Election Day Info Blackout Shows US Media Is No Friend Of The People. Americans Must Demand Better

ORIGINAL LINK
Election Day Info Blackout Shows US Media Is No Friend Of The People. Americans Must Demand Better Tyler Durden Sun, 12/06/2020 - 22:00

Authored by Robert Bridge via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

While half of the United States is mesmerized by witness testimony describing the ‘irregularities’ that purportedly occurred in the 2020 presidential contest between the incumbent Donald Trump and Joe Biden, the other half has been left deliberately in the dark by an activist media.

Watch Live: @RudyGiuliani appears before Georgia Senate Committee hearing on Election Fraud https://t.co/swGBX9AvKv

— RSBN 🇺🇸 (@RSBNetwork) December 3, 2020

It has become almost a cliché to say that the United States is now fiercely divided into parallel universes, alternative realities, otherwise known as the Republican and Democratic camps. One of the primary reasons for this great divide, aside from the obvious ideological differences, is that just one side, that is, the left, predominantly controls the flow of news and social media content.

Indeed, the ‘legacy media’ even feels itself bold enough to cast judgment on presidential messages via Twitter in real time. If ever there was a recipe for disaster, as the most consequential election in recent memory remains up for grabs, this is it.

On November 30, Bobby Piton, a mathematician and expert, testified at the Arizona voter fraud hearing where he provided compelling evidence that up to 300,000 “fake people” cast a vote in the contested election of Nov. 3. The data, if correct, was alarming in its implications since it meant the difference between Trump or Biden winning the fiercely contested swing state. Certainly the major media networks, in the interest of safeguarding the voting process and consequentially democracy itself, would be interested in providing its viewers with such news, right? Think again.

THE FRAUD WAS MEANT TO GO UNDETECTED

...but Biden received so few votes legitimately that the perpetrators were forced to flood the polling system after hours, and they overwhelmed it, setting off gongs and whistles.

So now they're forced to make believe the results were real.

— Zero Tolerance (@GradQuantico) December 3, 2020

Not only was Piton’s riveting testimony sent to the memory hole by all of the ‘legacy’ media networks, but Twitter actually decided to block his account the very next day. Piton was treated as yet another ‘conspiracy theorist’ nutcase who will probably need to enter some sort of re-indoctrination internment camp before he can join polite society again. He certainly won’t be in need of company if the thought police get their way.

Just days earlier, the social media platform also suspended the account of Pennsylvania state senator Doug Mastriano, who testified at that state’s election hearing. Twitter later said that Mastriano’s suspension was a “glitch,” which begs the question as to why these technological breakdowns almost always, without fail, target Republicans.

The very same media blackout has hit dozens of other poll watchers, regular citizens with no political ax to grind who had the courage to come forward and relay their stories in the hope of protecting America’s democratic process. Their reward has been crickets from the media industrial complex, which is essentially telling those witnesses that their stories do not matter; only the stories that are peddled to them from the corporate masters are all that count.

Such medieval rationale applies even to the President of the United States, who gave what he said was possibly “the most important speech I’ve ever made.”

“We used to have what was called ‘Election Day,’ but now we have Elections Days, Weeks and Months, and lots of bad things happened during this ridiculous long period of time,” Trump said in his 46-minute statement from the White House.

The American leader then proceeded to provide the various ways that the U.S. election system has come under “coordinated assault and siege,” as he described it. Naturally, Twitter tagged the presidential message by saying “This claim about election fraud is disputed.” Imagine, if you will, what the response would have been had the media titans dared to interrupt one of FDR’s famous fireside chats with a message disputing the veracity of the claims.

Statement by Donald J. Trump, The President of the United States

Full Video: https://t.co/EHqzsLbbJG pic.twitter.com/Eu4IsLNsKD

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 2, 2020

In any case, the media, acting, or not acting, in absolute lockstep (jackboot?) synchronicity, decided that the U.S. leader’s remarks were not important enough for the American people to hear. Chris Cuomo, CNN talking head, explained his network’s decision to blank the president’s “tirade.”

“Here’s the fact,” Cuomo began. “Trump is the least of our problems. He is a simple study at this point. Trump is toxic. Period. Sure, he’s going to go out with a bang as in trying to blow up as much as he can. He is absolutely trying to make nothing better, despite the fact that America is in a time of abject crisis.”

