Herbivore

that article is embarrassing for him. this thread is embarrassing for you.

This is great for you. Everyday Elon throws some chum in the water, and you are ready to slurp it up. And again, Elon Musk did not find $71.8b in fraud. Dudek stated that 150 yr old "people" are not getting benefits. And yet, your vid is out there pushing this. What do you call that?

It's funny cause I figured that you would bring up the $71.8b, which we all would like to be cleaned up and corrected. Thing is you are wrong again. Elon Musk did not find this, the audit, which was completed in July 2024 did. You can click on that link and see it. This audit was done by Michelle L. Anderson who has been with SSA since 2019. The goal of the audit seems to be to identify what was causing the improper payments, offer some corrections, and how to get paid back. One example of improper payments below. Is there some fraud likely coming from recipients that don't notify SSA timely, sure. Its kind of like how there is no widespread voter fraud, but a trump voter will vote for their dead mom. Now if that knob Elon came out and said, we saw this report, and have directed SSA to retrieve these funds in some manner, fine. But he didn't, he said a bunch of nonsense, and you lapped it up. The White House has pointed to a 2024 inspector general audit that found $71.8 billion in improper Social Security payments from 2015 to 2022, accounting for less than 1% of the $8.6 trillion in benefits paid over that period. Most were overpayments and some were underpayments, according to the report. For example, in a May 2022 audit of overpayments caused by incorrect benefit computations, we found SSA could have avoided about 73,000 overpayments totaling more than $368 million had it had effective controls over manual benefit computations.

ok, so you have fallen for some propaganda. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/02/20/trumps-social-security-head-contradicts-claims-dead-recipients/79330447007/

You've stated the 130 yr olds thing a few times. Is this related to the 150 yr old COBOL related thing, or something else? Cause the "wondering" sounds like propaganda to me.

The inseminated person part is weird, wonder why that was put in there. The other stuff "changed" seems reasonable. I would think that its not always a husband and wife that is using a donor here. This would cover those areas to avoid litigation.

Just scrolling through reddit and this came up.

If this girl was a former righty and used these same words essentially to explain why she moved to the left, you would call her an idiot.

Maybe it was all done to take Trump down, and they did overreach in some areas but not necessarily illegal activity, but I think Trump has been guilty of the acts he was charged with. That's why I think lawfare is a silly term. Would other people have been charged? I can certainly see how anyone would think no.

again, not confrontationally, I think these are fairly weak. I think it is more likely that anyone that is walked out will be for political revenge of some kind.

Could you identify the abuses that you are talking about? I'm not saying confrontationally, just want to understand which things you mean, as specifically as you can get.

yeah, first line there was more of a goof. I don't know the living arrangements of people on SNAP. It could certainly be that they typically have a fridge and stove. I do think looking at this and making positive cost saving and health related measures sounds like a pretty good idea. I have heard plenty of stories, maybe threads here, about people buying lobster and endless junk food, but I can't say I have ever really seen that. I am sure it exists, just not something I have seen. The soda numbers in the op are wild though. 61% of expenditures for SNAP, 51% for non-SNAP. I looked at the USDA report that the article cited, specifically with the link over the 61% sweetened beverages line and couldn't find anything in with 61% for this line item. In exhibit 5 on page 17 it says 9.25% of SNAP purchases went to sweetened bevs. Not sure where that 61% number came from. the below is on page 4 of that study. Overall, the findings from this study indicate that SNAP households and non-SNAP households purchased similar foods in the retail outlets in these data. Exhibits 1 and 2 summarize the findings.  There were no major differences in the expenditure patterns of SNAP and non-SNAP households, no matter how the data were categorized. Similar to most American households: About 40 cents of every dollar of food expenditures by SNAP households was spent on basic items such as meat, fruits, vegetables, milk, eggs, and bread.  Another 20 cents out of every dollar was spent on sweetened beverages, desserts, salty snacks, candy and sugar.  The remaining 40 cents were spent on a variety of items such as cereal, prepared foods, dairy products, rice, and beans.  The top 10 summary categories and the top 7 commodities by expenditure were the same for SNAP and non-SNAP households, although ranked in slightly different orders.

your speech on your 111th birthday?

If you don't have a fridge, can you buy 2 slices of bread, 2 slices of ham, and a slice of cheese? But yeah, if the plan generally followed what you are saying here, I would agree it was a good path.

Good idea to look at this for cost and for health. I agree with most of what you wrote here. The gas station purchases for example, if it's big gulps and candy, that's a problem. Even that though has questions. Does the person on SNAP have a fridge or stove? A car? If no, they might buy a sandwich at Wawa, or a frozen meal to go right in the microwave. Also the chips and Oreos comment. Families should be able to buy some snacks, get a cake for a kids bday. So, it might be hard to get this in the right spot.

not confident, but let's see what happens

I don't think "subject" is the right word there. I think that would be a word people use that believe parents are pushing them toward this in some way. Parents indoctrinate children in many ways, I would say in religion the most. With gender, I expect that most raise their kids as the sex that we would all assume. And then when presented with a child that starts to go down this path there is a lot of soul searching about what to do. I am sure we can find parents that slap dresses on their boy and lead them in this way too, with what that leads to with varying results. What do you mean about Dems long decrying those who want to make their own health decisions? That has been an R staple. As to the natural paths, I think you say this cause you see this as mental illness. I don't think it is.

I was just a little confused by your post

Transgenderism is a wild topic for sure. I don't get it at all. Probably never will. But you are advocating that the state override patients, doctors, and families for these medical decisions. You are trying to force people to follow your ideology with the idea that you are protecting them. Nothing is perfect, and likely some under 18(or over 18 for that matter) person that transitioned is going to regret it, and then very likely claim to be a victim. I think we would all like children to be protected from abusive people, but I consider it pretty arrogant that you would claim that every decision like this from someone under 18 is cause they were abused(ie allowed to go forward with their decision).

“Decisions about healthcare belong to patients, their doctors, and their families—not politicians,” said Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), who led Tuesday’s brief with Democratic Reps. Jerry Nadler (N.Y.) and Frank Pallone (N.J.) and Sens. Ed Markey (Mass.) and Jeff Merkley (Ore.), in a statement.

yeah, I believed you

I don't remember hearing that about To Catch a Predator. I wonder if the Creep Catcher Unit can film their work and post it on youtube.

I don't usually like to put too many words in other peoples mouths. Also, in the attempt for comedy it includes a lot of "look at me". Which goes back to my point in my 1st post, you're "comedy" is an attempt to make you feel better about your dumb selves.

I expect you're going for comedy here which is fine. Not funny, but fine. I liken this to the "if you are not a liberal when you're young" line Conservatives like so much. Essentially something that makes idiots feel smart.

Just something I saw on Google. Anything to this? https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=3a74d9e957c622ad&rlz=1C1RXMK_enUS1046US1048&sxsrf=AHTn8zoMv532whRmu9UXDoOMZvOcObdHAQ:1739823958779&q=Trump+voting+farmers&tbm=nws&source=univ&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiHgZ6oxcuLAxXsFlkFHTmKHqIQt8YBKAF6BAgSEAQ&biw=1366&bih=633&dpr=1