$8.8 billion in taxpayer money is unaccounted for - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Scipio · 08-21-2004, 10:19 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,129489,00.html

Quote:

WASHINGTON — A soon-to-be-released audit will show that at least $8.8 billion in Iraqi money that was given to Iraqi ministries by the former U.S.-led authority there cannot be accounted for, FOX News has confirmed.

And three senators want to know where the cash is.

The draft audit by the Coalition Provisional Authority's (search) inspector general chastises the CPA — formerly led by L. Paul Bremer — for "not providing adequate stewardship" of at least $8.8 billion from the Development Fund for Iraq. The audit is not expected to be released for at least two or three more weeks, possibly longer.

The audit was first reported on a Web site earlier this month by journalist and retired Col. David Hackworth. A U.S. official first confirmed to Reuters the contents of the leaked audit cited by Hackworth were accurate.

The development fund consists of proceeds from Iraqi oil sales, frozen assets from foreign governments and surplus from the U.N. Oil-for-Food (search) program. Its handling has already come under fire in a U.N.-mandated audit released last month, which found no evidence of spending fraud by the CPA but said there wasn't enough oversight to ensure money was used for its intended purposes....

Mind boggling, ain't it? Perhaps Bush is right; the government can't be trusted with our money, especially when they can't find it.

pan6467 · 08-21-2004, 10:28 PM

Hmmmm.... Haliburton overcharges for gas, recives money for goods they never gave to the military and now money is missing.... not saying, but......

Dragonlich · 08-21-2004, 11:01 PM

Gee, why would've guessed that a land as instable and chaotic as Iraq might result in some corruption?

Zeld2.0 · 08-21-2004, 11:18 PM

Not that the fact its happend matters right?

Chaotic or not (admitting its chaotic is a first), it still shouldn't have happened

TheKak · 08-22-2004, 03:24 AM

I mean we didn't waste enough money paying Haliburton $5 per gallon of gas when it costed around 2 cent per gallon right there in Iraq, that we have to lose 8 BILLION? Its not like spending $5,000 on a hammer, its just gone. I would rather have a $5,000 hammer than nothing!

reconmike · 08-22-2004, 05:17 AM

What do ya know the federal government cant account for all its money.
Lets blame Bush, it is not like it has ever happened at home with other presidents at the helm.
I am on a mission to find unaccounted tax payer money that disappeared while slick willie was in office.

Dragonlich · 08-22-2004, 06:27 AM

I'd like to point out that this is NOT US taxpayer's money!

The news report says the money is missing from the "Development Fund for Iraq", which consists of "proceeds from Iraqi oil sales, frozen assets from foreign governments and surplus from the U.N. Oil-for-Food (search) program". Now, I'm sure there's *some* money involved that can be traced back to US citizens (oil-for-food program and oil sales), but that's hardly worth mentioning.

This makes the thread title rather misleading. Furthermore, it says preciously little about the US federal government's ability to keep track of it's money...

tecoyah · 08-22-2004, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reconmike

What do ya know the federal government cant account for all its money.
Lets blame Bush, it is not like it has ever happened at home with other presidents at the helm.
I am on a mission to find unaccounted tax payer money that disappeared while slick willie was in office.

Nobody has mentioned Mr. Bush, at all. No blame was placed on Bush in this thread, I was actually enjoying the missing Bush Bashing until you brought it up.
Let's just focus on the topic, if we can....and let the other 150 bashing threads take care of the attacks.
The missing funds are not at all surprising, we are at war, have farmed out a large portion of logistics to a relatively corrupt private corporation. Capitalism at its best, might be a good time to invest in Halliburton stock....lol

seretogis · 08-22-2004, 08:33 AM

Still think that a $900 billion national healthcare system is the best way to go?

james t kirk · 08-22-2004, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by reconmike

What do ya know the federal government cant account for all its money.
Lets blame Bush, it is not like it has ever happened at home with other presidents at the helm.
I am on a mission to find unaccounted tax payer money that disappeared while slick willie was in office.

Don't change the subject.

This isn't about Clinton, that was 5 years ago.

This is about the here and now.

It will be very interesting to see if they can find out where this money went.

Rekna · 08-22-2004, 04:38 PM

probably went to Iran, Syria, and OBL

pan6467 · 08-22-2004, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seretogis

Still think that a $900 billion national healthcare system is the best way to go?

Why, yes, yes I do. Have to have one to keep workers healthy to work their 60 work weeks making $7 an hour with no overtime don't we?

