit would be that some individual is taking out huge amounts for themselves.

And then what else do you focus on? Trump is going in and he's using government to enrich the rich. It's the same kind of fraud, and yet... nothing.

The whole government needs to change, a new electoral system to change the mentality of the candidates and the voters.

Right now with FPTP it's incredibly negative and leads to bizarre results. We can see in Germany in 2017 the CDU/CSU got 77% of the seats with 36% of the votes. The Tories in the UK with FPTP won plenty of elections without ever getting more votes than the left wing. And Trump and Dubya both became president for the first time with less votes than the other candidate.

Money is buying people's vote and leading to huge corruption all over the government.

But Trump comes along and says "audit this" instead of saying "let's deal with the root of the problem".... It all sounds like the same crap that politicians use to squeeze more money out of the system for themselves at the expense of others.

You find fraud. You put people in prison for committing fraud. People stop committing fraud. This isn't rocket science.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You find fraud. You put people in prison for committing fraud. People stop committing fraud. This isn't rocket science.

Except it doesn't work like this.

Xi found corruption. He found people who were corrupt, he locked them up or even executed them. The corruption hasn't stopped. All that happened was his supporters remained to be corrupt and his enemies got kicked out of govt positions.

I think Trump is doing exactly the same thing. He looooves dictators.

 

[JGalt]

 

[Man With A Plan]

Except it doesn't work like this.

Xi found corruption. He found people who were corrupt, he locked them up or even executed them. The corruption hasn't stopped. All that happened was his supporters remained to be corrupt and his enemies got kicked out of govt positions.

I think Trump is doing exactly the same thing. He looooves dictators.

Why are you so reluctant to stop Government waste, fraud and corruption, Frigid? Why are you fighting so hard to keep it from even being exposed? Because Trump is the one doing it? That's pathetic at a whole new level!

 

[JGalt]

Why are you so reluctant to stop Government waste, fraud and corruption, Frigid? Why are you fighting so hard to keep it from even being exposed? Because Trump is the one doing it? That's pathetic at a whole new level!

This is what the liberals are fighting for...

 

[frigidweirdo]

Why are you so reluctant to stop Government waste, fraud and corruption, Frigid? Why are you fighting so hard to keep it from even being exposed? Because Trump is the one doing it? That's pathetic at a whole new level!

I think you're not seeing my point.

What I said was, Trump isn't trying to stop govt waste, fraud or corruption. He's just trying to stop the Democrats doing it.

What I said was, change the electoral system, and such things should get better because people will have a proper vote, instead of having to choose which asshole they prefer, have more oversight, be able to kick out parties more quickly, have more choice of which party and which politics they want to represent them.

Trump is NOT doing it. Trump had a nice tax cut that benefited him and his ilk, not the rest of the country, the 90% who don't earn shit loads of money. Everything he did was based around his own ego and rich people. He had 4 years and nothing changed.

 

[Man With A Plan]

I think you're not seeing my point.

What I said was, Trump isn't trying to stop govt waste, fraud or corruption. He's just trying to stop the Democrats doing it.

What I said was, change the electoral system, and such things should get better because people will have a proper vote, instead of having to choose which asshole they prefer, have more oversight, be able to kick out parties more quickly, have more choice of which party and which politics they want to represent them.

Trump is NOT doing it. Trump had a nice tax cut that benefited him and his ilk, not the rest of the country, the 90% who don't earn shit loads of money. Everything he did was based around his own ego and rich people. He had 4 years and nothing changed.

LOL...Seriously? When were the Democrats trying to stop government waste, fraud and corruption? Not only have they not tried to stop it...they're actively trying to stop Trump and Musk from stopping it! Your claim is preposterous!

 

[Man With A Plan]

This is what the liberals are fighting for...

Couldn't have said it better! Thanks, JGalt!

 

[frigidweirdo]

LOL...Seriously? When were the Democrats trying to stop government waste, fraud and corruption? Not only have they not tried to stop it...they're actively trying to stop Trump and Musk from stopping it! Your claim is preposterous!

I didn't say the Democrats were trying to stop it either.

What I'm saying is there are ways of dealing with it properly, and there are ways of using the situation as a political tool.

But it doesn't surprise me that you don't understand what I'm talking about. Most people on this forum have their head so firmly stuck in the partisan Rep v. Dem fight, they can't see beyond this.

 

[Man With A Plan]

I didn't say the Democrats were trying to stop it either.

