Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Maine Morning Sentinel)   Maine's Gov LePage has launched a special investigation into welfare fraud targeting baby eel fishermen, some of whom make up to $100,000 a season   (onlinesentinel.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, Paul LePage, Elver Project, welfare fraud, Maine, DHHS  
•       •       •

1476 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Nov 2013 at 8:50 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



71 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-11-03 08:05:30 AM  
What about the ones who don't make up to $100,000 per season?
 
2013-11-03 08:49:41 AM  
Oddly enough slippery slimy little buggers and the money grubbing bastages behind them is one area LePage can be considered an expert.
 
2013-11-03 08:51:55 AM  
What a eel fishing vessel may look like

img.fark.net
 
2013-11-03 08:53:42 AM  

NewportBarGuy: What about the ones who don't make up to $100,000 per season?


How much overhead comes out of that 100 grand is another question.
 
2013-11-03 08:54:16 AM  
Yeah I can't imagine why seasonal fishermen might use public assistance during the off season.
 
2013-11-03 08:55:28 AM  
LePage did something that might make a little bit of sense? Unpossible!
 
2013-11-03 08:56:26 AM  
LePage farks over billionaires, news at eleven.
 
2013-11-03 09:01:02 AM  
This investigation sounds like a slippery slope.
 
2013-11-03 09:02:21 AM  
When my son was a baby, I had a hard time just getting him to fish for trout. And he never made a penny off it.
 
2013-11-03 09:03:47 AM  
Eel fishermen start young, do they?

/dnrtfa
 
2013-11-03 09:13:31 AM  

Monkeyfark Ridiculous: Eel fishermen start young, do they?

/dnrtfa


Well... first you have to get a Barbie hovercraft... and it all works itself out from there.

/Boys get the GI Joe version.
 
MFK
2013-11-03 09:20:51 AM  
God this guy is an asshole. They way he's acting you would think that every single one of Maine's financial problems is because of a few people on welfare.

Nice going, Maine. Way to elect a guy who's hell bent on turning your state into the Alabama of New England.
 
2013-11-03 09:31:59 AM  
This is the same gov who spent $700,000 on an investigation that turned up 45 cases of possible welfare fraud earlier this year, right?
 
2013-11-03 09:36:16 AM  
They are disgusting, slimy little creatures, but you can make a lot of money selling them on the open market. This is what I know about babies and politicians.
 
2013-11-03 09:45:12 AM  

Here Comes Everybody: This is the same gov who spent $700,000 on an investigation that turned up 45 cases of possible welfare fraud earlier this year, right?


It isn't necessarily the amount saved from those 45 cases of possible but the amount saved when people tone down the amount of fraud they engage in knowing that an activation is going on.

For example- if the IRS announced that it would be launching an investigation into fraudulent claims on cash donation reporting, wouldn't those who engage in fraudulent claims tone it back a little?
 
2013-11-03 09:53:52 AM  

clowncar on fire: Here Comes Everybody: This is the same gov who spent $700,000 on an investigation that turned up 45 cases of possible welfare fraud earlier this year, right?

It isn't necessarily the amount saved from those 45 cases of possible but the amount saved when people tone down the amount of fraud they engage in knowing that an activation is going on.

For example- if the IRS announced that it would be launching an investigation into fraudulent claims on cash donation reporting, wouldn't those who engage in fraudulent claims tone it back a little?


Almost certainly not
 
2013-11-03 09:55:47 AM  
how do they even hold the poles?  they don't have arms
 
MFK
2013-11-03 09:58:58 AM  

clowncar on fire: Here Comes Everybody: This is the same gov who spent $700,000 on an investigation that turned up 45 cases of possible welfare fraud earlier this year, right?

It isn't necessarily the amount saved from those 45 cases of possible but the amount saved when people tone down the amount of fraud they engage in knowing that an activation is going on.

For example- if the IRS announced that it would be launching an investigation into fraudulent claims on cash donation reporting, wouldn't those who engage in fraudulent claims tone it back a little?


i'm calling bullshiat on your apologistic premise here. This was a politically expedient witch hunt that was designed to curry favor with the right wing, libertarian crowd who mistakenly believe that the problem is the lazy moochers and not the 1%s who are actually sucking up all the money. It was basically a solution in search of a problem. If the spot checks only uncovered 45 *possible* cases (and i have a feeling that, as is usually the case, this number will dwindle when people actually look at it), fraudulent claims aren't a big problem to begin with.