Was Cuomo talking about the election crisis that has left the United States without any idea who will be its next president, and especially more now that new evidence of foul play are emerging every single day? Of course not. CNN (which Project Veritas just demonstrated has a very big dog in the outcome of the ongoing race) has decided for their audiences, who apparently can’t be trusted to make decisions for themselves, that what the U.S. leader has to say is not important because…yes, Covid, the disease that just keeps giving the Democrats excuses to kill any semblance of democratic principles left in the country.

Cue the hysteria.

“He’s not working on the pandemic that is worse than ever,” crazy Cuomo continued.

“He’s not making a deal on relief when more people are struggling to put food on the damn table [cue the violins] than at any time in this country since my parents were babies during the Great Depression.”

In other words, Trump is acting like a monster for considering the integrity of the most consequential election in U.S. history when there is a virus on the loose that leaves 99.8 of its ‘victims’ alive and well.

Judging by CNN and the rest of the mainstream media’s breathtaking arrogance, it is not so hard to imagine a day when the president – whether he or she be Trump or some other nation-loving populist – is outright denied the ability to transmit information over social media, while being deprived of the necessary news coverage, as is already the case with the 45th POTUS. This is the pinnacle of corporate power, or rather the abuse of corporate power.

Such a turn of events in the ‘land of the free’ should be of massive concern for both Democrats and Republicans. Yet partisan politics is winning the day, as the Democrats and their lapdog liberal media believe they have sealed the White House. And perhaps they have. But such a victory will be short-lived as corporate power will not stop at Washington, D.C., but will go on to ravage every last remnant of freedom and democracy in the country. It goes without saying that fake elections supported by fake media will never nurture the conditions for a thriving democracy.

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Study Finds Asymptomatic Spread Not a Significant Source of the CCP Virus Pandemic

The most recent study from China on the prevalence of infection after a lockdown found no transmission of the CCP virus among people who were in close contact with asymptomatic patients, contradicting the current narrative that asymptomatic transmission plays a major role in the pandemic.

ORIGINAL LINK

For The First Time, A US State Will Require Disclosure Of PCR ‘Cycle Threshold’ Data In COVID Tests

ORIGINAL LINK

Via ZeroHedge

We have detailed the controversy surrounding America’s COVID “casedemic” and the misleading results of the PCR test and its amplification procedure in great detail over the past few months.

As a reminder, “cycle thresholds” (Ct) are the level at which widely used polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test can detect a sample of the COVID-19 virus. The higher the number of cycles, the lower the amount of viral load in the sample; the lower the cycles, the more prevalent the virus was in the original sample.

Numerous epidemiological experts have argued that cycle thresholds are an important metric by which patients, the public, and policymakers can make more informed decisions about how infectious and/or sick an individual with a positive COVID-19 test might be. However, as JustTheNews reports, health departments across the country are failing to collect that data.

Here are a few headlines from those experts and scientific studies:

1. Experts compiled three datasets with officials from the states of Massachusetts, New York and Nevada that conclude:“Up to 90% of the people who tested positive did not carry a virus.”

2. The Wadworth Center, a New York State laboratory, analyzed the results of its July tests at the request of the NYT: 794 positive tests with a Ct of 40: “With a Ct threshold of 35, approximately half of these PCR tests would no longer be considered positive,” said the NYT. “And about 70% would no longer be considered positive with a Ct of 30! “

3. An appeals court in Portugal has ruled that the PCR process is not a reliable test for Sars-Cov-2, and therefore any enforced quarantine based on those test results is unlawful.

4. A new study from the Infectious Diseases Society of America, found that at 25 cycles of amplification, 70% of PCR test “positives” are not “cases” since the virus cannot be cultured, it’s dead. And by 35: 97% of the positives are non-clinical.

5. PCR is not testing for disease, it’s testing for a specific RNA pattern and this is the key pivot. When you crank it up to 25, 70% of the positive results are not really “positives” in any clinical sense, since it cannot make you or anyone else sick

So, in summary, with regard to our current “casedemic”, positive tests as they are counted today do not indicate a “case” of anything. They indicate that viral RNA was found in a nasal swab. It may be enough to make you sick, but according to the New York Times and their experts, probably won’t. And certainly not sufficient replication of the virus to make anyone else sick. But you will be sent home for ten days anyway, even if you never have a sniffle. And this is the number the media breathlessly reports… and is used to fearmonger mask mandates and lockdowns nationwide…

Almost 7K deaths, including my dad is something that should be reported. A statewide mask mandate when @dougducey reopened the state could have saved thousands of lives.

