Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 1543
Joined: 15 Oct 2002, 9:34 pm

Post 02 Jun 2016, 2:08 pm

Dag, Lets pretend you are homeless 20 years ago. What did you do then for a phone number?
...there you go, what you did then can be done today. Use a friends number, a relative, or tell them you will drop in tomorrow, etc. Nothing has changed but your perception of what is a "necessity" Again, what a bout a car to get to your job? What about a nice apartment so you can have a good nights sleep and a morning shower? It is absolutely not required, never was before, still not today


Tom, you are so far off on this one I'm embarrassed for you. 20 years ago? Nothing has changed? Wow. I hope you never want for a means to improve your life situation.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7373
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 02 Jun 2016, 2:17 pm

Dag, I hope you understand the problem many people have with the systems in place. I understand the need to have a phone, but I think there are too many people who are using this program who truly do not need it. Would you agree that there are some who misuse the program?

As with many other programs, it is the few who misuse something that ruin it for everyone.

I just want those who misuse a program to be punished.

Do you?
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 02 Jun 2016, 2:47 pm

bbauska
Do you?

Well I said
OK.
That is usually taken by most as agreement or at least acquiesence
... Not you?

I then said
But how much of the benefits that are out there now ($152 billion) are fraudulent? I'd love to know why you think that there is rampant faud that amounts to anything significant?
(And for comparison I offered just one corporations tax evsion.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 02 Jun 2016, 2:49 pm

bbauska
Dag, I hope you understand the problem many people have with the systems in place. I understand the need to have a phone, but I think there are too many people who are using this program who truly do not need it. Would you agree that there are some who misuse the program?

What evidence do you have to offerto back up this claim?
How many get phones? How many shouldn't? On what basis do you make thisclaim?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7373
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 02 Jun 2016, 2:54 pm

rickyp wrote:bbauska
Dag, I hope you understand the problem many people have with the systems in place. I understand the need to have a phone, but I think there are too many people who are using this program who truly do not need it. Would you agree that there are some who misuse the program?

What evidence do you have to offerto back up this claim?
How many get phones? How many shouldn't? On what basis do you make thisclaim?


http://denver.cbslocal.com/2014/11/06/governments-free-phone-program-riddled-with-abuse-fraud/
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 02 Jun 2016, 2:56 pm

bbauska
Or is your bias against corporation shading your ability to be equitable?

Fraud and cheating and gaming the system I see equitably.
The amount and the effects of the fraud and cheating and gaming of the system by the poor are virtually meaningless when compared to the results of the fraud, cheating and gaiming the system by corporations and the wealthy.
I don't think that one should pay equal attention to an act that will cost thousands of dollars to police and result in the saving of hundreds of dollars (say cutting back on the quality of a school lunch in a city or chasing a few welfare frauds )
but should pay most sttention to doing the things that will secure the billions that are being hidden or cheated from taxes and held outside the main street economy in search of the exagerated profits that can accrue to speculative financial transactions that produce nothing but eventually risk crashes in the sector.
Would you agree that chasing pennies when billions are available is unwise?
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 02 Jun 2016, 3:05 pm

The $2 billion a year Lifeline program has handed out more than 13 million free cellphone plans across the country in the first six months of this year. In Colorado, the program handed out more than 117,000 free cellphone plans in the first half of this year, or about 20,000 cellphones every month.

thank you.
So if you eliminated the programcompletley , you'd save 2 billion dollars... Or the equivalent of 12 days of avoided taxes from Apple. And some percentage of poor who could really use the phones would be hurt. It is impossible to tell from the anecdotes on offer what that number actually is...

Saying that, the program is a miserable mess. Paying the phone providers a comission for each phone they move is the heart of the problem. Pay them a salary and provide absolute rules and only those supposed to get phones would get them .
It'll be far harder to get the billions in avoided taxes every year from Google and Apple and Microsoft etc.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7373
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 02 Jun 2016, 3:48 pm

rickyp wrote:bbauska
Or is your bias against corporation shading your ability to be equitable?

Fraud and cheating and gaming the system I see equitably.

Would you agree that chasing pennies when billions are available is unwise?


No, I would not agree. You go after both.
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 1543
Joined: 15 Oct 2002, 9:34 pm

Post 02 Jun 2016, 8:01 pm

Would you agree that there are some who misuse the program? As with many other programs, it is the few who misuse something that ruin it for everyone.