I find it saddening that so many of my fellow Americans are so willing - nay, enthused - to kick a man when he's down.
 
2013-11-03 10:01:18 AM  

NewportBarGuy: What about the ones who don't make up to $100,000 per season?


They ALL make up to $100,000.

Just like every cable company provides Internet speeds "up to" what they promise.
 
2013-11-03 10:06:48 AM  

MFK: Nice going, Maine. Way to elect a guy who's hell bent on turning your state into the Alabama of New England.


I've always referred to them as the Louisiana of New England.
 
2013-11-03 10:25:59 AM  

NewportBarGuy: MFK: Nice going, Maine. Way to elect a guy who's hell bent on turning your state into the Alabama of New England.

I've always referred to them as the Louisiana of New England.


Both states have delicious seafood, so there is that...
 
2013-11-03 10:27:15 AM  
Publicity whore jumps up welfare fraud investigation into eel fishers who make up to $100,000 a year to justify tax cuts to billionaire donors and cover up taking a wrecking ball to worker protections.  Film at 11.
 
2013-11-03 10:30:13 AM  
What fraction of what it will cost will this save?
 
2013-11-03 10:44:40 AM  

jso2897: What fraction of what it will cost will this save?


I'm guessing it's like drug testing welfare recipients: it doesn't matter because it's worth it.
 
2013-11-03 10:46:24 AM  

MFK: I find it saddening that so many of my fellow Americans are so willing - nay, enthused - to kick a man when he's down.


We've been trained for at least a century to assume that someone's flouting the rules and somehow getting more than we are.  Meanwhile those who actually flout the rules get much more than all the rest of us combine.

It's a twisted form of divide and conquer.
 
2013-11-03 10:46:27 AM  

MFK: clowncar on fire: Here Comes Everybody: This is the same gov who spent $700,000 on an investigation that turned up 45 cases of possible welfare fraud earlier this year, right?

It isn't necessarily the amount saved from those 45 cases of possible but the amount saved when people tone down the amount of fraud they engage in knowing that an activation is going on.

For example- if the IRS announced that it would be launching an investigation into fraudulent claims on cash donation reporting, wouldn't those who engage in fraudulent claims tone it back a little?

i'm calling bullshiat on your apologistic premise here. This was a politically expedient witch hunt that was designed to curry favor with the right wing, libertarian crowd who mistakenly believe that the problem is the lazy moochers and not the 1%s who are actually sucking up all the money. It was basically a solution in search of a problem. If the spot checks only uncovered 45 *possible* cases (and i have a feeling that, as is usually the case, this number will dwindle when people actually look at it), fraudulent claims aren't a big problem to begin with.

I find it saddening that so many of my fellow Americans are so willing - nay, enthused - to kick a man when he's down.


Dude- when you start spouting off antagonistic BS at other posters like that, it may be time to put the Red Bull down and go out and play.

Where did you read that I apologized for anything.  I merely pointed out that  an implied increase in the risk of being caught, regardless of how many are caught, often causes one to reconsider the behavior or tone it down.  It's not who you catch but those who reconsider or cease the behavior out of fear of being caught.

While most people will admit to speeding 10mph over the limit, far less are willing to do much more than that as the cost for being caught greatly increases.  An implied threat of more speed traps and targeting of speeders  may not yield any more convictions- hence the implication that moneys are wasted on trying to catch speeders-- however, the overall number of speeders willing to exceed the 10mph limit was drastically reduced.  There is where the investment in the speeding investigation really paid off- not by getting a few extra speeders off the road but by reducing the number of accidents and fatalities related to speeding.

The net for those 45 fraud cases wasn't the 45 individuals so much as the 100's of others that reconsidered or toned down their fraudulent activities.

Not catching people engaged in an activity in large numbers does not necessarily mean that there are few there to catch, it may mean they just didn't use the right methodology, have the funding, or were simply outsmarted.

Also, if you think it bad "kicking a man when he is down" when that man is engaged in fraudulent activity, you may need to re-calibrate your moral compass a bit
 
2013-11-03 10:57:36 AM  

Dwight_Yeast: MFK: I find it saddening that so many of my fellow Americans are so willing - nay, enthused - to kick a man when he's down.

We've been trained for at least a century to assume that someone's flouting the rules and somehow getting more than we are.  Meanwhile those who actually flout the rules get much more than all the rest of us combine.

It's a twisted form of divide and conquer.


