If you quilify for welfare do you get actual money?

[momz]

Thank you.

Not only that, but I am quite confident that the white collar fraud that takes place in the financial sector outstrips "welfare fraud" in this country by a factor of 1,000 to one, if not dramatically more.

We all know about Bernie Madoff's $50+ billion ponzi scheme, but how many know about Bruno Iksil, AKA the London Whale? He alone lost in excess of $6 billion in a few days through fraudulent trading for J.P. Morgan Chase (while he was based in London, J.P. Morgan Chase is US domiciled and the case was pursued by the SEC and DOJ, which fined J.P. Morgan over $1 billion for their role in allowing it to happen), and the ripple that put through the rest of the derivatives market will never fully be understood (and, it should be noted, the derivatives market is really nothing more than legalized gambling to begin with).

And of course there were Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, Arthur Anderson, commodity market manipulation, bank failures, hedge fund collapses, cases of insider trading, etc.

If we as a country really want to crack down to stop theft, the scale of theft on Wall Street would boggle your minds. But I'm not jaded because even there (and Wall Street represents the financial sector in my case), I believe 99.99% of people in the industry are largely ethical. The difference is the unethical ones are stealing billions upon billions of dollars, instead of $126 a month in food assistance to feed a family that maybe could get by without it.

One (welfare fraud) has nothing to do with the other (what you call white collar fraud). This post does not add anything to the conversation.

 

[jspoole]

I know a lot about my friends dd because she and my dd are friends. My dd still lives at home and works, so she has money for peds/mans and hair stylist and my friends dd goes with her. That's how I know so much about what she is doing. I wanted to do something for this single mother of soon to be 3 that was a little self pampering, but she seems to be already doing all that with her money. That's why I was curious about receiving actual cash. So maybe some free babysitting will be useful for her. I sure did not mean to cause a stink.

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

One (welfare fraud) has nothing to do with the other (what you call white collar fraud). This post does not add anything to the conversation.

I disagree. I think I asked compelling questions and clearly I did stimulate conversation. Conversations are organic and they evolve. Sometimes in ways people do not desire, but that is the beauty of conversation, in my opinion.

 

[chobie]

One (welfare fraud) has nothing to do with the other (what you call white collar fraud). This post does not add anything to the conversation.

Exactly. This conversation is about mythical welfare queens.

 

[Colleen27]

Distract and deflect.

Nice attempt to change the discussion. I'm sure more than a few will follow you down this rabbit hole instead of sticking to the discussion at hand.

I think it is impossible to separate the two questions. Why are we as a culture so comfortable with dissecting the behaviour of the least fortunate but feel that fraud among the most fortunate is less cause for concern? "Sticking to the discussion at hand" when the very premise of that discussion is questionable or flawed isn't productive in the least.

 

[lauradis]

Excuse me? Why are you attacking me? I suggested that if welfare fraud is believed to be taking place, that it should be reported, as theft is theft. I also wonder why welfare fraud is so much more interesting to people than larger cases of fraud. If you disagree, post some empirical evidence to the contrary instead of attacking me.

Oh daddy we like sound bites and non info statements

Yes, but the corporate fraud isn't as fun to bash as welfare fraud.

still more worried about deflation coming over the Atlantic.

What welfare up to now .17 of the tax dollar?

 

[momz]

I think it is impossible to separate the two questions. Why are we as a culture so comfortable with dissecting the behaviour of the least fortunate but feel that fraud among the most fortunate is less cause for concern? "Sticking to the discussion at hand" when the very premise of that discussion is questionable or flawed isn't productive in the least.

Well, I don't recall anyone saying that white collar fraud isn't wrong, it's just not what the OP was referring to. This thread has gone off on a tangent, it is no longer about the OP.

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

Oh daddy we like sound bites and non info statements

Yes, but the corporate fraud isn't as fun to bash as welfare fraud.

still more worried about deflation coming over the Atlantic.

