candide

And, of course, you have proof of it!

This new administration is chaotic! 🙂

That's obvious! There are more Dem recipients than Republican recipients, but there are still recipients. The problem for Republican politicians is that they are not evenly geographically distributed. They tend to be concentrated in some red rural areas which are playing a key role in the U.S. electoral system. The GOP politicians they elected, in particular, are not eager to shoot themselves in the foot! 🙂

Apparently, improper SSA payment are nothing new, and the rate is not higher than in Insurance companies. One reason for this long-lasting phenomenon is that Congress (whatever the majority party was) never allocated money to improve the computer system (which makes sense if they are still using Cobol). So the problem is known and remedies are also known. No reason for another clown show à la Musk! "Between fiscal years 2015 and 2022, which includes Trump’s first presidency, the Social Security Administration sent almost $71.8 billion in improper payments, according to a July 2024 agency inspector general report. The inspector general’s office called improper payments "a longstanding challenge." A November 2021 inspector general’s report found $298 million in payments after death to some 24,000 beneficiaries. (About $84 million was returned, the report said.) The Social Security Advisory Board, a group of outside experts, has regularly issued bipartisan recommendations to improve the agency’s accuracy record for payments, such as shifting death data collection to the Treasury Department." https://www.politifact.com/article/2025/feb/17/are-150-year-old-americans-receiving-social-securi/ A quite influent seem to be the budget rules, which are not inciting to solve this problem. 'To secure that first dollar to invest in technical fixes, the agency needs to lobby Congress, which is never easy and which could result in offsetting cuts to other parts of the agency. Then, if the agency does get that dollar and ends up saving $10 in payments, those proceeds would remain in the Social Security Trust Fund, which doesn’t help Congress’ own fiscal balance sheet, nor the agency’s own administrative budget."

Repeat after your master: fraud fraud! 😆

Wnd! 😆

From Musk's tweet! That says it all! 🤣

Why do they need $4 T just to finance a FY 2025 budget deficit of $1.4 T (already partly financed under the previous debt ceiling), if they don't intend to significantly increase the deficit in the 2026 FY budget? The next budget proposal will tell us.... 🙂

I know. My comment was about transferring nuclear weapon technology to another country, ex. Poland.

It makes sense and it's possible....in theory. However, it makes me laugh to read that Europeans are like this, or should do like that, etc.. As concerns defense matter, European countries are far from being homogenous: they are in different geographical, economic, and political situations, and don't necessarily have the same interests. As concerns the EU, it has no defense prerogative and can only support initiatives by member States. A good example is the weapon industry. There are excellent military airplanes, boats, tanks, helicopters, missile systems, etc... in Europe. The problem is that they tend to compete with each other rather to unite in order to reach a critical mass of production of standardised products. The French don't agree with the Swedes, the Italian don't agree with the French, etc... As concerns nuclear weapon, the only solution is nuclear proliferation in Europe. The idea that France or UK may be in charge of protecting other countries is a nonsense. Nuclear power can only be national. The country who bombs is the one which will be bombed in retaliation and vice versa. However, the know-how can be transferred. I am not sure UK can do it without the authorisation of the U.S., but at least the French have an independent technology. European countries together will never match the military power of the U.S. and have probably no interest in doing so. However, they can easily surpass the military power of Russia if they are united, as Russia's is an economic dwarf. Will they be able to unite and convergence on a common policy? That's another story....

It seems he's never been to Pattaya!

Complete false equivalence. U.S. missiles were not moved closer to the border before the invasion . And there was no ambiguity about the target of the U.S policy: China not Russia. On top of it, ICBMs don't need to be close to the border I particular as nuclear submarines are already hidden close to their targets. It's the same for both the U.S. and Russia. There are also Russian submarines close to the U.S., ready to nuke the U.S.

Nonsense! They were sent there after the Russian invasion!, not before. So ot a cause of the invasion.

False equivalence. As I posted before, U.S. missiles stayed where they already were at the end ofcthe cold war. They have not been moved closer to the Russian border.

It's you posting baseless nonsense. Even the GOP Senate committee found nothing Whatever

I get it but there was no NATO threat. As outlined recently, military budgets of European NATO countries had been decreasing and they were certainly no going to attack Russia. The U.S. military presence in Europe had also been significantly reduced.

There was no formal agreement, and the Soviet Union was dissolved in 1991.

Thank you for confirming you are a troll! 🤣

You are a lying troll! 🤣 I posted evidence. You posted nothing to support your ridiculous claims!

The links are to the statements made. Also avaible by other sources. There's even a video of this one!! 🤣 https://archive.kyivpost.com/article/opinion/op-ed/failure-to-fight-corruption-threatens-everything-that-government-is-doing-399825.html And no, Justsecurity is not left wing and is high for factual reporting. You are lying again! 🤣 https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/just-security/ https://www.allsides.com/news-source/just-security-media-bias Still waiting for your to post evidence of your ridiculous claims! 🙂

Which corruption? 🤣 You have proof of it, apart from Musk tweets? 😆

I did! Lie, Lie, Lie! 🤣 Feb. 3, 2015 — Obama administration conveys harsh criticism of Ukraine Prosecutor General’s Office for its coverup of Zlochevskiy/Burisma https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ukraine-clearinghouse-2019.10.15.kent_transcript.pdf Sept. 24, 2015 – U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt excoriates officials in the Prosecutor General’s Office for stymying anti-corruption investigations, including those involving Burisma https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Remarks-by-US-Ambassador-Geoffrey-Pyatt-at-the-Odesa-Financial-Forum-on-September-24-2015-ukraine.pdf Still waiting for your evidence to back up your lame claims! I'm not holding my breath! 🤣

Don't worry. Chinese will fill the gap. Then they could use the same trick as Putin: Chinese speaking people in Russia are threatened, we need to defend them! 🙂

I don't approve Obama's policy re. Russia. But obviously, he was not the only one to underestimate this threat at that particular time.

Russia's problem is that it's not attractive for other countries, and is even repellent. Your example is not realistic as Mexico has absolutely no reason to be attracted by a failed State like Russia.