What I'm saying is there are ways of dealing with it properly, and there are ways of using the situation as a political tool.

But it doesn't surprise me that you don't understand what I'm talking about. Most people on this forum have their head so firmly stuck in the partisan Rep v. Dem fight, they can't see beyond this.

This has zero to do with Republican vs. Democrat, Frigid...this is Common Sense 101! You need to do audits to keep people from wasting money or stealing money. I've run large nightclubs for decades. There's no way I could do that unless I was doing inventories to track product and sales. My employees would know that I didn't have a firm grasp on the business and they would steal me blind. I would have been fired as a Manager and rightfully so if I ran any of those nightclubs like that. Yet you have the Federal Government's Agencies running Trillion dollar budgets and nobody audits them? That's absurd.

 

[frigidweirdo]

This has zero to do with Republican vs. Democrat, Frigid...this is Common Sense 101! You need to do audits to keep people from wasting money or stealing money. I've run large nightclubs for decades. There's no way I could do that unless I was doing inventories to track product and sales. My employees would know that I didn't have a firm grasp on the business and they would steal me blind. I would have been fired as a Manager and rightfully so if I ran any of those nightclubs like that. Yet you have the Federal Government's Agencies running Trillion dollar budgets and nobody audits them? That's absurd.

"Common sense" is that phrase that people use to say "well, what's I'm saying is clearly good". It doesn't mean much.

However you said there needs to be an audit. Now you're saying it needs to be run properly. Two very different things.

The government is different to nightclubs but a lot of the basic principles will apply. Where there is a difference is in oversight. You're the boss, you have oversight. If you're corrupt, then either your boss has that oversight, or you're the owner and you suffer the consequences.

With the US govt, and potentially state governments, there's little oversight.

In Germany there's a political party called the AfD. They were formed in 2013. By 2017 they had got 94 seats and 12.6% of the vote. The reason they were able to rise so quickly and get a sizeable percentage of the seats, is that Proportional Representation is the main way of choosing parties in Germany.

In the UK, there's a political party called UKIP. They were formed in the 1990s. In 2015 they also got 12.6% of the vote. They got one seat from 650 seats. So, about 0.5% of the seats. This is because the UK, like the US, has FPTP.

In Germany, if a political party doesn't do what people want it to do, they can vote someone else.

They don't need to vote negatively. If you're right wing, like the AfD are, and you're angry at the main right wing party, the CDU, then you can vote for the AfD knowing you're not wasting your vote.
In the US you say "I don't like what the Republicans did" and you have three choices. Vote for the Republicans, vote against the Republicans or don't vote.
In Germany you can vote for the CDU, you can vote for the AfD, both of which are voting for the right, you could vote left if you want to. But there's that choice of voting right, and not seeing your vote wasted, unlike in the US.

This means the voters can give proper oversight. It means if they don't like something, there are avenues for voting that punish those political parties without having to vote negatively, without having to vote for a political wing you don't like.

It also means that within your political wing, differences of opinion can be expressed. In the Republican world, you go with what Trump wants, or you vote left wing. Nothing else exists.

This leads to politicians having to listen to what people want. Otherwise they will vote you out.
In the US, the Republicans will NEVER get voted out in many places. And if they do, it's because they're so bad that people are willing to vote Democrat. And in many places, this isn't an option, so the Republican will win in a safe seat no matter what happens.

You want good governance, you need politicians who are listening to the people. With FPTP they don't listen. They do the bidding of the money, because the money wins them the election.

 

[Dekster]

In the case of illegal immigrants, drug addicts/alcoholics, people faking disability who don’t want to work, or other cases of fraud/wasteful spending, I say to Elon “Go for it!”

I have actually met folks on heroin and other drugs, who are on social security. The outrage in favor of cutting SS is justified, in those cases.

We will see what happens. Right now, nothing has been done on a large scale. That may soon change.

Thoughts?

Addicts/drunks on disability get there because their addictions have ravaged their bodies to the point they probably can't work. I have a bigger problem with parents drawing checks for their kids under the pretense the undisciplined bastards have "Opposition defiant disorder" .

 

[Man With A Plan]

"Common sense" is that phrase that people use to say "well, what's I'm saying is clearly good". It doesn't mean much.

However you said there needs to be an audit. Now you're saying it needs to be run properly. Two very different things.

The government is different to nightclubs but a lot of the basic principles will apply. Where there is a difference is in oversight. You're the boss, you have oversight. If you're corrupt, then either your boss has that oversight, or you're the owner and you suffer the consequences.