What welfare up to now .17 of the tax dollar?

Where do you think deflation is a problem right now? I think you may be misunderstanding the definition and risks of deflation, but if you are truly concerned, it's far more likely to come across the Pacific, as Japan is the only major economy dealing with anything remotely approaching deflation right now, although it seems to have turned a corner after more than a decade (Ireland had some issues with minor deflation in 2008-2009, but they have a very small and non-complex economy). That having been said, cutting spending is a way to trigger a recession (a recession is literally defined as spending dropping sharply and, typically, suddenly), which is an effective way to trigger deflation by slashing demand. How else do you fear that deflation will become an issue, because of all the concerns I'm tracking in the markets right now, deflation is certainly not one of them. Inflation is more likely to cause problems, hence the monetary easing policy currently in place at the Federal Reserve Bank.

By welfare, what are you counting? Help me understand the numbers you are dealing with, and then once we're on the same page with macro and micro areas of the budget we can figure out where to pull back and where we can generate more revenue.

I just don't want to do sound bites any more. They just don't work to advance the common goals of the nation.

 

[lauradis]

Where do you think deflation is a problem right now? I think you may be misunderstanding the definition and risks of deflation, but if you are truly concerned, it's far more likely to come across the Pacific, as Japan is the only major economy dealing with anything remotely approaching deflation right now, although it seems to have turned a corner after more than a decade (Ireland had some issues with minor deflation in 2008-2009, but they have a very small and non-complex economy). That having been said, cutting spending is a way to trigger a recession (a recession is literally defined as spending dropping sharply and, typically, suddenly), which is an effective way to trigger deflation by slashing demand. How else do you fear that deflation will become an issue, because of all the concerns I'm tracking in the markets right now, deflation is certainly not one of them. Inflation is more likely to cause problems, hence the monetary easing policy currently in place at the Federal Reserve Bank.

By welfare, what are you counting? Help me understand the numbers you are dealing with, and then once we're on the same page with macro and micro areas of the budget we can figure out where to pull back and where we can generate more revenue.

I just don't want to do sound bites any more. They just don't work to advance the common goals of the nation.

dumb done version
http://americanhistory.about.com/od/greatdepression/tp/greatdepression.htm
http://www.moneycrashers.com/deflation-definition-causes-effects/

basically the recipe is there for deflation, Just hopeing we don't repeat
history.

All the Charts for 2014 say 8% for welfare federally which includes???

We owe the senior ss and medicare so can we really add that?

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

dumb done version
http://americanhistory.about.com/od/greatdepression/tp/greatdepression.htm
http://www.moneycrashers.com/deflation-definition-causes-effects/

basically the recipe is there for deflation, Just hopeing we don't repeat
history.

All the Charts for 2014 say 8% for welfare federally which includes???

We owe the senior ss and medicare so can we really add that?

I hate to bring this up, because it's the Internet and let's face it, I could also claim to be the Queen of England, but of of my advanced degrees is in economics (I have a graduate degree in law, as well, but that was to satisfy my nerdy nature and I've never practiced law, nor am I even admitted to the bar in the state where I now live, and most people in my real life don't even know I have one). If you are worried about deflation, I can tell you that it is the very last thing you need to worry about. Every lever the markets, the Federal Reserve and the federal government have is right now engaged trying to hold down inflation*, and if they start perceiving deflation, they can throw a few or all of those levers back to neutral and counteract any deflationary pressures in about an hour. You should worry about a recession, or tax policy, or the growing income delta and asset concentration, but deflation is not something you need to worry about, in my opinion.

As to how much money is spent on welfare and what is counted, that's my question. I don't see OASDI (social security) and Medicare as welfare, as they are promises paid into by the recipients (whether we are collecting enough from current payors IS another question), nor do I worry as much about Medicaid as that is largely funded at the state level.