— Tara Krebbs (@Tara_Krebbs) December 5, 2020

All of which is background for an intriguing decision made by Florida’s Department of Health (and signed off on by Florida’s Republican Governor Ron deSantis).

For the first time in the history of the pandemic, a state will require that all labs in the state report the critical “cycle threshold” level of every COVID-19 test they perform.

All positive, negative and indeterminate COVID-19 laboratory results must be reported to FDOH via electronic laboratory reporting or by fax immediately. This includes all COVID-19 test types – polymerase chain reaction (PCR), other RNA, antigen and antibody results.

Cycle threshold (CT) values and their reference ranges, as applicable, must be reported by laboratories to FDOH via electronic laboratory reporting or by fax immediately.

Full press release below:

So, why is Florida doing this? There appears to be three options:

1) Pro-Trump – Florida is attempting to pre-empt the Biden Team’s plan to slash the Ct used by labs for COVID “case” which will eliminate the false positives and show “cases” plunge “thanks to Biden’s mask/lockdown/vaccine-confidence” rules.

2) Pro-Biden – Florida is beginning the ‘fake rescue’ plan outlined here (and above)

3) Pro-Science – Florida is the first state to actually pay attention to the real ‘science’ of PCR tests.

We hope, for the sake of Americans’ livelihoods it is Option 3 and the ‘casedemic’ will collapse on itself and allow we, the people to go back to some sense of normality.

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Ex-Pfizer Exec Demands EU Halt COVID-19 Vaccine Studies Over 'Indefinite Infertility' And Other Health Concerns

ORIGINAL LINK
Ex-Pfizer Exec Demands EU Halt COVID-19 Vaccine Studies Over 'Indefinite Infertility' And Other Health Concerns Tyler Durden Sun, 12/06/2020 - 11:35

Former Pfizer vice president and scientific director Dr. Michael Yeadon and German lung specialist and parliamentarian Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg have filed an urgent application with the European Medicine Agency calling for the immediate suspension of all SARS-CoV-2 vaccine studies - particularly the BioNtech/Pfizer study on BNT162b (EudraCT number 2020-002641-42).

Yeadon and Wodarg say the studies should be halted until a design study is available which addresses a host of serious safety concerns expressed by a growing body of renowned scientists who are skeptical of how quickly the vaccines are being developed, according to Germany's 2020 News.

On the one hand, the petitioners demand that, due to the known lack of accuracy of the PCR test in a serious study, a so-called Sanger sequencing must be used. This is the only way to make reliable statements on the effectiveness of a vaccine against Covid-19. On the basis of the many different PCR tests of highly varying quality, neither the risk of disease nor a possible vaccine benefit can be determined with the necessary certainty, which is why testing the vaccine on humans is unethical per se. -2020 News

The pair also point to concerns raised in previous studies involving other coronaviruses - including (via 2020 News):

• The formation of so-called “non-neutralizing antibodies” can lead to an exaggerated immune reaction, especially when the test person is confronted with the real, “wild” virus after vaccination. This so-called antibody-dependent amplification, ADE, has long been known from experiments with corona vaccines in cats, for example. In the course of these studies all cats that initially tolerated the vaccination well died after catching the wild virus.

• The vaccinations are expected to produce antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. However, spike proteins also contain syncytin-homologous proteins, which are essential for the formation of the placenta in mammals such as humans. It must be absolutely ruled out that a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 could trigger an immune reaction against syncytin-1, as otherwise infertility of indefinite duration could result in vaccinated women.

• The mRNA vaccines from BioNTech/Pfizer contain polyethylene glycol (PEG). 70% of people develop antibodies against this substance – this means that many people can develop allergic, potentially fatal reactions to the vaccination.

• The much too short duration of the study does not allow a realistic estimation of the late effects. As in the narcolepsy cases after the swine flu vaccination, millions of healthy people would be exposed to an unacceptable risk if an emergency approval were to be granted and the possibility of observing the late effects of the vaccination were to follow. Nevertheless, BioNTech/Pfizer apparently submitted an application for emergency approval on December 1, 2020.

