Dahobbs
Legacy Members-
Posts
20174 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Downloads
Recruiting - 2020
2019-2020 Football Season
Football
Entertainment
Sports
News and Business
Cloak Room
Transfer Portal
Recruiting
Events
Everything posted by Dahobbs
-
TIL there’s something called fraud tourism. Congrats, Minnesota.
Dahobbs replied to Vato Macho's topic in Cloak Room
Dude, you're being really dense here. I get that the non-profit Feeding our Future was fraudulent. You also claimed: Basically all of the Housing Stabilization program is fraudulent. Over half of the new autism centers opened up were fake. Even Walz has said earlier this summer he won’t be surprised if there is over a billion dollars in Feeding our Future fraud alone I can't find any specific facts that support these statements. Again, I'm not contending that there isn't significant fraud. I'm just saying the particular article and statements from the DOJ improperly imply evidence of $9 billion without having it and without indicting it. -
Bozo, we can't respond to your particular experience. You've provided no detail. I don't know you. I don't have any reason to believe you or not believe you. I don't have any reason to know whether you have the evidence available to actually reach your conclusion. Again, if you want us to accept an assertion, you'll have to provide evidence. That's how it works. You don't get to just say things and have everyone believe you. You've made a claim, now support it. Again, if someone was treated unfairly, that is wrong and should be addressed. If a particular company's hiring practices are discriminatory, that should be fixed. But you seem to want us to jump from your individual anecdote to this being something that is systemic and prevalent. Again, the available evidence does not support that conclusion.
-
TIL there’s something called fraud tourism. Congrats, Minnesota.
Dahobbs replied to Vato Macho's topic in Cloak Room
Why are you being so dense? My response was to this particular article. I get that there is other fraud happening out there. I get that other fraud has been indicted. But nothing close to the $9 billion has been indicted. You have someone putting out an outrageous number with very little evidence to back it up. That isn't proper for a US attorney. It just isn't. Source? No, it is a red flag to me that one could identify fraudulent services by merely reviewing claims data. It basically never works that way. Again, I've done this work. I know what the data looks like. You can't do a skin level analysis and say these must be fraudulent because... uh... reasons. Sources? I can't find any (beyond politicians just saying things) that support these statements. There was definitely fraud to some significant degree. And I think it varied pretty widely. Some facilities were out right fake and didn't provide services. Other facilities provided services, but perhaps did so in a substandard way. But your statements appear to be significant exaggerations on the actual facts I can find. -
You've made nothing clear. You've talked out of both sides of your mouth and generally been a dick. I don't think you know what you want. Again, what response do you think you're looking for?
-
There is a growing gender imbalance. But I don't think it is because men are being unfairly denied admittance. I think they aren't applying. Also, there just are more women than men generally. We tend to forget that because for generations men have outnumbered women in higher education and the workplace. It is certainly something worth exploring, but doing so under the guise of giving credence to bullshit grievances isn't the way to do it.
-
TIL there’s something called fraud tourism. Congrats, Minnesota.
Dahobbs replied to Vato Macho's topic in Cloak Room
I've read both. The tweet is part of the article. If the tweet is incorrect, then that is on them and not me. We can't get anywhere until you admit it is misleading. I've gone through the material, and it frankly isn't clear what either the article or the US attorney's office are referring to. You may be correct. But I don't think that changes the substance of my problem: they are making sweeping generalizations based upon one specific instance of indicted fraud and what sounds like pretty surface level data review. If there is more, they should pursue it. Again, a few hundred million in fraud wouldn't surprise me. And I'm all for prosecuting it. But I'm not believing the $9 billion number without a lot of evidence. And I'm calling out the unusual prosecutorial conduct in commenting on unindicted fraud. Put up or shut up. I have a strong distaste for using the US Attorney's office to attempt to score political points, particularly when it isn't connected to indicted crimes or those without substantial evidence. I think it looks bad on our profession and is a violation of the duty of an officer of the court. -
What a bitchy and inaccurate generalization. Stop it.
-
TIL there’s something called fraud tourism. Congrats, Minnesota.
Dahobbs replied to Vato Macho's topic in Cloak Room
No, I'm not: The allegation is that half of the $18 billion paid by Minnesota Medicaid payments have been fraudulent. Grammatically, that is saying that half of the money paid out by Medicaid is fraudulent. That's the part that is bullshit. If the article and Mr. Thompson meant to say something different, then that is on them and not me. As presented, the article is misleading. In particular, I find this statement troubling: That's a red flag to me. I know what claims data looks like. I deal with it a lot. This sounds a lot like with DOGE scrubbed data without any understanding of what it was actually looking at. Again, an audit is under way. We should have better understanding once actual data and evidence is released. If there is fraud, prosecute it. But don't make sweeping and staggering pronouncements without significant evidence to back it up. I agree, you're definitely doing that. -
TIL there’s something called fraud tourism. Congrats, Minnesota.
Dahobbs replied to Vato Macho's topic in Cloak Room
Again, what the fuck are you talking about? I'm talking about this specific release involving a couple million in alleged fraud and extrapolating into billions based upon literally nothing. Whether or not other significant fraud exists, I don't know, but would not be surprised. I haven't said anything about Somalis or made a pronouncement that certain social groups may or may not be more connected to this sort of fraud. Half the states Medicaid isn't fraudulent. That's not how this works. I have enough experience pursuing these to know how they work, how prevalent they can be, and how bad data analysis leads to absurd conclusions. -
TIL there’s something called fraud tourism. Congrats, Minnesota.