On the subject of Social Security, however, I do favor the implementation of what is called Chained Consumer Price Index, which is the theory that inflation is not the straight-line averaging of all price increases but rather takes into account consumer psychology to move between products as prices increase. That would save billions of dollars a year, but would literally be cutting future payments to our senior citizens so many feel it is unfair. I think it needs to be all put onto the table, however, if we're to find a solution.

* Inflation has become an equally misunderstood economic indicator, in my opinion, because like too much else, it has been positioned as something it is not. Moderate inflation actually can help those in a lower income class, but it cannot be summed up in

 

[crisi]

Yes, yes it is. As a prosecutor who has handled that caseload it is incredible how wide spread the fraud is. A number of years ago San Diego County did a study and even after telling each recipient they would be visited in the next 90 days they still found massive amounts of fraud. Between unreported income, lying about how many people are in the home, lying about where the other parent is, using the childcare program while not attending classes or work etc. it is unbelievable how much taxpayers are on the hook for beyond the well intentioned safety net.

Agreed, if you suspect fraud, report it.

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, nationally it is 2.63%. Now, its possible that their numbers are low because people aren't reporting or states aren't reporting, but the best number we have is 2.63%. I wouldn't call that common.

 

[luvmy3]

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, nationally it is 2.63%. Now, its possible that their numbers are low because people aren't reporting or states aren't reporting, but the best number we have is 2.63%. I wouldn't call that common.

Curious as to what that 2.63% equals in tax dollars. Do you have a link where you got that stat, I'd love to see exactly how much fraud is costing those of us who have to pay for it.
It may not be common, but it may be a hefty price tag. White collar crime (like the pp brought up) isn't common either, but you never hear about what percentage it occurs, only about how much money is involved when it does. Funny how that works.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_welfare_spending_40.html

According to this in the 2013 fiscal year we spent 574.9 Billion dollars for welfare programs. 2.63% (of dollars) of that equals $ 15,119,870,000
Now that number isn't accurate due to the fact that not everyone is receiving the exact same amount, but it can give an idea of just how much money we are talking about. We aren't talking pennies here. Personally I think more people who talk about the welfare queen myth should open their eyes to just how much of our tax dollars pay for those mythical beings.

 

[Granny square]

Curious as to what that 2.63% equals in tax dollars. Do you have a link where you got that stat, I'd love to see exactly how much fraud is costing those of us who have to pay for it. It may not be common, but it may be a hefty price tag. White collar crime (like the pp brought up) isn't common either, but you never hear about what percentage it is, only about how much money is involved. Funny how that works.

The price tag will be large of course.

But the assumption that the average recipient is abusing the system is not accurate.

 

[luvmy3]

The price tag will be large of course.

But the assumption that the average recipient is abusing the system is not accurate.

I totally agree, but like I said previously, not all the stories we tell are myths. Some of us actually have witnessed true fraud in our lives. The problem is those who have never witnessed it don't believe it is really occurring as often as is talked about (at least here on the DIS), but the amount of people frauding the system shouldn't matter when you look at what it costs us by the ones that do.

And FTR, as someone who spent my entire life up until early adulthood living and working with those on assisstance I have seen my share of abuse and fraud. That tends to color your view and make one very skeptical. Is that right, maybe not, but it is what is.

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

Curious as to what that 2.63% equals in tax dollars. Do you have a link where you got that stat, I'd love to see exactly how much fraud is costing those of us who have to pay for it.
It may not be common, but it may be a hefty price tag. White collar crime (like the pp brought up) isn't common either, but you never hear about what percentage it occurs, only about how much money is involved when it does. Funny how that works.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_welfare_spending_40.html

According to this in the 2013 fiscal year we spent 574.9 Billion dollars for welfare programs. 2.63% (of dollars) of that equals $ 15,119,870,000
Now that number isn't accurate due to the fact that not everyone is receiving the exact same amount, but it can give an idea of just how much money we are talking about. We aren't talking pennies here. Personally I think more people who talk about the welfare queen myth should open their eyes to just how much of our tax dollars pay for those mythical beings.

