I was wondering how California hating conservatives were going to try and spin this.
I guess they don't care about welfare fraud anymore.
I was wondering how California hating conservatives were going to try and spin this.
That's not how it works.That's a bold statement considering there is nothing in here about the cost to employ every person involved with monitoring this, not to mention the legal costs associated if the state wants to pursue fraudsters. Justice is extremely expensive, and rarely worth the cost to get system abusers. Can't fine them because they won't pay. You can arrest them and jail them but I guarantee you that costs a lot more than their welfare fraud.
Not so much a problem here today, but in a more totalitarian government scenario, the technology could be used to track potential dissidents, political opponents, protest leaders, reporters, etc. Say they kept track of everyone that drove by a mosque or an abortion clinic, for instance. There's a lot of things that I can't even think of that somebody could abuse it for.I have been trying to use my imagination, but I'm not doing too well. What are we worried is the greatest potential for government abuse?
Yeah, I noticed the journalists mention attendance to "immigration offices", but I don't see how this information by itself is problematic. The problem would be a boots-on-the-ground response. For example, the police begin receiving information mid-stream, respond, and pursue these target cars on the road. They selectively profile and police them waiting for the target vehicle to violate a traffic law.Not so much a problem here today, but in a more totalitarian government scenario, the technology could be used to track potential dissidents, political opponents, protest leaders, reporters, etc. Say they kept track of everyone that drove by a mosque or an abortion clinic, for instance. There's a lot of things that I can't even think of that somebody could abuse it for.
I get the technology exists anyway and it has a potential for good, but it does make me uneasy. No getting the toothpaste back in the tube, I guess.
"It’s not immediately clear how travel patterns might reveal welfare fraud. As noted by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, welfare fraud is statistically speaking, extremely rare. In 2012, the DHA found only 500 cases of fraud among Sacramento’s 193,000 recipients."
Their can’t be fraud if the money is merely given to someone for being in poverty you dope.I don't believe that you actually believe that. lol at believing people should just get cash for assistance. Yeah, I can't imagine fraud becoming more common place in that situation. No way would people take advantage and be even less responsible with cash than they would with EBT.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this was true.From OPs article:
In other words an extremely minuscule 0.26% commit welfare fraud. Very likely an acceptable amount determined by the state. They should spend that $5000 to crack down on businesses who hire illegals.