Yes. There are poor people who misuse the system. Yes the few often ruin a good thing for the many.

I just want those who misuse a program to be punished. Do you?


I hesitate to use the word punishment. Terminate those phone lines suspected of illegal activity? Yes. Prosecute and punish the offender with jail time or fines? No. We don't need another idiot learning how to get better at crime while in jail.

Your frustration is of course justified.

I agree with you that you "go after both." Though it's the particulars of what you mean by "go after" that make me nervous.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 03 Jun 2016, 6:20 am

The question is why Tom and Brad are so intent on punishing cheaters that are poor while their fervor for punishing rich violators that game the system is low? Kin selection explains why those that are related cooperate with each other. Reciprocal altruism explains cooperation in small communities. But how do human beings cooperate in large communities? Punishing cheaters is thought to play an important role.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/pri ... -cheaters/
http://www.livescience.com/21703-punish ... venge.html


So why is there such fervor to punish people that are poor who cheat while banks and corporations escape such scrutiny (at least from Tom and Brad but there are many people like them)? I think there are a couple of explanation: (1) when the poor commit fraud it is pretty clear they violate societal rules but the cheating by the rich is more ambiguous, (2) it is harder for people to identify with large business entities or extremely rich individuals--ultimately if you are middle-class you are not competing against such people/entities whereas someone who is working and getting unjustified handouts might be getting ahead of you that way. When professional athletes and owners face off in negotiations there is a tendency for fans to blame players rather than owners. Again, players are perceived for whatever reason to be in fans' competitive group for evolutionary purposes and are judged whereas owners are not.

Then why would Tom and Brad care so much and Rick, myself, Owen and Dags agree that fraud is wrong but are not so fervent about it? Well, for one thing for stranger based large human communities not everyone has to be strongly attuned to punishing cheaters for the society to be able to cooperate. Another reason might be if someone perceives the poor as being outside their competitive group then there little reason to get worked up about it--even if someone who is poor cheats they are not going to get ahead. It is interesting that in one of the article cited above people only start to care when cheating is effective. Ultimately, we are all driven by evolutionary forces to compete for societal resources in order to be able successively reproduce. Whether cheating threatens that in some way is what tends to drive anger towards cheating and so whether poor commuting fraud really makes one angry is probably related to whether perceives that as the poor getting ahead vis-a-via them. Someone who is middle-class and worked hard to get there might really resent someone who did not work and was getting ahead.

But of course the poor in the US are still poor after assistance, so it is not clear why someone who is middle-class would be so upset about fraud, but I don't know that it has to be a realistic concern. It's just they are part of my group, they are cheating, they are getting ahead, and they must be punished. Those whose emotional outrage with regard to poor cheating is lower probably just don't perceive the poor as being any kind of threat to them.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7373
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 03 Jun 2016, 6:55 am

I disagree with your premise.

I want corporate fraud punished just as much. I have said so.

It fits your argument to make me out as the "Boogeyman", regardless of the validity.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 03 Jun 2016, 7:23 am

Right. So where's the topic Corporate Fraud...It's not that I question whether you're against corporate fraud, but the fact you posted a topic on government benefits rather than corporate fraud says something doesn't it?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7373
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 03 Jun 2016, 8:29 am

freeman3 wrote:Right. So where's the topic Corporate Fraud...It's not that I question whether you're against corporate fraud, but the fact you posted a topic on government benefits rather than corporate fraud says something doesn't it?


Where is your topic on the lying of Hillary Clinton, coupled with the poor economic recovery of Barak Obama?

I have made my statement. I can cut and paste it if needed. I have said it a couple of times.

I want all fraud tried, convicted and punished. Can you say that?
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 03 Jun 2016, 9:30 am

People believe in a lot of things. Some things have more emotional content than others; some things motivate people to action; some things outrage people more than other things. Just because you believe in getting rid of both corporate fraud and government benefit fraud doesn't mean those beliefs have the same emotional content behind them. I mean, who isn't against both corporate fraud and benefit fraud? The question is to what extent does each cause someone to be up in arms about it?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7373
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 03 Jun 2016, 10:06 am

How about this. I want the corporate fraud punished and sent to jail. I want the personal fruad punished and sent to jail as well. There is no difference in my mind.

Believe what you want.