This whole war with Iraq was unnecessary, has no end plan and is costing us so much money that we may as well just fucking sell Fort Knox to China, the National forests and parks to developers and close all public schools. Hell, it's what the radical right wants anyway. 4 more years of Bush they'll have it.

tecoyah · 08-22-2004, 07:30 PM

I would agree in the concept of spending money on the things OUR people need. While we can argue back and forth as to the worth of our current engagement in the middle east, there is no argument possible that we need to fix our healthcare system. We would save far more than the 3,000 lost in 9/11, every year, if we could provide the medical attention people require to remain healthy. Go ahead and call me liberal, its okay, the label is growing on me more as I understand the direction those who use it are intent on taking my country.

OFKU0 · 08-22-2004, 07:59 PM

Whew,..when I first read the header I thought, oh no, not another government scandal in Canada were billions have been unaccounted for in years. Then for a second I though,.'hmmm,...if it's only 8.8 billion this time, weeze Canadians just got a deal.'

Scipio · 08-22-2004, 08:46 PM

Hmm, so it's not taxpayer money. I seem to have misread it, in much the same way that the people in charge of that money lost it.

Still, the number itself is staggering. We've got about 535 legislators who'd love a shot at that kind of cash.

onetime2 · 08-23-2004, 03:55 AM

There is little doubt that the government and its agencies are inefficient at spending and tracking money it receives.

Until monies can be tracked responsibly I am not in favor of throwing more money into the system. That being said, being unaccounted for is different from being wasted or going into the pockets of the corrupt. It could very well have been used on perfectly legitimate and worthwhile things with no real way to "account" for it. To make the jump to corruption or waste requires evidence.

james t kirk · 08-24-2004, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OFKU0

Whew,..when I first read the header I thought, oh no, not another government scandal in Canada were billions have been unaccounted for in years. Then for a second I though,.'hmmm,...if it's only 8.8 billion this time, weeze Canadians just got a deal.'

You can bet the Americans won't go crazy like we did over ad-scam. They probably won't even care.

Scipio · 08-24-2004, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onetime2

There is little doubt that the government and its agencies are inefficient at spending and tracking money it receives.

Until monies can be tracked responsibly I am not in favor of throwing more money into the system. That being said, being unaccounted for is different from being wasted or going into the pockets of the corrupt. It could very well have been used on perfectly legitimate and worthwhile things with no real way to "account" for it. To make the jump to corruption or waste requires evidence.

Interestingly, measures that seek to root out inefficiency or that require justification for every dollar spent are often more costly than the inefficiencies they propose to combat. President Carter initiated a system called zero base budgeting where any agency or administrative unit that received money had to justify every dollar they received, not just increases or decreases from year to year. Traditionally, the budget process for next year begins with the budget from this year, and makes changes on the margin. As its name suggests, zero base budgeting starts from scratch.

A funny thing happened when they went through all the expenditures. They found that most of them were reasonable, and that a relatively small number of budget outlays were "bad." Moreover, the additional administrative overhead both in the agencies and in the budget process itself was found to be too costly to justify the gains.

Just a bit of history.

onetime2 · 08-25-2004, 04:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scipio

Interestingly, measures that seek to root out inefficiency or that require justification for every dollar spent are often more costly than the inefficiencies they propose to combat. President Carter initiated a system called zero base budgeting where any agency or administrative unit that received money had to justify every dollar they received, not just increases or decreases from year to year. Traditionally, the budget process for next year begins with the budget from this year, and makes changes on the margin. As its name suggests, zero base budgeting starts from scratch.

A funny thing happened when they went through all the expenditures. They found that most of them were reasonable, and that a relatively small number of budget outlays were "bad." Moreover, the additional administrative overhead both in the agencies and in the budget process itself was found to be too costly to justify the gains.

Just a bit of history.

Zero based budgeting is a good theory. As you point out there are problems with it. Most advocates of this system do not expect every department to go through the process every year. In fact the best thinking for the practice prefers that a certain segment of the departments go through it each year and the practice is rotated through the other departments as years go by.

The serious question also remains how thoroughly this process was enacted in the Carter years and how committed people were to rooting out waste.

jimbob · 08-25-2004, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scipio

Interestingly, measures that seek to root out inefficiency or that require justification for every dollar spent are often more costly than the inefficiencies they propose to combat.

And at the other extreme, if people knew their performance was not going to be checked at all, then we could expect higher costs growing year on year as the culture of inefficiency pervades. I've seen it a few times in the private sector.

How boring that the middle ground is the best here

Scipio · 08-25-2004, 10:43 AM

I think one way to look at this that might yield results is to go back to more localized control, where there's more accountability, when possible. Just as an example, local IRS offices could be given more autonomy, and a competitive rating system based on objective measures of performace and customer satisfaction should be created. Lots of franchises do this, so there's bound to be plenty of research out there on its effectiveness. They may already do this; I don't know, but I think local accountability, rather than congressional or national level credibility, is the way to go.

