@Rajk999 saidMine would be in the 5% or lower. I’d be glad to have you prove me wrong but I’d insist on a factual basis not feel.
Yes, its called an educated guess, based on what I read and there are tons of articles on welfare and medical fraud in the US particularly from the insurance companies and hospitals. It runs into the billions of US$$$.
So what is your educated guess?
@no1marauder saidTaking out the offensive capabilities (and possibly toppling) extremist theocrats who have been causing trouble for 5 decades both in and out of their own country has benefits beyond ensuring Israeli military supremacy.
And a few hundred school kids massacred to insure even greater Israeli military supremacy in the region is cheap, too!
Obviously, the intent was never to massacre school kids. Collateral damage is always a terrible part of war, but it's also impossible to completely avoid.
But yes, inevitability of collateral damage is a far more vital concern when deciding whether to go to war than the price of the hardware.
@wildgrass saidAgreed.
I don't think we're disagreeing either. Its not the percent tax rate for WW2, it's the means for going to war, and the quick reversal in war funding after it was over. There used to be a self-correcting requirement for collective "buy in" to spend money on war. If that system still existed, where voters chose politicians who aligned with "big military, requiring big taxes" ...[text shortened]... not the same. A Ferrari 250 and a Honda Civic stuck in traffic are getting to work at the same time.
That the military probably spends 2 or 3 times what it needs to spend to do basically the same thing is a great argument against state control of the markets. It's not in government's nature to spend efficiently.
This is getting off topic, but even when they have low budgets, government actors are terrible at prioritizing what is critical and what is luxury. Look as what these school districts do. "New York is projected to spend $36,293 per student" (https://nysfocus.com/2025/08/06/does-new-york-spend-more-per-public-school-student-than-any-other-state). That's 3 times what I pay to send my kid to parochial school, and they still can't educate the kids competently.
Obviously, there are some things government has to run because otherwise they won't happen (police, firefighters, military, etc.). But let's understand from the outset that they're not going to be good at budgeting.
2 edits
@sh76 saidIf we wanted to get rid of the offensive capabilities of extremists who have been causing trouble i.e. misery and death, we'd be bombing Israel, not Iran.
Taking out the offensive capabilities (and possibly toppling) extremist theocrats who have been causing trouble for 5 decades both in and out of their own country has benefits beyond ensuring Israeli military supremacy.
Obviously, the intent was never to massacre school kids. Collateral damage is always a terrible part of war, but it's also impossible to completely avoid.
...[text shortened]... amage is a far more vital concern when deciding whether to go to war than the price of the hardware.
Iran has mostly been the victim of aggression in the last 5 decades rather than an originator. That is despite it having a regrettably oppressive government.
War is mass killing, a great evil. It should not be initiated for dubious, speculative geopolitical advantages.
@sh76 saidInteresting comparison to schools. I admit I'm no expert, but there seems to be a good correlation in education between money spent and outcomes. Districts spend what they have. In school districts where property values are high, the students perform way better and this includes students who are not from that district. I've also heard, but not sure how true it is, that at least part of the private schools reporting better outcomes and lower costs vs. public has something to do with the affluent self-selection of students who enter private. Perhaps what you are describing is not a government problem per se, but maybe an issue with the leadership in New York state. But I haven't done enough homework.
Agreed.
That the military probably spends 2 or 3 times what it needs to spend to do basically the same thing is a great argument against state control of the markets. It's not in government's nature to spend efficiently.
This is getting off topic, but even when they have low budgets, government actors are terrible at prioritizing what is critical and what is luxury. Look ...[text shortened]... ilitary, etc.). But let's understand from the outset that they're not going to be good at budgeting.
I am not asking that government gets good at budgeting. I am asking for some consideration of budget in military. Currently there appears to be none. Ukraine can disable a Russian drone with a $200 net but the USA is using Patriot missiles against the same targets that cost $5 million each. I have no doubt that the military could get by on lots less and achieve the same outcomes, but this doesn't seem true in education.
If the most expensive state for public school in the country could educate 139 kids per year for the cost of one unnecessarily-used Patriot missile, then I'd say the school systems are doing a good job with their financing relative to the military. We've already used at least 800 Patriot missiles in this war. The proportions are wildly out of whack with the needs of Americans.