Wodarg Yeadon EMA Petition Pfizer Trial FINAL 01DEC2020 en Unsigned With Exhibits by Zerohedge Janitor on Scribd

Dr. Yeadon made headlines last month when he said "There is no science to suggest a second wave should happen," and that false positive results from inherently flawed COVID-19 tests are being used to 'manufacture' a second wave.

As Ralph Lopez write at HubPages, Yeadon warns that half or even "almost all" of tests for COVID are false positives. Dr. Yeadon also argues that the threshold for herd immunity may be much lower than previously thought, and may have been reached in many countries already.

In an interview last month (see below) Dr. Yeadon was asked:

"we are basing a government policy, an economic policy, a civil liberties policy, in terms of limiting people to six people in a meeting...all based on, what may well be, completely fake data on this coronavirus?"

Dr. Yeadon answered with a simple "yes."

He then lamented the lives lost as a result of lockdown policies, and of the "savable" countless lives which will be further lost, from important surgeries and other healthcare deferred, should lockdowns be reimposed.

Watch the full discussion below:

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

'No Vaccine, No Work' - Employers Discuss Making COVID Immunity Mandatory For Workers

ORIGINAL LINK
'No Vaccine, No Work' - Employers Discuss Making COVID Immunity Mandatory For Workers Tyler Durden Sun, 12/06/2020 - 12:50

Public opinion polls from the past couple of weeks appear to show a growing number of Americans are planning to get the coronavirus vaccine, even as Dr. Fauci hinted that the UK's decision to grant emergency approval to Pfizer's mRNA vaccine might have been somewhat "rushed".

A recent Goldman research note intended for its institutional clients showed as much, citing polling numbers from YouGov.

With hospitalizations surging to record levels and California once again heading into lockdown, millions of Americans would probably gladly take the vaccine just to feel a sense that the pandemic is "over", even though the duration of that immunity is still not very well understood, and some "conspiracy-minded" skeptics have raised question about the headline efficacy numbers.

But as the US and UK prepare to start delivering the first jabs in a week, industries are jockeying to try and get their workers designated as "essential" so they can have faster access to the vaccine (for many, profits are ultimately on the line).

Even though many Americans believe it's morally reprehensible to fire someone for refusing to take a vaccine, some companies and industry groups are planning to require workers to be vaccinated as a precondition for returning to work. Maybe they think taking such a public stand might help them secure supplies for their vaccines more quickly.

Whatever the reason, even for white collar workers who have been comfortably ensconced in their homes/apartments for the last nine months, the subtext is pretty clear: no vaccine, no work.

Here's more from the Hill:

Companies will soon face a tough decision about whether to require their employees to get vaccinated for COVID-19 as a condition for returning to work.

[…]

Employers believe they are on firm legal ground to mandate vaccinations, but that doesn't mean enforcement won't be without its challenges, particularly given the backlash in some parts of the country to mask mandates and smaller groups opposed to vaccinations of any kind.

However, many corporations might soon find that their workers (not just blue-collar manufacturing workers, but white-collar office drones, too) either don't share their concerns, can't get their hands on a vaccine or are simply skeptical of the long-term side effects and would prefer to simply wait and see.

Fortunately for these workers, US law offers a way to push back.

Companies can require it, yes, but they may bump up against legal limits. COVID is such uncharted territory that as we see employers acting, as we see others acting, more edges in the law are being articulated,” said Allison Hoffman, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School professor.

Some business groups are starting to get out in front of the issue by voicing public support for vaccination requirements.

Jay Timmons, CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers, stressed that the vaccine is needed to protect essential personnel, including manufacturing workers, and that his group would back member companies implementing vaccination requirements.

“While there are likely legal concerns with blanket mandates, if any of our members believed that a requirement at their company was the right thing to do, we would certainly support that within the bounds of the law.

Because America's future depends on folks rolling up our sleeves in a new way,” Timmons told The Hill.

The legal limits that employers could run up against are related to the American Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which allow for employee vaccination exemptions under certain health and religious reasons.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in March said an employer covered by the ADA and Title VII can’t compel all of its employees to take a vaccine.

"The Commission continues to closely monitor the developments of a COVID-19 vaccine and is actively evaluating how a potential vaccine would interact with employers’ obligations under the Americans with Disabilities Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the other laws the Commission enforces,” Christina Saah Nazer, an EEOC spokeswoman, told The Hill.