The problem is, when someone on our level is flaunting the rules, it only hurts us as a people.  All that unreported income keeps tax funds from being reinvested into the things communities need such as better roadways and education.  Sort of diminishes our humanity a bit when we find fraud at any level acceptable as well.
 
2013-11-03 11:01:17 AM  

clowncar on fire: The net for those 45 fraud cases wasn't the 45 individuals so much as the 100's of others that reconsidered or toned down their fraudulent activities.

Not catching people engaged in an activity in large numbers does not necessarily mean that there are few there to catch, it may mean they just didn't use the right methodology, have the funding, or were simply outsmarted.


Again, you're assuming that there are 100s of people out there "abusing the system" (which usually means getting the net total of $20 more on a month) when time and time again it has never panned out that way.  You don't chill what isn't there to chill.  What you do, however, is stigmatize more the people who are using help that the need as "probably" being welfare cheats.
 
2013-11-03 11:10:08 AM  

clowncar on fire: MFK: clowncar on fire: Here Comes Everybody

Also, if you think it bad "kicking a man when he is down" when that man is engaged in fraudulent activity, you may need to re-calibrate your moral compass a bit


if the result of the Fraudulent Activity is somebody a little outside the income limits getting a few extra buck to eat with or feed their family then it stops seeming like something serious enough to waste enforcement dollars on.  Especially if you know how low the bars for assistance are set.

And while the people who are frauding the crap outta the system while still making 60-100 thousand a year at their jobs should be punished, i know there are few enough of them that it doesn't even make sense to go after them.
 
2013-11-03 11:11:51 AM  

clowncar on fire: All that unreported income Special rules for capital gains keeps tax funds from being reinvested into the things communities need such as better roadways and education.


FTFY
 
2013-11-03 11:20:36 AM  

pueblonative: clowncar on fire: The net for those 45 fraud cases wasn't the 45 individuals so much as the 100's of others that reconsidered or toned down their fraudulent activities.

Not catching people engaged in an activity in large numbers does not necessarily mean that there are few there to catch, it may mean they just didn't use the right methodology, have the funding, or were simply outsmarted.

Again, you're assuming that there are 100s of people out there "abusing the system" (which usually means getting the net total of $20 more on a month) when time and time again it has never panned out that way.  You don't chill what isn't there to chill.  What you do, however, is stigmatize more the people who are using help that the need as "probably" being welfare cheats.


Apparently, an activity may be pervasive enough to warrant an investigation in the first place.  On a personal level, I have witnessed several different ways people have used to game the system in their favor.  Mind you, this was back in the 80's, but human nature hasn't changed all that much.  You leave an un-monitored candy dish out on the porch on Halloween night with a "take one please" sign on it, a few may heed the sign- most likely those escorted by their parents-- but most will take two or three.  Then there are those that in the belief they are not being watched or regulated in any way, who will walk away with the entire dish.  People like free stuff and will take whatever is given.  It's the ones that are not happy with the amount given to them that investigations are made for.
 
2013-11-03 11:25:14 AM  

Sergeant Grumbles: clowncar on fire: All that unreported income Special rules for capital gains keeps tax funds from being reinvested into the things communities need such as better roadways and education.

FTFY


I agree 100% on this one.  Any capital gains earned above your income should be treated as income.  If you are over 18 but under 64 and live on capital gains exclusively, the first 50k annually of that should be taxed as earned income.
 
2013-11-03 11:35:42 AM  

Antifun: clowncar on fire: MFK: clowncar on fire: Here Comes Everybody:  Also, if you think it bad "kicking a man when he is down" when that man is engaged in fraudulent activity, you may need to re-calibrate your moral compass a bit


if the result of the Fraudulent Activity is somebody a little outside the income limits getting a few extra buck to eat with or feed their family then it stops seeming like something serious enough to waste enforcement dollars on.  Especially if you know how low the bars for assistance are set.

And while the people who are frauding the crap outta the system while still making 60-100 thousand a year at their jobs should be punished, i know there are few enough of them that it doesn't even make sense to go after them.


The grifters are not gaming the system for an extra apple as that's not how the fraud works.  The fraud is that their family doesn't get anything extra to eat (maybe even less) and the POS gets a carton of cigarettes by returning/selling the kids food.  Those 45 people need to get government issued gruel and forced to wear a crappy jump suite in public that says "I'm a horrible person who stole food from kids"
 
2013-11-03 11:45:43 AM  

clowncar on fire: I agree 100% on this one. Any capital gains earned above your income should be treated as income. If you are over 18 but under 64 and live on capital gains exclusively, the first 50k annually of that should be taxed as earned income.


