Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Surly Horns

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Dahobbs

Legacy Members
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dahobbs

  1. Ok, so what exactly do you want the response to be? That's where the disconnect is. You keep saying you want the progressive movement to be open to these people. Great. It is. It wants to help everyone. It is just the particular problem may be caused by something different than they think. Helping them means doing something different than what I they think needs to be done. That isn't hand waiving the problem. It is attempting to identify and correct it.
  2. 1. I never said I wasn't concerned about fraud. I've said multiple times that I am and I want it prosecuted. But when an article (or the tween introducing an article from the company publishing it) is misleading, it raises my suspicions about the other parts of it. 2. Thank you for providing a source for the quote. That is what I asked for. As I said, I couldn't find the source for it. I looked up other statements that were less specific, which is why I questioned what the article was referring to. 3. As a lawyer, I'm sensitive to the legal side of this, and the politicization of the DOJ and the justice system more broadly. Fraud is Minnesota is bad for Minnesota. I don't live there so I don't have a real connection or interest in it. Politicization of the justice system is bad everyone, is happening, and this appeared to be an extension of it. It is possible for multiple things to be true at the same time. There can be real and significant fraud and waste in Minnesota, and the weaponization of the justice system to stretch that issue for political gain can also be a significant problem.
  3. How did I misrepresent anything? I was talking about the article and the tweet. I wasn't talking about everything else happening in Minnesota. The tweet by the company that published the article was incorrect and misleading. You've agreed with that. I don't understand why you're upset that I've pointed it out. The article is about two things: 1) 5 new defendants being indicted for a few million dollars in fraud; 2) Suggestions (not even allegations) by the prosecutor that there may be $9 billion in fraud. The $9 billion isn't indicted. It isn't supported by any alleged facts. The sum total of his belief for that statement appears to be a cursory review of some billing data. That's a problem and not proper behavior by an officer of the court.
  4. Feel free to. I don't think it'll change the general conversation if you're still insisting that anecdote be taken as proof of a more generalized problem. If you want to convince me that you're a problem and that you have discriminated in hiring practices, consider me convinced. If you want to convince me your company sucks and discriminates in hiring practices, consider me convinced. Y'all should stop doing that. If you want to convince me that this is happening on a more generalized basis, you'll have to provide actual evidence of that. But really, what would be most helpful is if you would tell me what the fuck answer you're looking for that I haven't already provided. How can I show you I care and empathize with these folks' feelings even if I doubt their conclusions?
  5. Do you think being condescending to everyone is productive? Again, what response are you wanting here? I have said if individual events occurred, that was wrong and should be addressed. What more are you wanting me to say? What is going to satisfy you that I care enough? I just don't think there is evidence that your individual experiences can be generalized more broadly. Maybe you suck. Maybe your company sucks. I don't know. But I'm not going to assume there is some broad discrimination against white males without some sort of statistical evidence to back it up.
  6. No. It is a true and accurate accounting of the amount that has been alleged in court. That is a very significant difference. Not every allegation is true and not every allegation will be proven true. I get that you have your own pet perspective on this. But you're completely misrepresenting what others have said and I don't appreciate it.
  7. I've tried to find an actual quote to back that article up. The statement in the article seems to mispresent what I've seen that Walz said. He agreed it was significant and substantial. I don't think I saw anywhere where he agreed over $1 billion was fraudulent. You're taking the comment out of context. Relatively small was referenced the few million indicted in the original post. I have no issue with this statement generally. I have issue with a US attorney throwing out a bullshit number that isn't supported by evidence. I have issue with a tweet headline that implied it was half the Medicaid program that was fraudulent. These statements are exaggerations and misrepresentations. I can be upset about them AND upset about fraud. They aren't mutually exclusive things. Stop suggesting that is how I view it or how this thread has responded. It is incredibly disingenuous and you're better than that.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. 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.
  11. 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?
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. What a bitchy and inaccurate generalization. Stop it.
  15. 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.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. Who is denying that things like that can happen?
  21. 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?
  22. Nope. You've been unfairly discriminated against. Bozo out front should have told you.
  23. 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.
  24. 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).
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.