Last week, Joe Biden - who vowed during the debates to make masks mandatory nationwide - switched it up and said he wouldn't make vaccines mandatory for every, just like he wouldn't "demand" vaccinations be made mandatory. The UK's Boris Johnson has pledged not to mandate vaccinations, and other world leaders have as well.

But let's back up for a second: some kind of federal edict mandating vaccinations isn't the only method for coercing the entire population to accept them. Oftentimes, political leaders - for whatever their reasons - will opt instead for a more subtle approach.

If those who refuse to get the vaccine can't work, can't shop and are effectively excluded from society, then can we honestly say that vaccinations are really "voluntary"?

And what does this mean for workers who simply find themselves shut out as the rich and connected shove their way to the front of the line?

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

82% Of Americans Say They Couldn't Afford $500 Emergency Thanks To COVID-19

ORIGINAL LINK
82% Of Americans Say They Couldn't Afford $500 Emergency Thanks To COVID-19 Tyler Durden Sun, 12/06/2020 - 16:10

A recent survey of 2,000 Americans carried out by "innovation consultancy" Highland took a close look at how personal finances and spending habits have changed since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, which crushed the US economy and has triggered a protracted downturn around the world.

With the US labor market adding just 245K new jobs last month, a sign that the sharp rebound from the chaos of March has already run its course, and millions of Americans waiting on more stimulus from Washington, the share of people living check to check has expanded rapidly.

Even before the pandemic, a staggering percentage of Americans didn't have enough cash on hand for an unexpected hardship of $400. But what's even worse for America's consumption-driven economy is that a solid majority of Americans have reduced spending, some dramatically, as pandemic has made socialization difficult. According to the survey, 63% have cut back on spending since the start of the pandemic.

Asked for their reasons, respondents cited the need to be more cautious with their finances (60%), experiencing a reduced salary or income (49%), and staying home more often (40%).

For those who have cut back, 64% say they are spending less on dining out or takeout, 61% have reduced spending on entertainment such as concerts or movies, while 55% are buying less apparel and 52% are spending less on travel.

It is interesting to note that 21% of respondents say they have been spending more since the pandemic. Of those respondents, 51% say they are buying more food or groceries, and 50% are buying more household supplies.

After the unemployment rate spiked to more than 14% in April, Americans continue to be wary about their job security and income. According to respondents, more than a quarter feel they do not currently have a stable income, and 63% say they have been living paycheck to paycheck since the pandemic. Millennials appear to be the hardest hit demographic as 64% say they are living paycheck to paycheck.

Moreover, 25%  of respondents feel they don't currently have a stable income.

27% of respondents also said they've taken on more than $10K in debt.

But perhaps the most alarming number from the entire survey: a whopping 82% of respondents said they wouldn't be able to cover an emergency $500 expense without borrowing money.

For context, prior to the pandemic, surveys showed that roughly half of Americans couldn't afford a $500 emergency expense, which means the number of people who say they couldn't cover a small emergency has risen by 60%.

Nearly half added that they now regret living beyond their means for so long before the crisis.

But the market's at record highs, so at least those who have the option can borrow against their 401(k)s for a little emergency cash (that is, if they have a 401(k)).

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

COVID-19 pandemic opens door to return to better 'normal' for education

ORIGINAL LINK

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Education.]

By Adam Peshek
Real Clear Education

The COVID-19 pandemic has provided an unprecedented opportunity to rethink education in America. Instead of hoping for a return to “normal,” let’s learn from what has worked – and what has not – to make lasting improvements and create a more resilient system, one that can adapt to any challenge families may face in the future.

The first step toward realizing a more resilient and family-centered system is to reimagine how we fund education. In short, it’s time to start funding families, not the buildings that are meant to serve them.

Americans spend at least $720 billion on education each year. At around $13,000 per child, that puts the U.S. among the highest-spending countries in the world.

Instead of providing this benefit directly to families – as we do for higher education, childcare, and health care – in K-12, we send this money directly to school buildings. Taxpayer dollars are collected and sent to a central office, and zones are drawn around individual schools where students are required to attend or forfeit the funds raised for their education.

The pandemic has exposed the flaws in this system. School closures, loss of childcare, and difficulties transitioning to online and hybrid-learning models are having devastating effects on children. According to one report, an estimated 3 million students have received no formal education since schools closed in March. That’s the equivalent of every school-aged child in Florida failing to show up for school.