@sh76 said
Taking out the offensive capabilities (and possibly toppling) extremist theocrats who have been causing trouble for 5 decades both in and out of their own country has benefits beyond ensuring Israeli military supremacy.
Obviously, the intent was never to massacre school kids. Collateral damage is always a terrible part of war, but it's also impossible to completely avoid.
...[text shortened]... amage is a far more vital concern when deciding whether to go to war than the price of the hardware.
Collateral damage is always a terrible part of war, but it's also impossible to completely avoid.
Our Secretary of War just gave a speech where he said that rules of engagement are "stupid" suggesting that they're not even trying to avoid collateral damage anymore.
@wildgrass saidIt's bad enough that our nation is engaged in an illegal and unnecessary war; it makes it worse that those in Washington responsible for it are acting like a bunch of gleeful adolescents while the killing goes on.Collateral damage is always a terrible part of war, but it's also impossible to completely avoid.
Our Secretary of War just gave a speech where he said that rules of engagement are "stupid" suggesting that they're not even trying to avoid collateral damage anymore.
@no1marauder saidIran uses its proxies (Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, etc.) to spread mayhem. That's aggression, just as much as though they had been attacking in their own names.
If we wanted to get rid of the offensive capabilities of extremists who have been causing trouble i.e. misery and death, we'd be bombing Israel, not Iran.
Iran has mostly been the victim of aggression in the last 5 decades rather than an originator. That is despite it having a regrettably oppressive government.
War is mass killing, a great evil. It should not be initiated for dubious, speculative geopolitical advantages.
1 edit
@sh76 saidThe first two are impediments to Israeli aggression and oppression. The Houthis aren't even that and have been mercilessly attacked from the air by Saudi Arabia for close to a decade.
Iran uses its proxies (Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, etc.) to spread mayhem. That's aggression, just as much as though they had been attacking in their own names.
You're playing word games but none of those groups have any intrinsic reason to be enemies of the US save our almost unlimited supplying of weapons to Israel and our military meddling in the Middle East. That Iran supports them as a counterweight to other hostile regional powers isn't something that should concern us.
An argument we should fight a war against Iran because of supposed second hand aggression towards Israel is just another way of saying we should fight a war to support Netanyahu's policies in the Middle East. I find that unacceptable.
@lstcyr saidMinnesota alone. From Google :
Mine would be in the 5% or lower. I’d be glad to have you prove me wrong but I’d insist on a factual basis not feel.
**************************
A series of massive, "industrial-scale" welfare and social services fraud scandals in Minnesota during the 2020s has resulted in nearly 100 federal charges, over 60 convictions, and allegations that hundreds of millions to billions of dollars in taxpayer funds were stolen. The schemes primarily involved exploiting federal child nutrition programs during the pandemic, with later investigations uncovering fraud in Medicaid-funded housing and disability support services.
Key Findings and Scope
- Feeding Our Future: The largest case involved the nonprofit "Feeding Our Future," which allegedly stole roughly $250 million in federal aid intended for meals for children during the COVID-19 pandemic.
- Scale of Fraud: Federal prosecutors and investigators have suggested that since 2018, potentially more than half of the $18 billion in taxpayer funds spent on 14 state-run programs may have been lost to fraud.
- Scope of Charges: As of early 2026, 92 people have been charged, with at least 62 convicted.
- Demographic Focus: The vast majority of those charged are of Somali descent, with many being U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents.
- Suspected Complicity: A federal audit and reports indicated that state agencies were slow to act on warnings about the fraud.
Political and Legal Consequences
- Congressional Hearings: Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison testified before the U.S. House Oversight Committee in March 2026 regarding their handling of the fraud, facing accusations that they ignored warnings.
- Federal Action: The U.S. Treasury and other federal agencies have increased oversight and issued alerts to financial institutions to identify fraud in Minnesota’s programs.
- Increased Penalties: In 2026, Minnesota moved to increase the maximum penalty for Medical Assistance fraud from 2.5 years to 10 years in prison.
- Impact on Somali Community: While the fraud involved specific individuals, it has caused broader reputational damage to the 108,000-person Somali diaspora in Minnesota.
Key Misconceptions and Context
- Perpetrators: While many defendants were Somali American, the founder of Feeding Our Future, Aimee Bock, is a white American woman.
- Recipient vs. Provider Fraud: Experts note that most fraud is committed by providers or outside entities (like non-profits) rather than by the low-income recipients of the aid.