You are misinterpreting several numbers and definitions (social welfare is a broad category of spending on the "social welfare" of the nation and not just "welfare" in the implied context of direct handouts to the poor), and you are including state and local contributions to social welfare, as well. The federal number on all social welfare programs is about $393 billion ($119 billion of which is distributed to the states for them to distribute), and of that $105 billion is for SNAP (which, of course, is money that is put back into the economy and supports the manufacturers of food while also feeding those without adequate income to purchase that food), $60 billion for federal unemployment (which is funded by the FUTA), and most importantly, $175 billion for the eponymous "social programs not elsewhere considered" which is largely the earned income tax credit, i.e. tax credits for those who do work and pay taxes but receive a tax credit to bolster their income (and extremely difficult to fraudulently claim; in fact, most economists believe it is underclaimed, not overclaimed, due to the complexity of claiming it) but also includes things like adoption and foster care tax credits ($8+ billion), workers compensation, pensions for railroad retireees ($5+ billion), etc. There is also a question of why those tax credits are included, while other corporate and high-income tax deductions and credits are not, which from an accounting point makes sense since you typically would not put a discount onto your balance sheet and then take it back off, but if you do it on one part of the balance sheet you really should keep the accounting method constant throughout your entire balance sheet...

I cannot go any deeper into my analysis without becoming political, but if you're concerned about the amount being spent on social welfare, you can at least rest assured that the actual numbers, while large, are not nearly as large as you may believe.

 

[chobie]

I totally agree, but like I said previously, not all the stories we tell are myths. Some of us actually have witnessed true fraud in our lives. The problem is those who have never witnessed it don't believe it is really occurring as often as is talked about (at least here on the DIS), but the amount of people frauding the system shouldn't matter when you look at what it costs us by the ones that do.

And FTR, as someone who spent my entire life up until early adulthood living and working with those on assisstance I have seen my share of abuse and fraud. That tends to color your view and make one very skeptical. Is that right, maybe not, but it is what is.

I know there is fraud, I've seen people prosecuted for it. As they should be. I'm also more appalled by the white collar theft that costs our country money, but the facts of those cases are not fun to tell as the story of the welfare mom buying steak and lobster.

I don't think its abuse or fraud per se for a person to buy junk food with their EBT card or lobster. Nor do I think it's abuse or fraud per se if they are driving a nice car or have a cell phone.

I'm also appalled by the number of nosy people who look at what type of card a person uses to pay for groceries. I think it's rude to be eyeing up others' purchases and looking at their payment method.

I'm sure it's possible that you can figure put how a person is paying with about being too intrusive, but I think that's a rare thing. I think all the stories that people have here about what people buy with their EBT card leads me to believe there are a lot of people who have bad manners.

 

[luvmy3]

You are misinterpreting several numbers and definitions (social welfare is a broad category of spending on the "social welfare" of the nation and not just "welfare" in the implied context of direct handouts to the poor), and you are including state and local contributions to social welfare, as well. The federal number on all social welfare programs is about $393 billion ($119 billion of which is distributed to the states for them to distribute), and of that $105 billion is for SNAP (which, of course, is money that is put back into the economy and supports the manufacturers of food while also feeding those without adequate income to purchase that food), $60 billion for federal unemployment (which is funded by the FUTA), and most importantly, $175 billion for the eponymous "social programs not elsewhere considered" which is largely the earned income tax credit, i.e. tax credits for those who do work and pay taxes but receive a tax credit to bolster their income (and extremely difficult to fraudulently claim; in fact, most economists believe it is underclaimed, not overclaimed, due to the complexity of claiming it) but also includes things like adoption and foster care tax credits ($8+ billion), workers compensation, pensions for railroad retireees ($5+ billion), etc. There is also a question of why those tax credits are included, while other corporate and high-income tax deductions and credits are not, which from an accounting point makes sense since you typically would not put a discount onto your balance sheet and then take it back off, but if you do it on one part of the balance sheet you really should keep the accounting method constant throughout your entire balance sheet...