It's all income. Tax it like income. If it needs special treatment at all, then it should be taxed at a higher rate.
 
2013-11-03 11:51:29 AM  

ShadowKamui: Antifun: clowncar on fire: MFK: clowncar on fire: Here Comes Everybody:  Also, if you think it bad "kicking a man when he is down" when that man is engaged in fraudulent activity, you may need to re-calibrate your moral compass a bit


if the result of the Fraudulent Activity is somebody a little outside the income limits getting a few extra buck to eat with or feed their family then it stops seeming like something serious enough to waste enforcement dollars on.  Especially if you know how low the bars for assistance are set.

And while the people who are frauding the crap outta the system while still making 60-100 thousand a year at their jobs should be punished, i know there are few enough of them that it doesn't even make sense to go after them.

The grifters are not gaming the system for an extra apple as that's not how the fraud works.  The fraud is that their family doesn't get anything extra to eat (maybe even less) and the POS gets a carton of cigarettes by returning/selling the kids food.  Those 45 people need to get government issued gruel and forced to wear a crappy jump suite in public that says "I'm a horrible person who stole food from kids"


It's 45 possible cases, not 45 slam dunk cases of fraud.  Based on previous investigations I wouldn't put that much money on the number of verifiable fraud cases reaching double digits after they've thrown out the honest errors and records being out of date.  Kinda like the other Republican fraud cause du jour, voter fraud.
 
2013-11-03 11:53:05 AM  

clowncar on fire: Also, if you think it bad "kicking a man when he is down" when that man is engaged in fraudulent activity, you may need to re-calibrate your moral compass a bit


If we knew that everyone facing an investigation was guilty, we wouldn't need an investigation. Innocent people will get tangled up in this at a time in their lives when their ass is already getting kicked from every direction.
 
2013-11-03 11:57:58 AM  

pueblonative: ShadowKamui: Antifun: clowncar on fire: MFK: clowncar on fire: Here Comes Everybody:  Also, if you think it bad "kicking a man when he is down" when that man is engaged in fraudulent activity, you may need to re-calibrate your moral compass a bit


if the result of the Fraudulent Activity is somebody a little outside the income limits getting a few extra buck to eat with or feed their family then it stops seeming like something serious enough to waste enforcement dollars on.  Especially if you know how low the bars for assistance are set.

And while the people who are frauding the crap outta the system while still making 60-100 thousand a year at their jobs should be punished, i know there are few enough of them that it doesn't even make sense to go after them.

The grifters are not gaming the system for an extra apple as that's not how the fraud works.  The fraud is that their family doesn't get anything extra to eat (maybe even less) and the POS gets a carton of cigarettes by returning/selling the kids food.  Those 45 people need to get government issued gruel and forced to wear a crappy jump suite in public that says "I'm a horrible person who stole food from kids"

It's 45 possible cases, not 45 slam dunk cases of fraud.  Based on previous investigations I wouldn't put that much money on the number of verifiable fraud cases reaching double digits after they've thrown out the honest errors and records being out of date.  Kinda like the other Republican fraud cause du jour, voter fraud.


SNAP fraud is between 5-8% by the Fed's stats, it used to be over 10% until they tossed a bunch of croaked store owners in jail

This isn't the bullshiat drug testing scam, and yes every once in a while you do need to setup speed traps well before the whole highway starts doing 90
 
2013-11-03 12:00:56 PM  

ShadowKamui: SNAP fraud is between 5-8% by the Fed's stats, it used to be over 10% until they tossed a bunch of croaked store owners in jail


In other words, the fraud was being driven by a bunch of Jerb CreatorsTM
 
2013-11-03 12:07:49 PM  

pueblonative: ShadowKamui: SNAP fraud is between 5-8% by the Fed's stats, it used to be over 10% until they tossed a bunch of croaked store owners in jail

In other words, the fraud was being driven by a bunch of Jerb CreatorsTM


No it was being driven by a bunch of scumbag dead beats who would rather get a carton of cigs than food for their kids.  Tossing the store owners in jail simply costs the POS a convent buyer
 
2013-11-03 12:31:25 PM  

ELVERS LIVE!!

