A little Math

Mar 16, 2015 37 Replies

formatting link

Flawed Social Security data say 6.5M in US reach age 112 Erroneous Social Security records suggest 6.5M people reach age 112; potential for fraud

BUT... IT SAYS: ... Only 13 of the people are still getting Social Security benefits, the report said. ... Nothing to see here, folks. Move along.

That's very responsible of you Jim, to ask about reliable sourcing.

But as usual in most rightist forums like this, authority and other leading points of reference seemed to be viewed negatively and hurriedly skipped in favor of fantasy, school yard polemic, pat-on-the-back tradition and encouragement and invective.

I suspect that the people in the math related newsgroup might have wanted more of a challenge than to just have answered the original poster's question on the presented merits... hence the response (or lack thereof...)

It's been in the news for almost two weeks, if I give you an authoritative source are you going to do something to fix it?

Is the SSA Inspector General authoritative enough?

The answer is yes.

formatting link

Mikek

reference seemed to be viewed negatively and hurriedly skipped in favor of fantasy,

Here's the references,

formatting link

The next question is, what are we going to do with the illegals that stole a SS#, paid FICA on it for 30 years and now want to draw on the stolen number?

The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they're genuine. -- Abraham Lincoln

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic. Do you really mean nothing to see here? I decided to look at your link :-) Minor details like this quote don't bother you? "But for others, their Social Security numbers are still active, so a number could be used to report wages, open bank accounts, obtain credit cards or claim fraudulent tax refunds. "That is a real problem," said Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis. "When you have a fake Social Security number, that's what allows you to fraudulently do all kinds things, claim things like the earned income tax credit or other tax benefits."

Mikek

==================== Compare and contrast the lack of governmental action in this area with furor over the Python "invasion" of the Everglades.

formatting link
formatting link

Say, do you think it would be cheaper to drop those illegals in the Everglades instead of deporting them? Call it "relocation".

More along the lines of a lot of slaves escaped into the 'glades, and joined the locals. Bit of a different situation.

-- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."

England and France conquered North America while Spain and Portugal were doing the same thing with more brutality in Central and South America. Right from the start they disputed the borders between their claims, the current issues aren't new or unusual. Disputes and readjustments still linger from the Canadian Arctic to the Falklands.

formatting link

-jsw

They probably won't like it and will help feed the snakes spicy morsels. ;)

Gunner Asch on Sun, 22 Mar 2015 00:59:11 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Back in the day, yes.

Nowadays? Possibly. OTOH, going from a subsidized urban environment, to a subsistence not yet settled enough to be "rural" environment, will have it own "sorting hat".

-- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."

All the better for Texican bidnessmen wanting 'spensive boots. It'll be a whole new ecology. Seminoles feeding illegals to the snakes and gators, then collecting the hides, trading those to cobblers who reciprocate with the Texans. It's a win for almost everyone, the illegals don't count. (They're illegal!)

I didn't forget, just named the major contestants. Denmark still owns (sorta) their New World colony, Greenland. Russia was smart enough to cash out.

-jsw

That is a little misleading as N. America wasn't completely conquered until the late 19th, early 20th century. Long after England and France has moved out of the picture. The last gasp in the U.S. "Indian Wars" seems to have been sometime in 1924.

I believe that the Dutch bought their island. For round about $1,000 in modern money. Given the availability of trade goods in America at the time it was probably viewed by the recipients as a fortune.

I assumed you knew that the European colonists in North and South America won independence.

The sympathetic left-leaning media ignored the Sandinistas' more recent abuse of and fight with the Miskito Indians.

formatting link

-jsw

As I said, "Long after England and France has moved out of the picture" :-)

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required