With the US govt, and potentially state governments, there's little oversight.

In Germany there's a political party called the AfD. They were formed in 2013. By 2017 they had got 94 seats and 12.6% of the vote. The reason they were able to rise so quickly and get a sizeable percentage of the seats, is that Proportional Representation is the main way of choosing parties in Germany.

In the UK, there's a political party called UKIP. They were formed in the 1990s. In 2015 they also got 12.6% of the vote. They got one seat from 650 seats. So, about 0.5% of the seats. This is because the UK, like the US, has FPTP.

In Germany, if a political party doesn't do what people want it to do, they can vote someone else.

They don't need to vote negatively. If you're right wing, like the AfD are, and you're angry at the main right wing party, the CDU, then you can vote for the AfD knowing you're not wasting your vote.
In the US you say "I don't like what the Republicans did" and you have three choices. Vote for the Republicans, vote against the Republicans or don't vote.
In Germany you can vote for the CDU, you can vote for the AfD, both of which are voting for the right, you could vote left if you want to. But there's that choice of voting right, and not seeing your vote wasted, unlike in the US.

This means the voters can give proper oversight. It means if they don't like something, there are avenues for voting that punish those political parties without having to vote negatively, without having to vote for a political wing you don't like.

It also means that within your political wing, differences of opinion can be expressed. In the Republican world, you go with what Trump wants, or you vote left wing. Nothing else exists.

This leads to politicians having to listen to what people want. Otherwise they will vote you out.
In the US, the Republicans will NEVER get voted out in many places. And if they do, it's because they're so bad that people are willing to vote Democrat. And in many places, this isn't an option, so the Republican will win in a safe seat no matter what happens.

You want good governance, you need politicians who are listening to the people. With FPTP they don't listen. They do the bidding of the money, because the money wins them the ele"With the US govt, and potentially state governments, there's little oversight.zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz'

"Common sense" is that phrase that people use to say "well, what's I'm saying is clearly good". It doesn't mean much.

However you said there needs to be an audit. Now you're saying it needs to be run properly. Two very different things.

The government is different to nightclubs but a lot of the basic principles will apply. Where there is a difference is in oversight. You're the boss, you have oversight. If you're corrupt, then either your boss has that oversight, or you're the owner and you suffer the consequences.

With the US govt, and potentially state governments, there's little oversight.

In Germany there's a political party called the AfD. They were formed in 2013. By 2017 they had got 94 seats and 12.6% of the vote. The reason they were able to rise so quickly and get a sizeable percentage of the seats, is that Proportional Representation is the main way of choosing parties in Germany.

In the UK, there's a political party called UKIP. They were formed in the 1990s. In 2015 they also got 12.6% of the vote. They got one seat from 650 seats. So, about 0.5% of the seats. This is because the UK, like the US, has FPTP.

In Germany, if a political party doesn't do what people want it to do, they can vote someone else.

They don't need to vote negatively. If you're right wing, like the AfD are, and you're angry at the main right wing party, the CDU, then you can vote for the AfD knowing you're not wasting your vote.
In the US you say "I don't like what the Republicans did" and you have three choices. Vote for the Republicans, vote against the Republicans or don't vote.
In Germany you can vote for the CDU, you can vote for the AfD, both of which are voting for the right, you could vote left if you want to. But there's that choice of voting right, and not seeing your vote wasted, unlike in the US.

This means the voters can give proper oversight. It means if they don't like something, there are avenues for voting that punish those political parties without having to vote negatively, without having to vote for a political wing you don't like.

It also means that within your political wing, differences of opinion can be expressed. In the Republican world, you go with what Trump wants, or you vote left wing. Nothing else exists.

This leads to politicians having to listen to what people want. Otherwise they will vote you out.
In the US, the Republicans will NEVER get voted out in many places. And if they do, it's because they're so bad that people are willing to vote Democrat. And in many places, this isn't an option, so the Republican will win in a safe seat no matter what happens.

You want good governance, you need politicians who are listening to the people. With FPTP they don't listen. They do the bidding of the money, because the money wins them the election.

"With the US govt, and potentially state governments, there's little oversight." Why? Why is there more oversight in the clubs I managed than in the Federal Government? The money in the clubs was private. The money in the Federal Government is public. Am I wrong in thinking that there should be MORE oversight when you're dealing with money that isn't yours than there is with money that IS yours?

 

[frigidweirdo]

"With the US govt, and potentially state governments, there's little oversight." Why? Why is there more oversight in the clubs I managed than in the Federal Government? The money in the clubs was private. The money in the Federal Government is public. Am I wrong in thinking that there should be MORE oversight when you're dealing with money that isn't yours than there is with money that IS yours?

Well, I think I explained why in my post.

No matter which election, the Reps or Dems win. Even when they don't "win", they still keep lots of power.

The third party in the US has zero seats in Congress, like one seat in a state senate, no governors, and a few hundred other elected officials like the elected dog catcher.

My solution is one that would change government.

Trump's not trying to change anything other than more power for himself because he's an egotistical bastard.

 

[Man With A Plan]

Well, I think I explained why in my post.

No matter which election, the Reps or Dems win. Even when they don't "win", they still keep lots of power.

The third party in the US has zero seats in Congress, like one seat in a state senate, no governors, and a few hundred other elected officials like the elected dog catcher.

My solution is one that would change government.

Trump's not trying to change anything other than more power for himself because he's an egotistical bastard.

Shrinking the size of Government doesn't increase the power of a President, Frigid...if anything it lessens that power. Trump's doing what he's doing because he understands we can't keep on spending like we are. Something needed to be done and he's the only President with enough back bone to take on Big Government.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Shrinking the size of Government doesn't increase the power of a President, Frigid...if anything it lessens that power. Trump's doing what he's doing because he understands we can't keep on spending like we are. Something needed to be done and he's the only President with enough back bone to take on Big Government.

Actually it can do.

I could give many situations where this might be so.

What is Trump getting rid of? Department of Education. Done so the right wing can impose their educational ideology more easily in states they control, like Louisiana, Kansas etc.

The problem is, he's telling you he's doing something which isn't the whole truth, it's probably only 20% of the truth.

But it's enough to manipulate people into giving him what he wants.

 

[Man With A Plan]

Actually it can do.

I could give many situations where this might be so.

What is Trump getting rid of? Department of Education. Done so the right wing can impose their educational ideology more easily in states they control, like Louisiana, Kansas etc.

The problem is, he's telling you he's doing something which isn't the whole truth, it's probably only 20% of the truth.

But it's enough to manipulate people into giving him what he wants.

As opposed to the Left Wing imposing their educational ideology nationwide through the Department of Education? Why shouldn't States and local communities control their schools? Could they possibly do any worse than what we have now? It's hard to believe that could be true. The Department of Education has made the US Education System one of the worst in the world. Why would we want to keep it?

 

[Man With A Plan]

Actually it can do.

I could give many situations where this might be so.

What is Trump getting rid of? Department of Education. Done so the right wing can impose their educational ideology more easily in states they control, like Louisiana, Kansas etc.

The problem is, he's telling you he's doing something which isn't the whole truth, it's probably only 20% of the truth.

But it's enough to manipulate people into giving him what he wants.

What Trump is doing is giving the people what THEY want!

 

[frigidweirdo]

As opposed to the Left Wing imposing their educational ideology nationwide through the Department of Education? Why shouldn't States and local communities control their schools? Could they possibly do any worse than what we have now? It's hard to believe that could be true. The Department of Education has made the US Education System one of the worst in the world. Why would we want to keep it?

Yes, the US education system is a total mess.

This is a problem of a partisan political system with people trying to impose their beliefs on others.

The UK doesn't have this, Germany doesn't have this, Austria doesn't have this, etc etc.

Why not? Because their political systems are more sane. Because teachers generally control education and generally believe that it's about educating.

The Department of Education could so easily push an agenda of learning skills. Use History to teach kids to analyse evidence, to make arguments, use English to learn creative thinking and writing.

But they don't. Both sides attack for the most part, I'm sure some states are fine, but a lot aren't.

The first part of any solution is to change how politicians are elected, then you work on changing everything else.

 

[frigidweirdo]

What Trump is doing is giving the people what THEY want!

What do people want?

The British people wanted Brexit. It was like turkeys voting for Christmas.

Problem was, the British people were manipulated, told blatant lies, and then told to go and vote. And now they've voted and seen the problems, the people who actually wanted Brexit, the rich people who stand to benefit, are telling everyone it's "undemocratic" to have another vote. As if voting every 4-5 years for something different (or the same) is "undemocratic", even though since the Brexit vote they've done it three times.

What do Americans want? How is it that "What Americans want" just happens to be what the rich bastards tell them they want?