The economic impact on students is estimated at $110 billion in lost future earnings each year. Unsurprisingly, this decline in learning has been felt more deeply by children in low-income families.

These challenges might seem insurmountable, and many of us look forward to the day when we can return to “normal.” But why would we want to return to a status quo that has proven a failure during a time of crisis? While we may not encounter an international crisis of the scope and scale of COVID-19, families face immeasurable local and personal crises each year.

This is a time to learn from innovations that have proven successful and integrate them into the system moving forward.

One of the biggest innovations during the pandemic has been the proliferation of individualized education. Families with resources – financial and otherwise – are taking matters into their own hands. They are hiring tutors, forming learning pods, enrolling in microschools, sharing childcare, reimagining after-school programs, and rearranging their lives to provide the continued learning opportunities that many children have lacked for months.

These unconventional models may yield academic benefits. Researchers from Opportunity Insights analyzed data from 800,000 students enrolled in an online math curriculum used by schools before and during the pandemic. The researchers found that students in low-income neighborhoods saw a 9% decline in math progression between January and April. Meanwhile, students from wealthy ZIP codes saw a 40% improvement over the same period.

In other words: in the spring, with schools closed during the pandemic, students in some wealthy families may have progressed academically at higher rates than if the schools had remained open.

This is raising understandable equity concerns from advocates concerned about widening gaps between low- and high-income students. But in a situation where some students are progressing and others are falling behind, the solution isn’t to move everyone to the middle. It’s to give those falling behind access to the same type of learning that is allowing others to thrive.

The sort of family-directed, individualized education taking place during the pandemic is likely to expand its presence in American life. As an Atlantic article observed, “COVID-19 is a catalyst for families who were already skeptical of the traditional school system – and are now thinking about leaving it for good.” The author of that piece, Emma Green, recently said in an interview that home-based, unconventional methods of education are getting “a flood of interest from parents of all kinds.” Early data seems to confirm this, with large upticks in families opting out of school systems to pursue homeschooling.

To create a more effective and more resilient education system, we must learn from what has proven effective during the pandemic – namely, the ability of those with resources to identify and pursue a variety of individualized learning opportunities to meet children’s needs. To provide these same opportunities for all families, governments should prioritize direct grants to families, education spending accounts, refundable tax credits, and myriad other ways to get money into the hands of families so they can build an education that fits their needs.

The way in which we currently fund education is blocking equal access to these learning opportunities. To expand that access, we need to fund families, not school buildings.

Adam Peshek is a senior fellow for education at the Charles Koch Institute.

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Education.]

The post COVID-19 pandemic opens door to return to better 'normal' for education appeared first on WND.

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Feds Admit $2.3 Trillion In Improper Payments

ORIGINAL LINK
Feds Admit $2.3 Trillion In Improper Payments Tyler Durden Sat, 12/05/2020 - 21:15

Submitted by Adam Andrzejewski,

Since 2004, twenty large federal agencies have admitted to disbursing an astonishing $2.25 trillion in improper payments. Last year, these improper payments totaled $175 billion – that’s about $15 billion per month, $500 million per day, and $1 million a minute.

But what exactly is an improper payment?

Federal law defines the term as “payments made by the government to the wrong person, in the wrong amount, or for the wrong reason."

When people or companies receive incorrect payments, it erodes trust and hinders the government’s ability to finance everything from defense to health care.

Recently, auditors at OpenTheBooks.com published a 24-page oversight report analyzing why, how, and where federal agencies wasted our tax dollars last year.

Here are the top 10 takeaways regarding improper and mistaken payments by the 20 largest federal agencies in 2019:

1. Total Mistakes: $175 billion in estimated improper payments reported by the 20 largest federal agencies, averaging $14.6 billion per month – Total (FY2004-FY2019): $2.25 trillion.

2. Worst Programs - $121 billion (approximately 69 percent) in improper payments occurred within three program areas – Medicaid, Medicare, and Earned Income Tax Credit.

3. Claw Back – only $21.1 billion of the $175 billion improper payments during 2019 was recaptured — that’s only 14 cents on every dollar misspent. Five-year total: $103.6 billion recaptured/ $747.7 billion improperly spent

4. Biggest Offenders:

5. Dead people: $871.9 million in mistaken payments were made to dead people. Medicaid, social security payments, federal retirement annuity payouts (pensions), and even farm subsidies were sent to dead recipients. Root cause: failure to verify death. Four-year total: $2.8 billion

6. Ancient Americans: Six million Social Security numbers are active for people aged 112+; however, only 40 people in the world are known to be older than 112 years of age.