I cannot go any deeper into my analysis without becoming political, but if you're concerned about the amount being spent on social welfare, you can at least rest assured that the actual numbers, while large, are not nearly as large as you may believe.

That is why I asked the pp for a link as to where she got her %.
The link I provided did give a breakdown of where that money was spent. As social welfare is a broad category, welfare fraud would cover that category, not just those handouts. I'm talking about fraud in that broad sense, not just the woman getting a manicure with her monthy assisstance check or buying lobster with her EBT card.
As for the bolded, without a link provided its kind of hard to take your word on that as fact.

My point is only that these "myths" are not myths at all. Maybe the person in the store buying steak and lobster isn't committing fraud, but plenty of people are and its costing us taxpayers tons.

 

[luvmy3]

I know there is fraud, I've seen people prosecuted for it. As they should be. I'm also more appalled by the white collar theft that costs our country money, but the facts of those cases are not fun to tell as the story of the welfare mom buying steak and lobster.

I don't think its abuse or fraud per se for a person to buy junk food with their EBT card or lobster. Nor do I think it's abuse or fraud per se if they are driving a nice car or have a cell phone.

I'm also appalled by the number of nosy people who look at what type of card a person uses to pay for groceries. I think it's rude to be eyeing up others' purchases and looking at their payment method.

I'm sure it's possible that you can figure put how a person is paying with about being too intrusive, but I think that's a rare thing. I think all the stories that people have here about what people buy with their EBT card leads me to believe there are a lot of people who have bad manners.

Fair enough. I have never really noticed how someone chooses to pay for their purchases, unless its a check and I'm right behind them.

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

That is why I asked the pp for a link as to where she got her %.
The link I provided did give a breakdown of where that money was spent.

As for the bolded, again without a link provided its kind of hard to take your word on that as fact.

My point is only that these "myths" are not myths at all. Maybe the person in the store buying steak and lobster isn't committing fraud, but plenty of people are and its costing us taxpayers tons.

As to the bolded, yes, you provided a link, but then you misquoted and misinterpreted the numbers from the link, leading to an incorrect interpretation of the amount that is actually spent on "welfare" in the colloquial sense versus the amount that actually IS spent on "welfare" in the colloquial seense at the federal level, much less the fact that the actual amount spent at the federal level is not "welfare" in the context you are using it but rather includes lots of things that are not "welfare" in the colloquial sense.

As to what you bolded in my post, my premise is that there are other areas in the federal budget that are also out of line with what I think we should be spending and that trying to balance the budget merely by cutting spending (whether in all or in just a few areas) leaves out other solutions that I think should be on the table. My theories on what those are could be construed as political, however, so I will not debate them here.

I wasn't the one who posted the level of fraud, but you seem to doubt the percentage, so do you have empirical data to indicate what the actual amount of fraud is, as well as how fraud is defined and calculated? I cannot deal in anecdotes, as they are too ethereal to build policy upon.

 

[chobie]

Fair enough. I have never really noticed how someone chooses to pay for their purchases, unless its a check and I'm right behind them.

I'm also appalled that people who do work , still have to get food stamps and other assistance to get by.

Personally I would rather pay more for McDonalds and Walmart if meant people working there could get a wage where they can afford the basics of life and have some joy in their lives.

And yes, in theory people should work 2 or 3 jobs to get by if they must, but the logistics of that would require a reliable car in most situations, reliable round the clock day care, and yes, a cell phone to coordinate everything,

We can talk all day long about how minimum wage jobs are not supposed to pay enough to support a family, but the reality of the US today is that many people cannot get better paying jobs. Maybe they had one and were downsized, or some other misfortune took place. Who knows.

But these are all bigger issues that I don't have all the answers to.

So before the self-appointed OP police drop by, lets get back to talking about welfare recipients who get manicures.