• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Face, meet leopard. Leopard, meet face.

TomB said:
Good point.

I'm also not convinced that a reduction in the number of cardholders is appropriate. It may be, or it may not.

Without looking back, someone calculated that five cardholders per hospital would be needed. This number supposes that the cards would be held by some central purchasing people, on or two being on duty at a given time and that the P-Cards would be needed only for emergency "need it now" purchases. Neither really works.

A unit the size of a hospital will have its own purchasing department. Obviously, this is better than having to utilize a national department in D.C. (or another remote location), but it still has the purchaser far removed from the need.

I suspect most departments within the hospital will have some sort of administrative staff. A unit secretary, office manager, etc. Those people often serve as a more localized purchasing agent for the department. They are close enough to work directly with staff to get the correct stuff without wasting doctor/nurse time on purchasing. Often department heads or unit coordinators might have a card as well. (Handling purchasing within the department helps with prioritization, by the way. Things just run much smoother.)

It would probably be appropriate and efficient to have one or two P-Cards per department within a facility. Which probably is where we get 12,000. Most of those cards probably stay in desk drawers most of the time, but it's nice to have someone with one available when you need it.

Basically, what's going to happen is they will take the ability to use the cards away and then see who ends up needing it after a few months. It's a dumb way to reel in excess cards. A better way is to just look at how frequently cards have been used and then ask the people who don't use them if (and why) they really need them.

Of course, that assumes that the people "breaking things" actually want the departments to be functional and efficient.
Click to expand...
None of that practical, sensible, proven stuff matters. They want all the government purchases to run through Trump corporation, which takes a percentage. This is a shakedown.
 
Just read someone saying their brother-in-law voted for Trump because he said it would get you higher wages. He was earning 500K+.

You can guess what's just happened.

The Trump voter got sacked due to Trump policies.
 
Last edited:
Blue Mountain said:
I like the story, but [citation required].
Click to expand...
Bad luck, it will remain just a story, because I got it from a Members Only section of another forum, and I'd also assume the writer wants to remain nameless as they use a username. I don't want to get them in trouble.
 
Darat said:
I think there is a mixture of straightforward amusement, irony and schadenfreude. And which is the predominant depends on the story. Take for instance the one I've posted about the woman wanting free IVF. She was willing to ignore Trump is a serial sexual assaulter, and she was willing to listen to friends and family claim the women who he assaulted were lying even though she'd been sexually assaulted and couldn't speak about it, she ignored what people were saying his plans were to reduce the federal work force, ignored how he behaved last time he was president all because she heard him say apparently that he would make IVF free. I can't beyond a standard level of human empathy for anyone suffering feel sorry for her, she has lost her job, lost her medical coverage, lost rights to maternity leave etc all because she once heard him say IVF would be free. It's not even as if IVF costs that much, in the UK if it's not being provided by a NHS it's around £5000 to £6000 a cycle, presumably because of the exchange rate that's the same in dollars in the USA. So yes I find it ironic the situation she is in.

To me this thread isn't really about humour but incredulity about how some people were fine with Trump until it hit them personally, you know if it hadn't hit them personally they'd still be gung-ho about what was happening to "them".
Click to expand...
One other thing about her, she was willing to ignore that the party are about as anti-IVF as they are anti-abortion (ie only make it available to the ultra rich members of the Inner Party, everybody else can go hang). Trampy's promise was always an empty one.
 
I guess the large Hispanic community voting for Trump is totally happy with the moves to make English the official language of the US, I'm sure he'll make an exemption for them.
 
Leopards on the rampage in Kansas:

Funding freeze leaves Kansas farmers unpaid for work they already completed

Many Kansas farmers are in limbo and waiting for promised payments under contracts they signed with the federal government. It comes after a federal directive from the Trump administration paused payments at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.​


Farming in Kansas can be clouded with uncertainty, like harsh weather and limited natural resources. But current funding freezes have added a new variable and left some of them with empty hands.

Some farmers have not been paid out for work they already completed under contracts signed last year. At least millions of dollars are left in limbo.

After the administration of President Donald Trump ordered a funding freeze of the Inflation Reduction Act from the Biden administration, waves of federal funding have ceased. The U.S. Department of Agriculture had funding tied up under that act. Some programs were put on pause, leaving Kansas farmers and rural communities looking for answers.

Rural renewable energy projects and conservation funding have also been stalled on the High Plains.

