If, tkc, you can imagine a supervison scheme that costs less than just a printing press I am listening.
My experience is we layer on supervision, increase government (the supervisors) reduce benefits (the super vised) and don't save a dime.
To me, supervision needs to demonstrate a cost-benefit, otherwise it is just us acting out our collective anger and distaste for sponges (to the extent they meaningfully exist).
I'm not fiscally into the idea of spending a billion dollars to ferret out a million dollars of abuse.
It doesn't men I like the abuse, I just don't see good evidence that abuse prevention is fiscally cheaper.
Same goes with jails and food stamps.
I want clear fiscal arguments for all these welfare police. Generally, welfare police are around GS6 to GS9, with benefits ... kinda expensive.
If the security systems is 14 billion dollars, and it is designed to protect a 6 pound brisket ... it seems it has more to do with moral pissed-off-ness than fiscal responsibility.
| 