 
2013-11-03 12:42:59 PM  

ShadowKamui: pueblonative: ShadowKamui: SNAP fraud is between 5-8% by the Fed's stats, it used to be over 10% until they tossed a bunch of croaked store owners in jail

In other words, the fraud was being driven by a bunch of Jerb CreatorsTM

No it was being driven by a bunch of scumbag dead beats who would rather get a carton of cigs than food for their kids.  Tossing the store owners in jail simply costs the POS a convent buyer


So if I'm getting you straight:

One theoretical dude refunding an extra Banquet meal or three and using it for a pack of ciggies == string the bastard up and don't spare the tar and feathers!

Dude pocketing all of that extra money by giving less what the food stamps are worth in exchange for ciggies, booze, etc from multiple people == meh.
 
2013-11-03 12:56:10 PM  

pueblonative: ShadowKamui: pueblonative: ShadowKamui: SNAP fraud is between 5-8% by the Fed's stats, it used to be over 10% until they tossed a bunch of croaked store owners in jail

In other words, the fraud was being driven by a bunch of Jerb CreatorsTM

No it was being driven by a bunch of scumbag dead beats who would rather get a carton of cigs than food for their kids.  Tossing the store owners in jail simply costs the POS a convent buyer

So if I'm getting you straight:

One theoretical dude refunding an extra Banquet meal or three and using it for a pack of ciggies == string the bastard up and don't spare the tar and feathers!

Dude pocketing all of that extra money by giving less what the food stamps are worth in exchange for ciggies, booze, etc from multiple people == meh.


The store owners who did that are already in jail, and the POS on the other side of the counter was still the one who made the decision to trade their kids food for cigs not the clerk.
 
2013-11-03 01:15:42 PM  

ShadowKamui: pueblonative: ShadowKamui: pueblonative: ShadowKamui: SNAP fraud is between 5-8% by the Fed's stats, it used to be over 10% until they tossed a bunch of croaked store owners in jail

In other words, the fraud was being driven by a bunch of Jerb CreatorsTM

No it was being driven by a bunch of scumbag dead beats who would rather get a carton of cigs than food for their kids.  Tossing the store owners in jail simply costs the POS a convent buyer

So if I'm getting you straight:

One theoretical dude refunding an extra Banquet meal or three and using it for a pack of ciggies == string the bastard up and don't spare the tar and feathers!

Dude pocketing all of that extra money by giving less what the food stamps are worth in exchange for ciggies, booze, etc from multiple people == meh.

The store owners who did that are already in jail, and the POS on the other side of the counter was still the one who made the decision to trade their kids food for cigs not the clerk.


And the clerk is the innocent bystander?  Gee, to hear talk radio, they know exactly who is doing what with their welfare benefits, just like they can identify all the cadallac driving blah people welfare recipients whipping out their debit/credit EBT cards to pay for lobster and filet mignon all month long.  If you're not part of the solution. . .
 
2013-11-03 01:24:48 PM  

pueblonative: ShadowKamui: pueblonative: ShadowKamui: pueblonative: ShadowKamui: SNAP fraud is between 5-8% by the Fed's stats, it used to be over 10% until they tossed a bunch of croaked store owners in jail

In other words, the fraud was being driven by a bunch of Jerb CreatorsTM

No it was being driven by a bunch of scumbag dead beats who would rather get a carton of cigs than food for their kids.  Tossing the store owners in jail simply costs the POS a convent buyer

So if I'm getting you straight:

One theoretical dude refunding an extra Banquet meal or three and using it for a pack of ciggies == string the bastard up and don't spare the tar and feathers!

Dude pocketing all of that extra money by giving less what the food stamps are worth in exchange for ciggies, booze, etc from multiple people == meh.

The store owners who did that are already in jail, and the POS on the other side of the counter was still the one who made the decision to trade their kids food for cigs not the clerk.

And the clerk is the innocent bystander?  Gee, to hear talk radio, they know exactly who is doing what with their welfare benefits, just like they can identify all the cadallac driving blah people welfare recipients whipping out their debit/credit EBT cards to pay for lobster and filet mignon all month long.  If you're not part of the solution. . .


What part of the clerks in jail do you not understand?  You however are trying to white knight the POS that gotta get their cigs & booze rather than feed their kids.  The 5-8% who are committing fraud need to be removed from the normal system so that the  90% who need the help can use it to better themselves.
 