Bill Shaw, owner of Shaw Feedyard in Ashland, has a contract worth $600,000 for rural energy development. He said he never thought twice about the government holding up its end of a contract, until now.

“Now the USDA is telling me I may not get paid and I don't understand how that's possible,” Shaw said. “If I have a contract with the government they hold me to it. I’m doing the same.”

The freeze has paused payments from the Rural Energy for America Program, or REAP. The program was meant to help ag workers become more energy efficient and produce renewable energy. This would cut their energy costs while offsetting some of the negative environmental impacts farming can produce.
Click to expand...

Trump has spent his whole life stiffing people. Why should he stop now?
 
shemp said:
Leopards on the rampage in Kansas:

Funding freeze leaves Kansas farmers unpaid for work they already completed



Trump has spent his whole life stiffing people. Why should he stop now?
Click to expand...
From the link:
Bill Shaw, owner of Shaw Feedyard in Ashland, has a contract worth $600,000 for rural energy development. He said he never thought twice about the government holding up its end of a contract, until now. “Now the USDA is telling me I may not get paid and I don't understand how that's possible,” Shaw said. “If Trump doesn't want to have a solar energy program in the future, that's his business. But this is a deal that was already done long before he ever came into office,” Shaw said. High Plains Public radio article link
Click to expand...

1740951178974.png
 
johnny karate said:
Immediately buys into the baseless claim that any of this is about fraud and waste, offers zero evidence that any of this is about fraud and waste, accuses everyone else of stupidity for not believing any of this is about fraud and waste. Folks, it’s damn hard to find razor-sharp argumentation like this these days.

Also, if I’m on an internet desperately trying to fool people into believing I’m not a right wing Trump supporter, I probably wouldn’t give up the game so easily by saying things like “basic business sense” when describing how best to run government programs.
Click to expand...
Especially when said 'businessman' has multiple bankruptcies with most of his actual business having failed...
And has a horrible reputation, with most businesses not wanting to deal with him again...

In other words, exactly how he is 'running' the USA currently...
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
OMG!!!!! We absolutely have to allow fraud and waste and inefficiencies to keep eating up taxpayer money, there's no possible way we could avoid that. People are going to DIE!!!

Are you unable to conceive of a way to treat veterans efficiently, without wasting taxpayer money? Seriously, you fail at basic business sense.
Click to expand...
Nope...if it was about identifying fraud and waste it wouldn't be a bunch of tech interns who should be tasked with it. It would be accountants, particularly a forensic accountant. You know, like the ones in the office of the Auditor/Inspector general who actually regularly audit many of these organizations on a pretty regular basis.
 
Emily's Cat said:
Are you unable to conceive of a way to treat veterans efficiently, without wasting taxpayer money? Seriously, you fail at basic business sense.
Click to expand...
Also, the government is not a "business". Government policies and services are not there to generate profits. Maybe that is a fundamental learning that Americans require.
 
Dabop said:
Especially when said 'businessman' has multiple bankruptcies with most of his actual business having failed...
And has a horrible reputation, with most businesses not wanting to deal with him again...

In other words, exactly how he is 'running' the USA currently...
Click to expand...
Basic business sense would seem to mean "shafting everyone else", learning how to lose vast amounts of inherited wealth, running multiple companies into the ground, taking illegal loans from your family, fraudulently cooking the books, oh and being disbared from running charities. And not understanding who pays for tariffs you slap on foreign countries' goods and services.
 
eliminating fraud is not a good in itself:
if the effort of identifying and stopping the fraud exceeds the savings, or if the process of eliminating the fraud you also stop legitimate payments, then it is time to look for another area to look for fraud.
And the effort to audit millions of transactions for minor amounts of money will always be less effective than auditing the few contracts with massive amounts of money involved - but those are protected by those who got bribed to make them happen.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
eliminating fraud is not a good in itself:
if the effort of identifying and stopping the fraud exceeds the savings, or if the process of eliminating the fraud you also stop legitimate payments, then it is time to look for another area to look for fraud.
And the effort to audit millions of transactions for minor amounts of money will always be less effective than auditing the few contracts with massive amounts of money involved - but those are protected by those who got bribed to make them happen.
Click to expand...
That's assuming that there is any fraud to be found to begin with.... most government departments are pretty strict on their accounting...

And considering the ones doing the 'searching' have literally zero experience in the field- its more likely that they wold miss any actual fraud, rather than their own ideologically inspired version of it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom