JDHillFan Posted February 11 Author Posted February 11 13 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: Don't they send condoms out for HIV prevention which has been vastly successful? Seems like context is important. You truly want context for 50M worth of rubbers going to Mozambique? I don’t even know if it’s true but the need for context on this is stunning. 1
The Frankish Reich Posted February 11 Posted February 11 15 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: Seems like context is important. Understatement of the millennium. 16 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: "But all those bureaucrats making $180k a year with a net worth of 35 million? I'm sure there are thousands of bureaucrats with such net worths. Why do people listen to this crap?
BillsFanNC Posted February 11 Posted February 11 15 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: "But all those bureaucrats making $180k a year with a net worth of 35 million? Meh." It's one person they mentioned, maybe they have a spouse that makes a lot of money or received a large inheritance? The idea that you can single out one person as having a high net worth working for the government as some sign that they are selling data is a rather large leap to take. See Pelosi, Nancy and they'll go down the list from there. It will be long. 15 minutes ago, billsfan89 said: Don't they send condoms out for HIV prevention which has been vastly successful? Seems like context is important. Yes, that's what its supposed to be about on its face, but it's not. And even if it was 50 million for condoms for HIV prevention, I think most Americans don't want their tax dollars spent that way.
billsfan89 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 37 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: See Pelosi, Nancy and they'll go down the list from there. It will be long. Yes, that's what its supposed to be about on its face, but it's not. And even if it was 50 million for condoms for HIV prevention, I think most Americans don't want their tax dollars spent that way. Stock trading Congress people is a big problem, but that also doesn't mean that there's a long list of federal bureaucrats becoming millionaires many times over for unexplained reasons. They literally named one federal employee who had a big jump in net worth and there's numerous possible explanations for that like someone getting a big inheritance or their spouse making a lot of money at their profession or receiving some sort of settlement for a spouse or family member. Yeah if you got thousands or at least hundreds of examples of this then this is really concerning but this isn't some unfathomable situation where one example means this is widespread. The US AIDS prevention program has saved tens of million of lives in Africa it's a very small portion of the federal budget and tremendously helpful towards US Diplomacy. I think there's a lot of Americans that view that program as being worth it. Of course some don't which is fine but its not a slam dunk either.
JFKjr Posted February 12 Posted February 12 1 minute ago, billsfan89 said: The US AIDS prevention program has saved tens of million of lives in Africa it's a very small portion of the federal budget and tremendously helpful towards US Diplomacy. I think there's a lot of Americans that view that program as being worth it. Of course some don't which is fine but its not a slam dunk either. The history of Fauci and AIDS will be looked at. The picture is not as rosy as you might think.
Homelander Posted February 12 Posted February 12 11 minutes ago, JFKjr said: The history of Fauci and AIDS will be looked at. The picture is not as rosy as you might think. Aaron Rodgers? Is that you? 1
billsfan89 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 25 minutes ago, JFKjr said: The history of Fauci and AIDS will be looked at. The picture is not as rosy as you might think. It's a pretty objective fact that the program which was implemented in the 2000's under George W Bush was a massive success...
daz28 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 41 minutes ago, Homelander said: Who controlled the budget for the past two years? Doh!
JDHillFan Posted February 12 Author Posted February 12 RoundyLogic - GAO is just saying 233-521B is lost to fraud because it’s spending on things they don’t like. 1
daz28 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 13 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: RoundyLogic - GAO is just saying 233-521B is lost to fraud because it’s spending on things they don’t like. Fraud is criminal, so if he found all this fraud, where are the criminal cases? I hope he does find it, but claiming to have found it, without proof, is political theater. So far most of what I've seen has been spending on things the trump administration doesn't like, but were appropriated through budgets. Republican budgets mind you. I wish they'd save the fraud/corruption accusations for when they can present their case to the people. 1
Pokebball Posted February 12 Posted February 12 (edited) 13 minutes ago, daz28 said: Fraud is criminal, so if he found all this fraud, where are the criminal cases? I hope he does find it, but claiming to have found it, without proof, is political theater. So far most of what I've seen has been spending on things the trump administration doesn't like, but were appropriated through budgets. Republican budgets mind you. I wish they'd save the fraud/corruption accusations for when they can present their case to the people. It's only been 3 wks for the shyt Musk is finding. But you ask a good question. Why hasn't our government pursued all of this fraud? Edited February 12 by Pokebball
dgrochester55 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 (edited) To the libs out there protesting DOGE like it is the end of the world. Do you think that the US has been inefficient in their spending over the past few decades? Is DOGE terrible to you because of who is behind it or what it consists of? If Obama or Biden did this, would you have still been against it? Personally, I can say that some things go beyond politics. I am fine with this regardless who the president is. Same way that I was glad to see Biden put through an infrastructure bill (despite the climate scheme pork.) No President is 100% good or 100% bad. Financial accountability and transparency in the government was desperately needed and the spending leaking out has proven it. Edit: One last request. They aren't going after our Social security, every cabinet member for any president is unelected and some wasteful spending was definitely uncovered, so don't play those three cards and give sensible replies only. Edited February 12 by dgrochester55
JFKjr Posted February 12 Posted February 12 15 minutes ago, daz28 said: Fraud is criminal, so if he found all this fraud, where are the criminal cases? I hope he does find it, but claiming to have found it, without proof, is political theater. So far most of what I've seen has been spending on things the trump administration doesn't like, but were appropriated through budgets. Republican budgets mind you. I wish they'd save the fraud/corruption accusations for when they can present their case to the people. You miss Sleepy Joe, don't you?
Recommended Posts