2013-11-03 01:35:25 PM  

ShadowKamui: What part of the clerks in jail do you not understand? You however are trying to white knight the POS that gotta get their cigs & booze rather than feed their kids. The 5-8% who are committing fraud need to be removed from the normal system so that the 90% who need the help can use it to better themselves.


The part that lists clerks as a synonym of store owner.  And in terms of priorities, the 5-8 percent who may be, at most, skimming a hundred bucks in SNAP benefits vs closing legal loopholes that let the top one percent get a free ride off the society that helped them be the top one percent occupy very different positions.  Wanna guess which one is way higher than the other?
 
2013-11-03 01:45:03 PM  

pueblonative: ShadowKamui: What part of the clerks in jail do you not understand? You however are trying to white knight the POS that gotta get their cigs & booze rather than feed their kids. The 5-8% who are committing fraud need to be removed from the normal system so that the 90% who need the help can use it to better themselves.

The part that lists clerks as a synonym of store owner.  And in terms of priorities, the 5-8 percent who may be, at most, skimming a hundred bucks in SNAP benefits vs closing legal loopholes that let the top one percent get a free ride off the society that helped them be the top one percent occupy very different positions.  Wanna guess which one is way higher than the other?


The SNAP program is not run by the SEC so your comparison is completely irrelevant.  And by the USDAs states the ~5% fraud resulted in over 850 million dollars that were stolen from needy people.  So yeah kindly STFU and stop trying to white knight nearly a billion dollars in theft from starving children
 
2013-11-03 01:57:41 PM  

ShadowKamui: pueblonative: ShadowKamui: What part of the clerks in jail do you not understand? You however are trying to white knight the POS that gotta get their cigs & booze rather than feed their kids. The 5-8% who are committing fraud need to be removed from the normal system so that the 90% who need the help can use it to better themselves.

The part that lists clerks as a synonym of store owner.  And in terms of priorities, the 5-8 percent who may be, at most, skimming a hundred bucks in SNAP benefits vs closing legal loopholes that let the top one percent get a free ride off the society that helped them be the top one percent occupy very different positions.  Wanna guess which one is way higher than the other?

The SNAP program is not run by the SEC so your comparison is completely irrelevant.  And by the USDAs states the ~5% fraud resulted in over 850 million dollars that were stolen from needy people.  So yeah kindly STFU and stop trying to white knight nearly a billion dollars in theft from starving children


Yeah, I'm sure you and all the welfare cheats are worse than Wall Street crowd would immediately funnel that $850 million "recovered fraud" money into more programs for poor children.  Either that tax cuts, one or the other.

So kindly STFU and stop using starving children as human shields for your hate on for people with a shiatty existance that you suspect are making it slightly less shiatty through fraud.
 
2013-11-03 02:04:32 PM  

pueblonative: ShadowKamui: pueblonative: ShadowKamui: What part of the clerks in jail do you not understand? You however are trying to white knight the POS that gotta get their cigs & booze rather than feed their kids. The 5-8% who are committing fraud need to be removed from the normal system so that the 90% who need the help can use it to better themselves.

The part that lists clerks as a synonym of store owner.  And in terms of priorities, the 5-8 percent who may be, at most, skimming a hundred bucks in SNAP benefits vs closing legal loopholes that let the top one percent get a free ride off the society that helped them be the top one percent occupy very different positions.  Wanna guess which one is way higher than the other?

The SNAP program is not run by the SEC so your comparison is completely irrelevant.  And by the USDAs states the ~5% fraud resulted in over 850 million dollars that were stolen from needy people.  So yeah kindly STFU and stop trying to white knight nearly a billion dollars in theft from starving children

Yeah, I'm sure you and all the welfare cheats are worse than Wall Street crowd would immediately funnel that $850 million "recovered fraud" money into more programs for poor children.  Either that tax cuts, one or the other.

So kindly STFU and stop using starving children as human shields for your hate on for people with a shiatty existance that you suspect are making it slightly less shiatty through fraud.


Guess what their genus they are making their kids life shiatty through fraud.  Sorry scum bag, letting your kids starve to death so you can get you smokes is not making their life better.
 
2013-11-03 03:07:30 PM  
Who the hell eats eels?
 
2013-11-03 03:12:02 PM  
ShadowKamui: ...The store owners who did that are already in jail, and the POS on the other side of the counter was still the one who made the decision to trade their kids food for cigs not the clerk.

Why is it you Republicans can't make your point without lying? Welfare fraud is negligible.
 
Displayed 50 of 71 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report