You speculate so much you should audition to be William Devane’s sidekick.
This idea that there is just all of this fraud within direct Federal spending executed by Federal Depts isn't grounded in reality . The controls are too tight for actual fraud of substantial scale.
Seriously? Phantom employees and other kinds of fictitious payees in federal programs is astounding. DOGE was oversold, but one of the best things it accomplished was to pull the cover off the whole phantom and fictitious payee scandal present in every single federal and federally funded program.
Phantom employees? What are you talking about?
There are no phantom Federal employees.
I don’t think Medicare is pass through. Neither is SS. But yeah. Pass through’s are a huge issue.
Google AI
- Improper Payments: The U.S. Government Accountability Office tracks funds lost to fraud, which includes payments made to deceased individuals or ineligible recipients. Annually, improper payments across the federal government frequently exceed \(\$150\) billion, with a portion attributable to phantom payees and identity fraud in benefit programs.
- Ghost Employees: "Ghost employee" schemes involve fictitious or reactivated identities placed on a payroll to divert wages. While the total number of individuals involved fluctuates as cases are investigated and prosecuted, monitoring involves heightened tracking by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.
@co-hoosier yeah I’m being lazy. I just meant at the ground level with cms reimbursing etc
@co-hoosier improper payments are a problem in Medicare and Medicaid, as discussed already. Those two programs account for more than half.
EITC makes up another big share, people receiving the tax credit incorrectly.
GAO puts out an improper payment report every year, and has for decades. DOGE didn't uncover anything new, that wasn't publicly available before. Improper payments actually were higher in 2025 than the year before. So what does that tell you about DOGE successes?
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-108694
The 'ghost employee' thing is a farce. It was something that Musk was obsessed with and talked about frequently, early on. But yet never came up with any examples.
I had heard that some were forced on agencies, but not how pervasive it was.
They left a lot of strings in place for NIH and NSF research funding. Every grant application is still searched for "bad words" such as "gender", "diversity", "diverse", "female", "sex", "climate", others...
Use those words, even innocently, and you proposal is flushed as being out of line with priorities of the administration.
Never say that your cancer drug will be tested in mixed gender groups of mice, or in both male and female mice, or in mice of both sexes. But... Testing in both male and non-male mice... you're good to go!
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
I had heard that some were forced on agencies, but not how pervasive it was.
They left a lot of strings in place for NIH and NSF research funding. Every grant application is still searched for "bad words" such as "gender", "diversity", "diverse", "female", "sex", "climate", others...
Use those words, even innocently, and you proposal is flushed as being out of line with priorities of the administration.
Never say that your cancer drug will be tested in mixed gender groups of mice, or in both male and female mice, or in mice of both sexes. But... Testing in both male and non-male mice... you're good to go!
"You can't make someone listen to reason if they aren't willing to think"-- Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451
Nonsense. Link it.This idea that there is just all of this fraud within direct Federal spending executed by Federal Depts isn't grounded in reality . The controls are too tight for actual fraud of substantial scale.
Seriously? Phantom employees and other kinds of fictitious payees in federal programs is astounding. DOGE was oversold, but one of the best things it accomplished was to pull the cover off the whole phantom and fictitious payee scandal present in every single federal and federally funded program.
Stop. You have no clue what you posted or what it really means. Admit it.Said like someone that didn't read it and can't explain its findings. It's a common tactic.There are many other articles & studies about this. People can only learn something if they’re willing to approach with an open mind, which you are not…
Sure, I'll play. I'm coming at this with an open mind. Tell us what you think that study means in your own words.
Read the study & draw your own conclusions.
I get that you need someone to explain it to you, but I’m not going to. You & your fellow Ohioan should join forces & maybe between the two of you figure it out. You can also use AI to explain it to you, but either of you claiming to have any real interest in my opinion is disingenuous, you’re just looking for a fight, & my opinion is immaterial to the conclusion you make. My guess is you’d rather remain ignorant than learn something based on who posted, regardless of what they post.
@co-hoosier I don’t know what you’re talking about. I doubt that you do.
You don’t control phantom employees and fictitious payees one by one. You do it with serious and strict universal precautions, which some federal agencies still resist.
Stop. You have no clue what you posted or what it really means. Admit it.Said like someone that didn't read it and can't explain its findings. It's a common tactic.There are many other articles & studies about this. People can only learn something if they’re willing to approach with an open mind, which you are not…
Sure, I'll play. I'm coming at this with an open mind. Tell us what you think that study means in your own words.
Read the study & draw your own conclusions.
I get that you need someone to explain it to you, but I’m not going to. You & your fellow Ohioan should join forces & maybe between the two of you figure it out. You can also use AI to explain it to you, but either of you claiming to have any real interest in my opinion is disingenuous, you’re just looking for a fight, & my opinion is immaterial to the conclusion you make. My guess is you’d rather remain ignorant than learn something based on who posted, regardless of what they post.
You’re right. Please explain it to me…
@co-hoosier ok, sure. Let me know when you find something that supports any of your thesis about these phantom employees.
I didn’t say I read it, you did. I honestly do not believe you read it or are capable of understanding it if you did. Prove me wrong.You’re right. Please explain it to me…