- Broader Context: While the Minnesota cases are uniquely large, benefits fraud is a national issue, and the focus on Minnesota has been intensified by political scrutiny in 2026.
***************************************
Illinois :
*******************************
Welfare fraud in Illinois involves significant SNAP and WIC benefit theft, with over 38,000 households reporting nearly $21 million in stolen benefits over a two-year period ending early 2025. Recent legislation aims to combat this by introducing chip-enabled EBT cards, as over 89,000 fraudulent transactions were reported in 2024 alone.
Key details on welfare fraud in Illinois:
- Stolen SNAP Benefits: Criminals have heavily targeted SNAP benefits, with $12 million stolen from 22,000 families in the last year reported.
- Provider Fraud: In fiscal year 2025, the Office of Executive Inspector General (OIG) identified $55.7 million in provider overpayments (e.g., healthcare/food retailers) and $316,000 in client overpayments.
- Legislative Action: Senate Bill 3266, introduced in early 2026, proposes chip-enabled EBT cards to stop rampant card skimming.
- End of Reimbursement: As of late 2024, the state no longer replaces stolen SNAP benefits due to the expiration of federal funding.
- Reporting Fraud: Incidents can be reported to the IDHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) via their website or by phone at 1-844-453-7283.
The Illinois Department of Human Services (IDHS) investigates fraud committed by recipients and employees, including trafficking (selling) benefits for cash or non-eligible items.
********************************
New York State
*************************************
New York State experiences notable instances of welfare fraud, particularly in large-scale Medicaid and SNAP (food stamp) scams, with 16% of households receiving public assistance as of late 2025. Major cases include millions stolen through fake Medicaid billing, though overall fraud constitutes a small percentage of total benefits.
Key Details on Welfare Fraud in NYS:
- Common Fraud Types: Fraud often involves underreporting income, overreporting household size, trafficking SNAP benefits, or selling EBT cards for cash.
- Medicaid Fraud: Significant cases involve complex schemes, such as individuals stealing millions from Medicaid programs.
- Rising Investigations: Government benefits fraud cases increased by 242% nationally between FY2020 and FY2024, reflecting increased federal focus on detection.
- EBT Scam Warning: NY State has reported increased scams targeting recipient Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) cards through phishing or card cloning.
- Penalties: Welfare fraud is prosecuted as a crime (felony or misdemeanor) based on the amount stolen, with potential consequences including restitution, jail, and probation.
While instances of fraud are highlighted by authorities, it is important to note that the vast majority of public assistance recipients in New York State use benefits as intended.
*******************************************
@Rajk999 saidYikes you love it when AI can do your thinking for you. Compare it to military budgets, that's the point here.
New York State
*************************************
New York State experiences notable instances of welfare fraud, particularly in large-scale Medicaid and SNAP (food stamp) scams, with 16% of households receiving public assistance as of late 2025. Major cases include millions stolen through fake Medicaid billing, though overall fraud constitutes a small percentage of tota ...[text shortened]... recipients in New York State use benefits as intended.
*******************************************
Pete Hegseth bought a $20,000 violin with tax dollars just because he needed to spend the money. That's more money than a SNAP recipient receives all year... for FOOD!
1 edit
@sh76 saidNew York State spends about $80 billion per year to educate 3.5 million kids. I take your point it's likely too much. But that's the budget for the whole state, and its the most expensive state in the country for pre-college education.
Agreed.
That the military probably spends 2 or 3 times what it needs to spend to do basically the same thing is a great argument against state control of the markets. It's not in government's nature to spend efficiently.
This is getting off topic, but even when they have low budgets, government actors are terrible at prioritizing what is critical and what is luxury. Look ...[text shortened]... ilitary, etc.). But let's understand from the outset that they're not going to be good at budgeting.
Pete Hegseth just spent $93 billion in 5 days on completely frivolous items just to max out their spending. He spent $9 million just on crab legs. The comparison is insane. I guess you might argue that the crab leg fishermen gained a few extra dollars to pad their paychecks but I can't imagine a scenario where spending that money on teacher salaries (or science grants) would not have had a bigger benefit for US taxpayers.
https://newrepublic.com/post/207555/pete-hegseth-billions-dollars-fruit-basket-stands-chairs-crab