Dahobbs replied to Vato Macho's topic in Cloak Room
You're misreading the thread. -
Yes, it is. I don't have any basis to know if the number is significant or not. As to why someone may misattribute the reason for their denied jobs or promotional opportunities, for all the usual reasons: people have poor innate understanding of statistics, it is easier to attribute cause to something external rather than internal, DEI policies (and the sentiments surrounding them) are in their face and thus easy targets for blame, people mistake lessened advantage with unfair disadvantage, etc. It is hard to talk in generalities because for any individual the reasoning may be different. And it is entirely possible that certain people faced actual discrimination. The issue is whether there is evidence that the discrimination is systemic, I don't see any evidence of that. But, rather than play sophomoric games, why you don't you just answer my question? What is the response you're looking for.
-
TIL there’s something called fraud tourism. Congrats, Minnesota.
Dahobbs replied to Vato Macho's topic in Cloak Room
Well, then I guess we must believe that all Ukrainians are nazis because of few them might be, right? This is a disappointing take for you. I generally like you as a poster, but come on, they have evidence of small fraud in this particular instance and use it speculate that half the states Medicaid disbursements must be fraudulent. That's ridiculous and irresponsible. That's the only thing we have pushed back on. -
Again, what is an acceptable response in your view? Why is not ok to say "I understand how you feel, but let's address the real cause"? Why are you being a petulant child when people refuse, without any evidence, to believe unfair discrimination is happening en masse? Your posts have a shitty tone and you're not explaining yourself well. It is tiresome.
-
TIL there’s something called fraud tourism. Congrats, Minnesota.
Dahobbs replied to Vato Macho's topic in Cloak Room
Who is denying that things like that can happen? -
The article is about DEI policies hurting white, millennial males. Again, I don't think you actually know what point you're trying to make. Ostensibly you've asked us to agree that this is happening and that a well intentioned policy is having negative consequences. Many posts have pointed out while we may understand why he feels that way, the objective facts simply don't support it. For some reason, you seem to find these responses unacceptable and disappointing. It seems the only response you want is complete agreement this bad thing is happening. I get that anecdotes exist. I get that people may feel that they are being treated unfairly. I empathize with the anger and resentment that feeling can create. But I also think it is mistake to blindly agree with what I believe is a faulty analysis of the problem. I can commit to addressing actual problems that contribute to their lot in life, including inequity in how the fruits of labor are distributed. This isn't me rejecting someone's "personal lived experience" as you want to say. Again, I empathize with the way they are feeling. But just because they feel that way doesn't make it true. Are there individual instances of unfair treatment at companies that had poorly implemented DEI policies? Sure, I believe there are. Is there widespread unfair discrimination against white, millennial men? No. That statistics don't support that. Those men just don't have the same level of unfair privilege that they've had before. 28% of the population doesn't get to have 70% of the good jobs. And it especially doesn't get to do it when entering fields where it only makes up 10% of the applicants. What does unfairly affect a lot of white, millennial men is the refusal of the wealthy to share in the fruits of everyone else's labor. If they did so, you'd have more, better paying jobs, and more opportunities for advancement. I'm down for fixing that. And I'm down for telling them I understand your frustration, but this is how we address that issue, not blaming the DEI boogie man. Again, I ask you, what are you trying to accomplish here? Why are you disappointed in what I see as a pretty thoughtful discussion? If you don't believe there has been systematic discrimination against these men, why are you insisting that we agree with them?
-
Nope. You've been unfairly discriminated against. Bozo out front should have told you.
-
Everyone is poor compared to the truly wealthy. That's what I mean. If we want to fix the decline of real wage growth and how all economic growth has been captured by the top 1% of the top 1%, I'm here for it. I'm not here for pretending that white men are disadvantaged because they are white men.
-
If you want me to say I can empathize with his point of view even if I think his casual analysis is faulty, I can. I get why he might feel that way. I think other progressive policies attempt to address the root cause of the problem (e.g., higher progressive tax brackets, universal healthcare).
-
We can commit to helping the disadvantaged poor, including the white males in that group, without agreeing that DEI policies have systematically and unfairly hurt a subcategory of white males. If that is all you want, you got it.
-
Do you also need to know how we relate to flat earthers? I don't understand what you're trying to accomplish and I suspect that neither do you.
-
I get you're presupposing it. Why don't you prove it if you want someone else to agree with you? That's how this typically works. As to your non-sequitur, I can agree that poor people get shafted generally without agreeing that there is some sort of systemic discrimination against white males. Those examples have nothing to do with them being white males.
-
Ok? I I honestly don't give a shit if he believes it. I'm willing to commit that DEI programs shouldn't unfairly discriminate. But 'm not going to agree it is happening without evidence. He seems to want us to jump to that point prior to providing any real evidence.
-
Sure. Has it occurred to you that we simply don't believe white males are getting the short end of the stick? Certainly I don't think the guy who spends his time scalping tickets is getting the short end of anything, at least not unfairly.
-
There is very little evidence in your posts or the original article of mass discrimination against white men.
-
You're just ignoring the thoughtful posts and lumping everyone into a bucket that doesn't even really exist in this thread. The initial post was interesting. Now you're just being tiresome.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... COOKIE MONSTER!