White House accidentally texted reporter its secret plans for strikes on Houthis in Yemen
Military by Curt_Anderson     March 24, 2025 12:41 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (6 comments) [85 views]

Social Security does some "cleanup"
Government by oldedude     March 22, 2025 11:28 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (10 comments) [99 views]

FL completes an unspeakable act
News by oldedude     March 23, 2025 6:17 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (9 comments) [99 views]

Trump's tariffs are already working: South Korea's Hyundai announces $21 billion U.S. investment
International by HatetheSwamp     March 24, 2025 12:56 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (6 comments) [71 views]

One group is finally accountable for damages- Antifa next?
Crime by oldedude     March 19, 2025 9:19 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (22 comments) [293 views]

Is love thy neighbor and WWJD passé among Republican Christians?
Religion by Curt_Anderson     March 23, 2025 2:45 pm (Rating: 5.0) Last comment by: oldedude (20 comments) [195 views]

Ahhhh ma chérie, even your dreams can come true!
Machinery & Tools by oldedude     March 24, 2025 7:54 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [9 views]

Around 23,000 Tucsonans Show Up for Bernie and AOC's FIGHT OLIGARCHY Tour
President by Ponderer     March 23, 2025 7:39 am (Rating: 5.0) Last comment by: ROB3RT (28 comments) [258 views]

Surrendering to Authoritarianism
Education by Donna     March 24, 2025 4:39 pm (Rating: 5.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (2 comments) [20 views]

My prediction and a question about Usha Vance's visit to Greenland.
International by Curt_Anderson     March 24, 2025 9:06 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: meagain (7 comments) [86 views]

Social Security does some "cleanup" By oldedude March 22, 2025 11:28 am Category: Government (0.0 from 0 votes) Rules of the Post Write A New Article How To Post Here

I have been critical of the "bull in the China Closet" methods DOGE has employed since their inception. My guess is that trumpster wanted a blitzkrieg affect at the onset of the program.

A lot of folks are worried because to reduce the "number" automatically meant they were taking away granny's check. Having worked for the government for many years, I knew there was a lot of slush in record keeping of anything that big. There just has to be. Johnny doesn't report granny's death and just pockets the money. OR granny dies and there is no family to report it.

When working gangs, we would routinely find social security checks that belonged to somebody's granny in the house. Granny (or even a neighbor or other family member) got dead years back. Not only did they not report it, but they were also using it as their "income" which of course they didn't report.


These are the reported stats. Getting into an argument about the numbers is stupid. Everyone with a story in the past two days have the same numbers. I consider these to be as valid as if pedojoe put them out.

In a statement on X, DOGE announced, "For the past two weeks, Social Security has been conducting a major cleanup of its records. As part of its ongoing mission, DOGE continues to focus on cutting government expenditure. According to government records, as of March 8, the Social Security database listed 1,357,967 people between the ages of 150 and 159 as alive.

The story goes on to say that by mid March, this number had decreased by 186,415 to 1,171,552. In total, 3,261,057 individuals were reclassified as deceased.

It sounds like they're actually doing their due diligence to make sure the oldest person in the world isn't still alive and collecting. I'll accept that. And it sounds like this is the way it'll be with Medicare and Medicaid. While the existence of these records does not necessarily imply that benefits were still being paid, it highlights the FWA (Fraud, Waste, and Abuse), or simply inefficiencies in the bureaucracy. Also, with that many, I'd say there was systemic inefficiencies or abuse.

Welfare is ran by the states (which is usually part of the counties), so DOGE would have to look into the counties. It may be interesting if folks will have to "reapply" for services. That looks different in every county so the feds will have a problem getting to it.

Cited and related links:

1. business-standard.com

Comments Start Below

by oldedude on March 23, 2025 8:47 pm It's interesting the sheeple don't give a flying F*** about people ripping them off. Great. No big deal. The billions of USD recovered could go into their socialized whatever. Navy want us to be under an questionably productive (like it is in every other country with socialized medicine). It wants some government bean counter to "evaluate" everyone if they "deserve" health care or not. I just say "fuck you!" to it. Given the recent "decisions" by the "British" "health care system" that refused health care to a child in the US. My guess is that navy (it) will pay for this three-fold in hell. And I hope so. I have done lots of things. AND I am willing to meet my soul in death. I think it is not. by Curt_Anderson on March 23, 2025 9:05 pm Commerce secretary Howard Lutnick suggested this week that only "fraudsters" would complain about missing a monthly Social Security check, and that most people wouldn't mind if the government simply skipped a payment. "Let's say Social Security didn't send out their checks this month. My mother-in-law, who's 94, she wouldn't call and complain," Lutnick — a billionaire former Wall Street CEO — told the billionaire "All In" podcast host Chamath Palihapitiya. "She just wouldn't. She'd think something got messed up, and she'll get it next month. A fraudster always makes the loudest noise, screaming, yelling and complaining." axios.com by Curt_Anderson on March 23, 2025 9:16 pm "I knew there was a lot of slush in record keeping of anything that big. There just has to be. Johnny doesn't report granny's death and just pockets the money. OR granny dies and there is no family to report it." --OD How does Johnny, a younger male, cash the SS checks of granny, an elderly (and dead) female? It cannot be that easy without the bank noticing. If granny dies and the checks keep coming, she's not cashing them. I'd like to see an authoritative and reliable report on Social Security fraud. Probably it's in the very low single percent of all money sent out. Elon Musk will no doubt overstate the amount of fraud. by Navy2711 on March 23, 2025 9:40 pm Curt, "How does Johnny, a younger male, cash the SS checks of granny, an elderly (and dead) female?" I don't know the answer to this question, but here's a wild guess. I haven't taken a check to the bank in person in years. I deposit them with an app on my phone. The app has you take a picture of the front and back of the check, then you submit the info, and voila, the money appears in your account in a day or two, just as if you had walked the check into the bank. But no teller ever saw my face. If I had access to my deceased granny's bank account, I don't see why I couldn't deposit her checks like that and then withdraw the money for myself. by Curt_Anderson on March 23, 2025 10:15 pm Navy, I also haven't cashed a check in person in a long time. I've also cashed and deposited checks via smartphone that are made out to ME, not some other person. by oldedude on March 23, 2025 11:38 pm navy, what you're talking about is felony fraud. I know you have no morals, so that doesn't surprise me, but it's actually worse than what trumpster was charged with. It isn't a "state" crime, it's a federal crime of falsifying a government document (which is 10 years/ $10K for each time you do it). You really don't have morals, do you? by oldedude on March 24, 2025 8:57 pm If I had access to my deceased granny's bank account, I don't see why I couldn't deposit her checks like that and then withdraw the money for myself. Exactly how it's done. Johnny has been on granny's account for years. It's a normal thing for him to do. He's been on the signature card since granny got dementia and just kept going. by oldedude on March 24, 2025 9:36 pm Sorry for the SPAM. navy, both posts are true. It is fraud and money laundering. That said, if you're on the signature card, you can do it forever. As long as the account is active and "normal" it doesn't raise any red flags. curt is "assuming" Social Security looks at every account every month. It's way too big for that. If they don't get a death certificate, things just keep going. Just like the DMV. Nobody cares. They're trying to do their job and eventually collect the retirement when it comes. The issue is none of these components talk to each other. Social Security/ medicare the VA are federal programs. They "could" talk to the states. And don't. Private financial institutions complete several forms IF they see something suspicious, deposits over $10K, and some other reasons. If the feds don't see the form, they don't raise a flag. AND for the "normal" analyst, there are rules about who they can investigate. And most of them are too busy to look for Johnny, unless that's the case they've been assigned. navy here are the laws that would break. 18 U.S. Code § 1956 - Laundering of monetary instruments curt- here are the numbers from 2023 of the FinCEN forms. Approximate Total for FinCEN, FY23 SARs 4.6M CTRs 20.8M Currency and Other Monetary Instrument Reports 143,200 Reports of Cash Payments >$10K Received in a Trade or Business 421,500 Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts 1.6M law.cornell.edu fincen.gov congress.gov by Curt_Anderson on March 24, 2025 10:23 pm "curt is "assuming" Social Security looks at every account every month. It's way too big for that. If they don't get a death certificate, things just keep going." --OD I am not assuming that. I am sure they don't. But I know that banks are able to verify checks deposited using a mobile app, which includes submitting photos of the front and back of the check. Joe Blow cannot deposit into his account a SS check made out to Jane Doe. Is fraud possible? Sure, but a fraudster would have to be pretty ballsy to attempt to fraudulently deposit a SS check into their own account as the bank would have the fraudster's phone number and photographic evidence of their crime. Not to mention there is the good chance the bank would learn that Jane Doe died. If a person is intent on committing fraud there are less risky ways of making a dishonest buck. The former commissioner of the Social Security Administration for six years under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama says DOGE and Musk's claim's of rampant SS fraud are "flat out wrong". [Some] of the biggest examples of allegedly wasteful spending held up by Musk and DOGE so far have been overblown or inaccurate. Musk’s assertion that tens of millions of dead people over 100 years old are receiving Social Security benefits was so off-base that it had to be tamped down by the agency’s acting head, who had been promoted because of his willingness to cooperate with DOGE. npr.org washingtonpost.com by oldedude on March 24, 2025 11:58 pm I am not assuming that. I am sure they don't. But I know that banks are able to verify checks deposited using a mobile app, which includes submitting photos of the front and back of the check. Joe Blow cannot deposit into his account a SS check made out to Jane Doe. You are misreading the example. It's jane's account. I deposit my wife's checks all the time. So do most couples. It's not a big deal. All I have to do is to complete a signature card for jane's account🙄. If Joe is on the signature card for Jane's account (jane has to either be there in person or give John a power of attorney to do this), then have access to the account. It's perfectly legal to do that. If you've done all the stuff above, the bank may not know for a very long time. In this case, what is NOT legal is to collect a dead person's check. That is called defrauding the government and money laundering. That's a different statute all together. Two separate sets of laws, but a lot of prison time. This happens often with parents in dementia. My sister had full access to my mom's accounts. No big deal. She was on the signature card. And that was at the suggestion of the bank (mom went to the same bank for 30 years). I said this already and cited the law. I'm really sorry if you don't understand the simplest nuances of modern banking. Go To Top

Find old posts & articles

Show Most Recent Articles Articles by category: Politics+ Religion+ Law & Crime Military News Media History Health Sports+ Humor Entertainment Misc.

Report spam & abuse SelectSmart.com home page