Stimulus Checks Mistakenly Sent to 1,700 Inmates, Federal Agency Says
"The federal government mistakenly sent out stimulus checks to 1,700 inmates, the Social Security Administration said Tuesday -- a $425,000 error. "
Dead People Being Sent Stimulus Checks
"Thousands of Americans are receiving federal stimulus checks in the mail, this week. Only problem: many of them are deceased."
"That amounts to between 8,000 and 10,000 checks for millions of dollars."
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
12 comments:
Mistakes are bound to happen with program of this magnitude the real question however is due the costs of the mistakes say for example add up to 1 billion dollars equal or surpass the benefits of the program say creating 1 million jobs...which is of more value a million jobs or a billion lost tax dollars in giving tax revenue to prisoners and dead people (do dead people cash their checks?),... is the program working or not is the real question
The Pentagon lost one Trillion dollars, just lost it, under Rumsfeld, yet the right wing don't howler about that, further the Iraq War will cost American tax payers at least 6 Trillion in the end and probably more, where is the outrage on that? Bin Laden had nothing to do with Iraq...Paulson under Bush gave Goldman Sachs (via AIG) almost a Trillion tax dollars ,again , why isn't the right wing screaming at Bush and Paulson for that, you hear nothing about that! Yet they are all over any mistakes the Democrats make which seem extremely small compared to what Republicans have done.
We have gone through this before, the Pentagon did not lose on trillion under Rumsfeld.
Even the liberal sources say we haven't spent more than 700 billion on Iraq so far, so how do you figure 6 trillion?
Rumsfeld admitted at congressional hearing that the Pentagon could not account for over 1 Trillion dollars, he admitted it, they don't know where the money is, he said so to congress...I don't know about you but I call that losing a Trillion dollars...as for the 6 Trillion this is what Economists estimate the Invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan will cost the American tax payer, estimates range from 3 to 10 Trillion yet most consider 6 Trillion a good estimate assuming the wars end before 2011. They include costs such as long term health care for wounded veterans, which weren't calculated by the Bush administration, read the recent book by Stiglitz explaining in detail all the costs, past and future.
You said "The Pentagon lost one Trillion dollars, just lost it, under Rumsfeld"
In fact Rumsfeld said that on 9/10/2001. It wasn't lost under Rumsfeld.
Government now admits 4000 checks sent to inmates in jail.
It is not important if Rumsfeld lost the Money in 9 months or if Clinton's Pentagon lost the money in any event the Pentagon lost the money, 1 Trillion plus dollars divided by the population of US is roughly 3333 dollars per person, or roughly 12000 dollars per household, since probably half the households in America don't have 12000 to pay in future taxes the Pentagon lost, that means richer households must carry the burden which means 24000 per household that can pay, yet half of those will find it too great a burden so that means 48000 for those who can really pay, half a years income for most of them. Compare that cost to 4000 checks to prisoners each check is how much? I don't know let's say 500 dollars, that's less than 1 penny per person in the US or a nickel if only the rich pay like in above scenario, except here everyone can pay half a penny.
You worry about checks to prisoners which is a waste of nickel per rich family compared to 1 trillion dollars lost by the pentagon which is about 50000 dollars per rich family, now add the war costs, let's say conservatively 3 Trillion and that's about 150,000 per rich family a year's pay for most, add to that 3 trillion given to banks and insurance corporations and we are talking 3 years salary for rich families....something tells me taxes need to go up or war costs need to go down or the dollar will collapse big time soon.
Your concern about prisoner's checks is penny wise and pound foolish, from a common sense standpoint
YOu make my point, the government at all levels doesn't care how it spends the taxpayer money. The Defense Department, State, etc. all waste money. The the government didn't even care it was sending "stimulus" checks to prisons, just emphasizes the massive waste and fraud in all levels of government. Why would you want to add health care to a government that already projects a $9 trillion deficit in the next 10 years?
This is where the right and left differ, the left know that we have wasted Trillions over the last 30 years in too much military spending, I would guess that over the last 30 years, since Reagan, and the end of the cold war, we could have adequately maintained defence needs for easily 10 Trillion less, this amounts to roughly 40000 per person in the US or 160000 for a family of 4, including military families, by reducing our military spending we actually would have increased our security and 9/11 probably never would have happened because Bin Laden would have had no reason to attack us since we would have had no military presence in Saudi Arabia. Further millions in Africa and South America would have suffered much less too. Reduced military spending alone would have left more than enough money to finance a national health insurance system AND free higher education that would have been the envy of the World, probably allowing many small businesses that failed to survive, the auto industry survive without bankruptcy and bail out money etc.
The right wing deregulation of banks has cost this country probably as much as profligate military spending, add to that corporate subsidies to coal and oil and you got another 200000 per family of 4 over last 30 years of Republican rule basically.
My point is social programs don't cost much compared to right wing programs and they benefit us both financially and morally whereas right wing programs not only hurt us immensely financially but morally as well.
The right as a long history of putting this country into enormous debt before they leave power to the left which usually forces the left to cut social programs in order to reduce the debt that has become dangerous for the country, the left must stop playing this game and keep spending on the social programs and cut the welfare programs to the banks, oil, etc and military spending to reduce deficit, Obama is doing one but not enough of the other unfortunately. He will not stop terrorism by the war in Afghanistan but only by drastically reducing our military presence overseas.
I think you must agree with all of the above Common Sense Joe
Again, your logic fails. The lack of a military presence allowed the pirates to multiply off of Africa. You can't know what would have happened if the U.S. removed it's military presence from around the world. Without the U.S., maybe the Soviet Union would have invaded western europe, North Korea might have succeeded in taking South Korea.
It the U.S. had not help in Bosnia, maybe the Muslim world would have revolted, cutting off all oil supplies. What would that have resulted in.
With the U.S. support of Israel, maybe Saddam would have achieved his nuclear weapon. With the U.S. support of Kuwait, maybe Saddam would have taken Saudia Arabia, or maybe Al Queda would have overthrown Saudi Arabia.
Etc. Etc.
The right wing deregulation of banks - Again, occurred in 2000, under Clinton.
My point is social programs don't cost much compared to right wing programs and they benefit us both financially and morally whereas right wing programs not only hurt us immensely financially but morally as well.
-Again all wrong. Social programs are a drain that may financially benefit the recipient but produces nothing. The military is a waste but it protects the country. As a by-product it pays soldiers, increases employment (manufacturers of weapons, ships, planes) etc. Social Security just takes from the young to give to the old.
Your hypotheticals are spurious and illogical, without military presence in the ME the US would be much better off, this is the most probable outcome, and the World would be better off too....
and what makes you think the military, which you admit is a waste, protects this country, our trillion dollar a year military budget couldn't protect us from a few Saudi terrorists...many people think, I among them, that our huge military expenditures actually created the terrorists and thus endangers our national security.
Ron Paul ( a real conservative... not a Limbaugh Beck fascist)agrees with me on this issue
and don't tell me Clinton is not right wing , get real, more right wing than he you die, he's not a fascist like the Neocons Cheney and his puppet Bush, but he's certainly not on the left...Democrats have lots of right wingers in their party, unfortunately..Obama seems to be on the right too, unfortunately
Post a Comment