08-21-2004, 10:28 PM	#2 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	Hmmmm.... Haliburton overcharges for gas, recives money for goods they never gave to the military and now money is missing.... not saying, but...... __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

08-22-2004, 03:24 AM	#5 (permalink)
TheKak Insane Location: Virginia	I mean we didn't waste enough money paying Haliburton $5 per gallon of gas when it costed around 2 cent per gallon right there in Iraq, that we have to lose 8 BILLION? Its not like spending $5,000 on a hammer, its just gone. I would rather have a $5,000 hammer than nothing! __________________ Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic and so am I.

08-22-2004, 05:17 AM	#6 (permalink)
reconmike Thank You Jesus Location: Twilight Zone	What do ya know the federal government cant account for all its money. Lets blame Bush, it is not like it has ever happened at home with other presidents at the helm. I am on a mission to find unaccounted tax payer money that disappeared while slick willie was in office. __________________ Where is Darwin when ya need him?

08-22-2004, 08:33 AM	#9 (permalink)
seretogis Huggles, sir? Location: Seattle	Still think that a $900 billion national healthcare system is the best way to go? __________________ seretogis - sieg heil perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

08-22-2004, 07:30 PM	#13 (permalink)
tecoyah Illusionary	I would agree in the concept of spending money on the things OUR people need. While we can argue back and forth as to the worth of our current engagement in the middle east, there is no argument possible that we need to fix our healthcare system. We would save far more than the 3,000 lost in 9/11, every year, if we could provide the medical attention people require to remain healthy. Go ahead and call me liberal, its okay, the label is growing on me more as I understand the direction those who use it are intent on taking my country. __________________ Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

08-21-2004, 11:01 PM	#3 (permalink)
Dragonlich 42, baby! Location: The Netherlands	Gee, why would've guessed that a land as instable and chaotic as Iraq might result in some corruption?

08-21-2004, 11:18 PM	#4 (permalink)
Zeld2.0 Cherry-pickin' devil's advocate Location: Los Angeles	Not that the fact its happend matters right? Chaotic or not (admitting its chaotic is a first), it still shouldn't have happened

08-22-2004, 06:27 AM	#7 (permalink)
Dragonlich 42, baby! Location: The Netherlands	I'd like to point out that this is NOT US taxpayer's money! The news report says the money is missing from the "Development Fund for Iraq", which consists of "proceeds from Iraqi oil sales, frozen assets from foreign governments and surplus from the U.N. Oil-for-Food (search) program". Now, I'm sure there's some money involved that can be traced back to US citizens (oil-for-food program and oil sales), but that's hardly worth mentioning. This makes the thread title rather misleading. Furthermore, it says preciously little about the US federal government's ability to keep track of it's money...

08-22-2004, 04:38 PM	#11 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	probably went to Iran, Syria, and OBL

08-22-2004, 07:59 PM	#14 (permalink)
OFKU0 Junk	Whew,..when I first read the header I thought, oh no, not another government scandal in Canada were billions have been unaccounted for in years. Then for a second I though,.'hmmm,...if it's only 8.8 billion this time, weeze Canadians just got a deal.' __________________ " In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

08-22-2004, 08:46 PM	#15 (permalink)
Scipio Mencken Location: College	Hmm, so it's not taxpayer money. I seem to have misread it, in much the same way that the people in charge of that money lost it. Still, the number itself is staggering. We've got about 535 legislators who'd love a shot at that kind of cash. __________________ "Erections lasting more than 4 hours, though rare, require immediate medical attention."

08-23-2004, 03:55 AM	#16 (permalink)
onetime2 Junkie Location: NJ	There is little doubt that the government and its agencies are inefficient at spending and tracking money it receives. Until monies can be tracked responsibly I am not in favor of throwing more money into the system. That being said, being unaccounted for is different from being wasted or going into the pockets of the corrupt. It could very well have been used on perfectly legitimate and worthwhile things with no real way to "account" for it. To make the jump to corruption or waste requires evidence. __________________ Strive to be more curious than ignorant.

08-25-2004, 10:43 AM	#21 (permalink)
Scipio Mencken Location: College	I think one way to look at this that might yield results is to go back to more localized control, where there's more accountability, when possible. Just as an example, local IRS offices could be given more autonomy, and a competitive rating system based on objective measures of performace and customer satisfaction should be created. Lots of franchises do this, so there's bound to be plenty of research out there on its effectiveness. They may already do this; I don't know, but I think local accountability, rather than congressional or national level credibility, is the way to go. __________________ "Erections lasting more than 4 hours, though rare, require immediate medical attention."