7. Worst Upward Trend: Medicaid and Medicare improper payments soared from $64 billion (2012) to $88.6 billion (2017), and, in 2019, to $103.6 billion. Five-year total: $456 billion

8. Best Turnaround: In 2018, the Education Department overpaid $6 billion to college students receiving PELL grants and student loans. In 2019, improper payments were reduced to $1.1 billion – an 85-percent reduction.

9. Improper Income Redistribution: $17.4 billion in improper payments by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) within the Earned Income Tax Credit program. 25-percent of all payments were improper. Five-year total: $84.35 billion

10. Purchasing Power: What can $175 billion buy? Last year, the federal government wasted the equivalent of a full year of all federal salaries, perks, and pension benefits for every employee of the federal executive agencies. A stunning example of institutionalized incompetence.

Justifications for their improper payments vary by agency.

For example, Veterans Affairs (VA) says they are working on the problem and, yet, have a long way to go:

“During FY19 testing for improper payments, VA found that many root causes of improper payments still have not been remediated. While the VA is actively working corrective actions to remediate these complex problems, VA completes its statically valid testing for Improper Payments Elimination & Recovery Act) one year in arrears…”

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) flat out admits that their improper payments ($17.4 billion FY2019) will continue:

“… the IRS does not have the resources to audit every return claiming return tax credits… Without legislative change to greatly improve effective tools to administer these credits, the improper payment rate will not drastically change.”

Over the years, improper payments is an issue that has attracted reform efforts on both sides of the aisle.

In 2009, President Barack Obama issued an executive order to stop improper payments in the core programs of the federal government. Core programs provide services such as Medicare and Medicaid.

In 2020, President Donald Trump emphasized the importance of eliminating improper payments in the President’s Budget to Congress FY2021.

But with billions of dollars misspent every year, it’s obvious that both administrations failed to successfully address the issue of improper payments and much more needs to be done.

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

LA Mayor Bans Unnecessary Walking As Part Of New COVID-19 Restrictions

ORIGINAL LINK
Democratic Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti issued a new emergency order Wednesday that bans unnecessary “travel on foot” as he warns the city is nearing a “devastating tipping point” in their fight against COVID-19.

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Rich People & Journalists Made Exempt From Having To Enter COVID Quarantine In UK

ORIGINAL LINK
Rich People & Journalists Made Exempt From Having To Enter COVID Quarantine In UK Tyler Durden Sun, 12/06/2020 - 07:00

Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

Journalists and rich people defined as “high value business travellers” will be made exempt from having to enter a 2 week COVID quarantine when they return to the UK under new rules announced by the government.

“From 4am on Saturday, people in a number of categories will no longer have to self-isolate upon returning to England, even if they are travelling from a country not on the travel corridors list,” reports Sky News.

Those categories include journalists, “high value business travellers,” performing arts professionals and wealthy sports stars.

Under current rules, anyone returning from a country not on the UK’s “travel corridor” list has to self-isolate at home for 14 days or face escalating fines.

Public Health England said the new measures will not raise the risk of domestic transmission of coronavirus.

New Business Traveller exemption: From 4am on Sat 5th Dec high-value business travellers💼will no longer need to self-isolate when returning to ENGLAND from a country NOT in a travel corridor, allowing more travel to support the economy and jobs. Conditions apply.

— Rt Hon Grant Shapps MP (@grantshapps) December 3, 2020

The rule change is being pitched as a way to help boost the economy, but many responded by framing it as a classic example of elitist privilege.

“We are being governed by absolute fools, clowns and charlatans. If I’m rich enough to afford Business Class I’m immune to Covid?” asked one Twitter user.

“Ah! One rule for “us” and another for all the “little people”. Shrewd move just when trust and social cohesion is needed,” remarked another.

“What a load of rubbish. You mean those well off don’t need to follow “quarantine measures,” said another.

“There will be some big businesses that are able to take advantage of it,” said Paul Charles, chief executive of travel consultancy The PC Agency, underscoring once again how the rules favor large transnational corporations while small businesses continue to go bust.

*  *  *

New limited edition merch now available! Click here. In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, I urgently need your financial support here.

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK