Slashdot Mirror
Identity Thieves Drain Unemployment Benefit Funds
Makarand writes "According to a News.com.com article, the
defrauding of state government
unemployment benefit programs is the most underpublicized identity theft crime
and the states are not doing much about it. Identity thieves are using
stolen social security numbers to file false unemployment claims and collecting
benefits because the states have no systems in place to deter fraud. In fact,
it is easier to convert stolen identity data into money by filing
false unemployment claims than going after the credit card companies." From the article: "File a false unemployment claim and you can receive $400 per week for 26 weeks. Do it for 100 Social Security numbers and you've made a quick $1.04 million. It's tough to make crime pay much better than that."
From TFA:
With all the theft of personal information in the news lately, and considering that a large percentage of this stolen information was Social Security numbers, it might be easier to compile a national database of Social Security numbers that haven't been stolen. ^_^
Seriously, though, this is just yet another good argument to ditch the Social Security number system entirely...it's clearly not working. Essentially, with just one number, you have a system where the SSN is both the public and the private part of the ID, and as any security professional can tell you, that simply is not a workable model.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
This Malda guy next door has been unemployed for so long I don't think he's ever gonna get a job.
I wonder how much this kind of fraud contributes to artificially(?) raising the unemployment rate. Maybe it's quite a bit lower than the reported rate due to the fraud?
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
To which extent do they actually check that the person is in fact unemployed? Certainly, a person-to-person talk should take place before they hand over money just like that? Perhaps this is a bigger problem in their system as identity theft appears to be one of many ways to exploit that system.
see a Text Widget
After my unemployment benefits ran out I should have reapplied using someone else's identity.
Seriously. Why shouldn't we cheat and steal when everyone else does it in varying degrees and gets away with it?
Western society has become a culture of cheating. All that matters anymore is how skilled you are at doing it so you can get away with it. There is no turning back.
Life's not that simple. For every person ripping off the unemployment system there are 9 others who actually need it. Well, that is unless this new type the article talks about takes off...Maybe people will actually start to enforce proper management of the system?
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
They are only copying someone's identity after all. The original person still has their identity, so it can't be considered "theft" :D
1. Steal social security numbers
2. ?
3. Profit!
4. Get caught
5. Spend the next 5-10 years defending your corn hole
Its not like its their money. Until government civil servents can be fired instead of collecting big fat pensions, we will NEVER get any changes from the government.
So not only am I paying a bunch of money into the system for a benefit I am never going to receive, the money isn't even going to the people that it should be. Shame on you, stealing from my Grandma.
you can receive $400 per week for 26 weeks
Well, is you have to receive checks for 26 weeks, it's much harder to stay ahead of the authorities. You (or an associate) have to pick up all the checks.
With most other fraud, you move quickly to avoid being tracked.
I don't see it included in the story.. it sounds like such a great deal for those with initiative, I have to ask if this is illegal?
When the author referred to the victims of this crime as being the government agencies and not the taxpayers, I stopped reading.
What?
So can I file for unemployment for myself, and then complain about identity theft and say I didn't get it?
Sounds like a free iPod a week for half a year! I'm up for that game. Where do I sign up?
What's your damage, Heather?
Those checks have to be mailed or deposited somewhere right? Wouldn't it be fairly easy to catch these people "red handed" picking up their checks or depositing the checks in their account? What about withdrawing it? It all leaves a trace..
cowboyneal's advances on taco's wife
now that is a worthwile use of my tax dollars
Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
No doubt lots of fraud going on but simply having the SSAN isn't all you need. You would also need at least some employment history data.
Instead of another central database which conveniently aggregates all your personal information in one place, ripe for the hacking, what we need is a law passed that requires companies to remove the SSAN from their databases. All of them. The company can replace it with a unique identifier if they want but there is no reason for them to have the SSAN in the first place. Yes, I know it's the one number everyone remembers when someone is trying to identify you, but that is a poor reason for every database on the planet to contain such an important identifier. Let's develop a better way to authenticate someone, why don't we?
The NSA: The only part of the US government that actually listens.
i just got out of the military, and im just now gettung unemployment (been 3 months) its a bit of a hassle anyways. i wish they did a better check though. im hoping next week to be off of it though (so in total, getting unemployment for maybe 2 weeks)
Movies made by a crazy person
http://www.youtube.com/marginalpro
Yes, they want their extreme right-wing measures back. Some of us are heart bleeding liberals, thank you very much.
Bored? Browse Slashdot with a +6 modifier for Troll comme
They need it because they are a) lazy, b) too stupid to manage even the simplest of a job, c) socially maladjusted or d) physically crippled.
Charities will take care of the type d, but it's absurd to say that anything should be paid to types a-c.
File a false unemployment claim and you can receive $400 per week for 26 weeks. Do it for 100 Social Security numbers and you've made a quick $1.04 million.
Quick? 26 weeks? Plus the start up overhead of several weeks?
Infuriate left and right
Now everyone knows.. Thanks..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
This was in the news recently in the UK. I think the no2id website has some stuff about it. Basically, there is far more social security fraud where people are honest about their identity but dishonest about their circumstances, e.g. they have a part-time job, not as many children, secret Swiss bank account etc. Using an entirely false identity makes up only a small fraction of the total fraud. The headline total fraud number is used to justify the idea of a national ID card, yet that would solve only this tiny part of the total problem.
It seems like it would be trivial to scan a database for recurring addresses -- sure, there might be four people in a two-bedroom apartment collecting unemployment. But fifty? A hundred? Send an investigator out to talk to anyone living at an address with more than (e.g.) six registered names. If nothing else, he can interview all six of the people and see if there's a systemic problem keeping them from getting work in an area.
Two things bother me about the article, however:
1) The person calling our attention to this problem is a software vendor. He runs a payroll software firm, and probably has some financial interest in fraud-detection software. If nothing else, his byline contains an advertisement for his company.
2) He doesn't really present any evidence for the problem other than hearsay from an official in Washington State. Neither of them presents any real numbers.
I think it's wise to prevent this problem, and shore up any weakness to this exploit that may exist, but it's also important to be sure that a problem exists before demanding that the state take action.
In Virginia employers are required to file quarterly reports to the Virginia Employment Commission. These reports include the SSN of all current employees.
It would seem simple to coordinate accross states.
that's the most sickening picture I've ever seen. you sick fuck!
Hm, your social security number is irregular? Well, you're not an enemy combatant, nor a criminal. It's off to Diego Garcia with you, and if anyone - spouse, neighbour - wonders about you, there's room for them too.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
Advise for everyone: start using fake SSNs and DOBs whenever possible... Gee!
Your social security number has been stolen.
Please send your name, address and social security number to socialsecurity@hotmail.com.
Your friends at the fraud office.
Quick compared to what? Bank robbery?
Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
Right, and then those people will have children that go hungry while at the same time they're stealing your car radio and mugging your wife after she gets off work in the evening because they're unable to both look for work and keep a roof over their kids' heads at the same time.
Welcome to reality, where criminals are real people and economic crime doesn't stop just because you say "Hey, wait, it's a free market! This isn't fair! Why don't you get a job?"
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
An unemployment claim that is fraudulently made on a stolen Social Security number would be easier to detect if there were a national database of stolen Social Security numbers.
Right... Hacker target number one. Ah, but maybe they've thought of this.
Again FTFA:
If and when a database is created, the only caveat is that it must possess airtight security features.
Right... See, humans will be involved somewhere, and humans can be corrupted just as easily as databases (and perhaps more so). The database will have a lookup function or it's worthless. So who will get access? Only state unemployment offices? How about credit card companies (think MasterCard)? And won't banks want a piece of this, too?
But wait, there's more. What about employers? They certainly wouldn't want to hire somebody who is using a known stolen SSN. Ok, so employers get access. It wouldn't be fair if it weren't every employer, from massive multinationals to the mom-and-pop store on the corner. Every one of these organizations will have the ability to lookup information from this database.
FTFA one last time:
At the current time, this initiative isn't even being discussed in the halls of Congress
Let's just hope it stays that way.
How do you expect us to be sucessfully trolled if you guys won't do your job right? I tell you, I'm losing my faith in Slashdot trolls.
And the next time you are layed off during a bad economy you will wonder where your benifits are while you search for a new job.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I was unemployed for a while here in Massachusetts. When I was unemployed, after a few weeks, they force you to go to a seminar to learn the effective ways to find a job and if you dont go, you're cut off. While I doubt that would stop many thieves, it certainly would become obvious if you show up to the same seminar week after week under different names. While this certainly isnt foolproof, it does help a little bit. Are there programs like this in other states which not only help the unemployed but could possibly reduce the fraud?
The author only addresses how to detect and punish the fraud when it happens as opposed to preventing the fraud. Here is a much better idea: Force those wanting unemployment to travel to the unemployment office in person, scan a fingerprint with a modern scanner, take their picture, and record the SS#, age, and name. This will prevent two individuals from ever claiming the same identity, or a single person from registering multiple SS#s.
In my state, you unemployment is based on the last job you had (or jobs). They look at like the last 6 - 24 months or something. A company has the right to appeal as well. I'm not sure how one would defraud in this case. Joe Schmoe files against Acme Widget. Acme Widget says either a) He never worked here, b) wait, he still works here! (if say the phisher knew he worked there), or c) we don't think he's entitled.
Charities will take care of the type d, but it's absurd to say that anything should be paid to types a-c.
Well, taking care of those who fall under type d can fall to charities, but generally, I don't have a problem seeing someone who is actually incapable of the work receiving some kind of assistance, especially if they ended up being injured or whatever because of their jobs, and most particularly if it was while in some kind of service (Military, Police, Fire, etc)
Types a-c already gets plenty of assistance. The federal government employs a lot of them.
OCO is Loco
Holly hell, ICFP has started.
Go team Perl GO.
Would prove nothing.. They would *gasp* lie during the interview...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
In Texas, when someone files an unemployment claim, their employers within their "eligibility window" - ie, those they worked for the last X months (18? 24?) get notices. If their unemployment claim is granted (which requires they have been terminated not-for-cause, or that they quit for very specific few reasons, like harrassment), it is "debited" to the employer, and the employer's unemployment tax rate may go up as a result.
I can't imagine how they manage to file unemployment claims without the employers knowing and going to the person and saying, "What the heck? You're still employed." The jig would be up pretty quick. In Texas, the first phone interview includes a call to the employer(s) and takes place within days of the filing, probably before the first check is paid.
Since the unemployment fund is paid into through payroll deductions linked to the SSN, by the employer, I don't see how this could succeed, at least in Texas.
Well, you have to file a claim exactly when the person that you are filing as got laid off. *All* claims are verified by the state employees in unemployment insurance fraud division. This means a call to your former employer to ask for a termination date and reason. Also you have to show up for a personal interview with the program officer so you need a drivers license or a passport. And, if you try to file for someone eligible for unemployment benefts chances are he will file too so you will get caught.
I worked at the ** State Unemployment insurance for quite a few years. Fraud happens but with existing security measures it is not exactly easy to get a free unemployment check...
Maybe some states are more lax, but I know here in Missouri, there's no way you'd "easily get away" with this type of scam.
For starters, you're required to do an in-person reporting to your local unemployment office every 4 weeks. Until you do, your benefits cease, and not showing up for the in-person reporting after 2 weeks go by terminates your benefits.
Also, the maximum benefit amount they pay out in Missouri is $250 per week, not $400 like the figures used in the article.
To top it off, they also require that you apply for at least 3 jobs per week and keep a log of your contacts. True, they may or may not ever really look at this - but they reserve the right to. (I don't know exactly how that policy works, but I'm guessing maybe they randomly select people from the pool of benefits-seekers to come in and show them the log of contacts.) And in some cases, applicants for benefits are also required to go through other processes, such as spending time each week in their "resource room", using their computer database to job hunt.
Your employer *has* to have your SSN, and the government *has* to know that your SSN is currently registered with X employer. THis is how the whole benefit system works.
If the government is not checking if an SSN is *already currently employed* when an unemployment claim is being filed, it is a result of pure incompetance. You would think this thing could be enforced with a foreign key constraint in the SSN claim database for god's sake.
How about something other than SSNs?
lets ban the SS!
We have seen that living things are too improbable and too beautifully "designed" to have come into existence by chance.
The flaw with this theory is that it doesn't distinguish between the unwilling to be employed and those for whom there are no jobs. It's possible that a locality will have done so poor a job bringing employment into their area and training those on unemployment for available jobs that someone willing to work is unemployed for longer than 26 weeks. Unemployment benefits are hardly enough to finance a relocation to where there is work for most people.
I can understand the underlying concept of the fraud, but your social security number is linked to your name, atleast in New York state. I can guess you can change the address to where the check is sent to, but it seems hard.
1)Most states won't send unemployment checks out of state without some extra paperwork, with more authorization.
2)The computers will most likely pick up the fact that 100 checks are being sent to the same address. I had an issue once when I was collecting unemployment at the same time my father was, living in the same house. They don't send checks to P.O. Boxes either, so you cannot setup 100 different addresses.
3)The name on the check will be the name of the of the unemployment recipient. Banks won't cash checks under different names without id. So now you're creating 100 fake id's, opening up bank accounts, and you have to go to 100 different banks, or you risk someone recognizing you cashign checks under different names.
Seems awfully risky to me, with a lot of variables that can go wrong. Probably easier to just rob the people when they cash their checks and leave the bank.
The federal government employs a lot of them.
Employes? I thought it was led by one of them.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Just trying to get you to accept identity cards, national database of everyone, etc.
I am trolling
2. The State administers the state income tax system and therefore knows if you are still employed.
Have I missed something?
So, in the very recent past, they WERE willing to accept a job and their skills WERE useful.Again, they were considered "useful" in the very recent past.
By your "logic", there would never be any unemployment because the only people who would be counted as "unemployed" would have skills currently needed by business and a willingness to work for those businesses. So why would they not be hired by those businesses?
And before you talk about demanding too much money, the businesses would only have to offer them more than they'd make on unemployment.
Which doesn't leave much rational for "unemployment".
Anybody still want the government as their ISP?
What if Digg added local news and a Slashdot inspired comment karma system? ---
http://houndwire.com
There are certain services that governments should be providing, not private companies who cut corners and use your tax to make themselves richer while providing the absolute minimum quality of service they can get away with. Security has always been the last priority in just about every area of industry because it doesn't make money, prime example: this whole shambles will continue, no-one will assign a team to fix it.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
jmfdez@ono.com
You're correct. "Identity infringement" is the proper term in such situations. Much like in the case of copyright infringement, the term "theft" has been used to suggest a rival loss of tangibles. Indeed, no tangibles have been lost when somebody's identity is infringed upon.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Mod this baby up. The only thing worse than a bleeding heart liberal is a cold hearted conservative.
Now all I need to do is figure out wether or not to copyright myself...
This is another example or rot, I am sorry to say. It troubles me that we as a nation are going down the drain. How are we more different as compared to those in the third world in this regard?
To make matters worse, many technology writers and pundits do not see matters like these as news-worthy! Our leaders are not doing a good job.
I usually try to refuse. Once at a Sprint PCS store, the clerk went along just fine - when 111-11-1111 wasn't accepted by their system, he tried 000-00-0000 and it took it.
Another time, a different cell phone company wanted my SSN, I said "no", they said "no". I wanted the phone, so I said "fine" and gave them a slighly different number from my true number... a few minutes later, they asked if it was correct - apparently the credit check didn't go thru. Alas, in that case I had to relent.
But in general, I make no effort whatsoever to keep my consumer information records "clean".
If it is for my benefit for my information to be right, then I keep it correct. If it is only for the convenience of others, I don't care if my name is spelled wrong, my DOB is off, or my SSN is munged.
I also enjoy saying "no" whenever a retail clerk asks something simple like "may I have your zip code?". Most just shrug, but every once in a while you get one that is truly surprised, and in those instances watching their reaction is amusing.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
This is indeed how Texas works. This is the
solution. Nothing spurious gets through here.
Tempest in a teapot.
In certain jurisdictions could could file for a patent on your DNA structure. But then that may only protect you from cloners. Indeed, that most likely will not protect you from identity infringement.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Unemployment benefits are taxable as income. So the state governments are not the only victims. I am assuming that anyone that is a victim of this scam is liable for the benefits that were scammed. They are going to have fun fighting the IRS because Uncle Sam wants him money, NOW!!!
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
DAMN! Finally someone who UNDERSTANDS statistics!
When you start NOT COUNTING certain data points, you SKEW the results.
The government WANTS to skew the results so it can claim to be "improving" the "economy".
If the government is skipping homeless people and people who have given up looking for work because the jobs aren't out there, then the government is not reporting the situation correctly.
This article may be summarized thus:
- there's a large trough in state budgets
- my company can not currently feed from this trough
- fearmongering can open this trough for me
- i want some sort of model citizen award for feeding at this trough
Politicus
There is a very easy solution to this:
Require them to pick up the first check, and subsequent first checks of each month, in person at a government agency where their identity can be confirmed.
There are maybe 2% of the people that will have legitimate reasons why the can't make that trip (in hospital, in traction, etc). In these cases send someone out.
If these people can't come out of their hole to collect a check, they obviously aren't getting out of their hole to look for a job, so they don't deserve benefits anyway.
Lose Weight and Feel Great with Isagenix
I was just wondering. Maybe some of you can clairify me on this.
UI is funded through payroll taxes - the employer pays the tax. You're not "paying a bunch of money into the system" unless you've got people working for you ;-)
we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
-- anais nin
yes, you missed the part where the state would have to continually check up on people, and that companies would need to see that the state computer had job status information immediatly.
Good luck with that.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
> forcing the people to actually work.
/.
Yeah, that would be great. Then we wouldn't have dumbfucks like you wasting time posting on
Its not like its their money. Until government civil servents can be fired instead of collecting big fat pensions, we will NEVER get any changes from the government.
Where did you get the erroneous idea that government civil servants can't be fired?
Since I'd rather not mod down incorrect responses to your question, I'll just post an answer. Short answer is 'No'. Long answer follows.
The unemployment rate is calculated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics based on two *surveys*, a household survey and an establishment (business) survey, with the household survey being used for the unemployment percentage, currently 5.1%. Basically, A person is considered 'unemployed' if they don't have a job *AND* they are looking for one. If they're not working but not looking, they don't count (removed from the both the numerator and denominator of the unemployed % because they're not considered part of the labor force). See here for more details
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.tn.htm
Specifically, "The unemployment data derived from the household survey in no way depend upon the eligibility for or receipt of unemployment insurance benefits".
Occasionally, the news will report on new initial unemployment claims filed as another indicator of the job market, and those numbers would be affected by fraudulent claims, but that's the extent of it.
Imposing Libertarian views on everyone online since 1992.
I pay unemployment tax. I am on H1b. I dont like paying that tax one bit, because I will never see benifits of it. If ever I am unemployed, I should leave the country with no money till I find my next job. This fraud makes me happy cuz the fat government is losing the money that is stolen from my pay check. One can give me crock about working in a foreign country and me not having rights even to complain blah blah blah, but really, if they call it H1b tax, I'd be more than happy to pay.
Life's not that simple. For every person ripping off the unemployment system there are 9 others who actually need it.
Yeah, too bad the 1 person ripping off the program are probably, on average, taking much, much more out of the system than the 9 people who "need" it.
Economics dictates that people would "need" these programs less if they didn't exist--meaning that people would rely more on savings. It shows a general distrust in the people's collective judgement to dock their pay and use it to pay people who have lost their jobs.
Imagine if you saved all that money you pay in unemployment taxes and had THAT for a rainy day. Considering the fraud and the fact that these programs still aren't bankrupt, it WOULD be more efficient.
Regardless, ALL payroll taxes affect wages and are effectively a burden on the labor market. So essentially, once you lose your job, unemployment taxation actually REDUCES the opportunity to get a new job! Solve a problem by creating a new one: it's the American way.
Finally, as an added nugget of useful information, just because "the employer" pays part of your payroll taxes doesn't mean that it doesn't affect you. Economics dictates that the burden of taxation on a market has nothing to do with who sends the check to the gov't, but what the supply and demand curves look like. This means that if you JUST increased payroll taxes on the employer's end, it would STILL lower wages for the employees. Therefore, SS taxes (another payroll tax) are NOT 6.2% but 12.4%.
Latewire
Advise for everyone: start using fake SSNs and DOBs whenever possible
Good god someone MOD PARENT DOWN. Your advice is credit fraud which could get someone who has the fake SSN in trouble... as well yourself. Besides, if you provide correct information everywhere else you could have multiple SSNs tagged to your credit report which is evidence of fraud. BAD ADVICE, DO NOT DO THIS. If you don't want to provide your real SSN/DoB then don't give it out.
Speak truth to power.
I've been working full time for about two and a half years now (130 weeks). In that time I've made somewhere around $100,000 pre tax. Also, to do that requires working 8 hours a day (ok, I admit, surfing Slashdot occupies some of that :), 5 days a week.
So something which would get 10 times the money in 1/5 the time, sounds awful fast to me. I suppose if you are a CEO of a large company it's not big money, but if you are a normal worker it's quite a lot.
Both times I ended up unemployed, I was unemployed longer than the 26 weeks that my unemployment benefits lasted.
Since the current administration keeps claiming triumph when the jobs grow, it is very relevant to point out that the number of jobs in the economy is growing slower than the number of people entering the workforce.
If the same SSAN is showing up in both tax payments and unemployment, that ought to be noticed. And the IRS sees both.
You can file online in MI, but you still must meet people face to face before you recieve your first check.
Employs? I thought it was led by one of them.
Only one? You're giving WAY too much credit to the 535 members of Congress and 100 members of the Senate.
It's over due, everybody should get them. Best if they are across the forehead, but if you went to Aruba and got a deep tan it may make it hard to run you thru the scanner. Don't you just hate it when these thing don't scan?
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
Welcome to reality, where criminals are real people and economic crime doesn't stop just because you say "Hey, wait, it's a free market! This isn't fair! Why don't you get a job?"
Exactly.
(I was going to write something else here to add to that sentiment, but really the parent said it all.)
What doesn't add up to me is that employers have the opportunity to appeal the individual's application for unemployment. For example, if someone is fired for using drugs on the worksite, they are typically not eligible for unemployment benefits. When they apply for benefits, the employer is notified and has the opportunity to appeal so their benefit account will not be charged. Granted, a check or 2 might be paid before that process begins, but I fail to see how this goes on for anything close to 26 weeks. I'm sure the fraud takes place, but I think this article is exaggerating the problem.
When you file for unemployment, your last known employer is notified and gets a chance to protest (eg. by claiming you were fired for cause or quit, rendering you ineligible for UI benefits). The state tax people know who your last employer was because the employer is remitting your tax withholding and the UI people can and do cross-check to verify employment and salary to calculate your benefit amount, so verifying that the last employer you claimed on your paperwork is really the last one who sent in a tax payment for you should be easy. When your employer gets a notice about your UI claim when you're still working for them, they should be raising a flag either with you or the unemployment office. At this point the scam should come undone and the case turned over for investigation. If that doesn't happen, someone's really fallen down on the job.
What I don't get is how you can cash fraudulent check and get away with it. Don't currency exchanges and the like require some ID?
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
Send an investigator out to talk to anyone living at an address with more than (e.g.) six registered names.
I've got multiple personality disorder, you insensitive clod, and all of me are out of work!
In Michigan you can file online for this, but the last step is you must meet a real person face to face with more than 1 piece of ID before the checks come rolling in.
This comment is only valid in NY, I have no idea what the other states do, but when an unemjoyment claim is filed, a copy goes to the company for verification of dates employed, etc.
If the company that's getting hosed was to return the form stating the person either didn't work for them, or is still employed, it would be the fly in the ointment.
In NY, the companies have an unemployment account they fund and when there's a claim, the person in question draws against that fund. If other states do it different, like one general fund that every company funds and that the ex employees all drain, then yes...there should be a different plan in place. But in NY, it would be failry easy to detect.
WTF? Over?
Have I missed something?
You mean like expecting the state to actually know what it's doing?
To clear my less-than-perfect post a bit:
Stolen passwords or cards can be retired, while compromised biometric data will haunt you forever.
Did the submitter go to Yale too? What happened to the "least publicized"?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Interesting...
There are certain services that private companies should be providing, not governmental agencies who cut corners and use your tax to pay pensions while providing the absolute minimum quality of service they can get away with. Security has always been the last priority in just about every area of government because it doesn't make money, prime example: this whole shambles will continue, no-one will assign a team to fix it
That's the point of identity theft. They can pretend to be someone else so it doesn't matter what kind of list they really are on.
(Emphasis mine)
Do you really believe what you wrote? You're in favor of constitutionally-violating the rights of thousands upon thousands of unemployed citizens?
Or you'll see a huge drop in people filing for unemployment and an enormous rise in people finding other ways to fraud the system to get paid so they can buy diapers and groceries for their families. Did you know that in some boroughs of Chicago, unemployment is over 60%?!
The problem is severe, let's not make it worse by encouraging people to commit more fraud by invading their lives more than we already do.
True identity theft would require the actual stealing of someone's identity. In the case of fraud, the person whose SSN has been copied still has his SSN, they have not lost anything. Same with any other copying of personal data.
Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
Looking on http://fortress.wa.gov/esd/portal/unemployment/ben efits/uiappl.htm
Apparently, he used a reference from Washington State in his article, because they're one of the few states that does not at any point require you to physically provide any proof that you are who you say you are. In fact, it's all done via phone or browser. Every other state I've lived in requires you to visit an unemployment office for verification at least once.
If you're curious, searching her name and job title referenced her in buying Aware, an anti fraud package, and being used as publicity for it, and also revealed that this news story was submitted to about 6 different websites, including the writer's own company site. This isn't news, it's trying to panic people into buying a product to protect themselves from a phantom threat.
And your SSN is an absolutely terrible way to prove someone's identity. While it may have been the intent, now all it has become is a good ID for keying databases. Because everyone has your SSN now, it's not even kind of a secret. It's simply a value more unique than a name for keeping records straight now.
I found this really cool site about Social Security Numbers and who you have to give them to. I can't vouch for the site or anything (and this is not a plug), but there is a lot of good information about how the system was set up and how it's changed into this monster unique identifier (which it really isn't -- the SSN system contains dupes) today.
For further in-depth reading check it out:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/ssn/
Hmmm. I don't see why anyone would need more than one iPod (or, at most, one for each ear).
When I was on unemployment in MA (after being laid off by 3Com), they went to some lengths to verify that I was who I claimed to be, and that I had worked for 3Com for the length of time I said I had, and that 3Com had paid into the unemployment insurance fund.
His example of a guy being laid off in one state and collecting employment in another runs counter to the way I understand the system works. My understanding is that your employer pays a quarterly unemployment tax for each worker, and sends in a list of employee SSNs for whom the tax is being paid every quarter. When you get laid off, this tax money is used to pay your unemployment benefits. You would have a hard time collecting in a state in which you didn't work.
I hate to call FUD, but something is wrong here. Even if I stole 1000 numbers, had all the other information I needed to go with them, at most, 50 of those will turn out to be eligible, and maybe not for the full $400. You have to file every single week of those 26 weeks. Then you have to convert a check with someone else's name on it... and it's been forever since I've been able to cash even a payroll check anywhere without an account. Hell, even the grocery stores that used to do it won't anymore.
100 checks, would require 100 visits to unemployment offices, there are maybe a dozen in my city, that means at least 8 people visiting. Lots of potential for someone to notice a familiar face.
I just don't see how this happens.
Look who is writing the article. A president of a software account/payroll firm. Maybe I believe in conspiracy to much, however this would be great publicity to sell more software to states and get some of the state taxes.
It's tough to make crime pay much better than that.
Plan a wedding -- at least set the date. On the day of, jump on a Greyhound. Tell the police you've been kidnapped. Wait a few days. Get booked on The Today Show. Make half a mil. All that in less than week. The other way, you have to "work" for half a year...
jason
Have a good day?! Impossible! I'm at work!
This is a problem:
As of December 2004 blacks are the highest unemployed ethnic group in America at 10.8 percent. Now, by definition that means these people are *looking* for work. I understand that some are under-qualified, and other factors, but doesn't that show something. Put your racism away; we aren't counting "bums" here - we are counting workers who will take wages for a job done.
Get your Unix fortune now!
In Calirornia, once your employment relationship is severed, the EDD sends a notice out to your new ex-employer and any employer that may still be paying into your account. The employer(s) then verify the info sent (i.e. Name, SSN, employment status, etc.) and return the forms to the EDD. Then you start getting your checks.
At least in California, you get at least one phone screen for each claim filed, once a year you need to make a personal visit to the unemployment office to take a class (but you are not IDed IIRC), and the state does call your ex-employer to verify your information. So you would have to have a pretty good setup to get around all this and launder all the checks. I suppose you could set up a "Vandelay Enterpises" type company to front for you but it sounds a lot more risky than just ordering a bunch of expensive stuff and selling it on the street or EBay.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
Is he talking about federal pound-you-in-the-ass prison?
If you can devise a system that can assure that recipients of these funds are individuals whom are supposed to receive these funds without retaining any sources of identification information then I would be interested in learning how you plan to do this.
Or they change it first.
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
I was told about an online job application where the company says it's secure (it is using https), but if you look at the URL, the information is sent to a location that has NOTHING to do with the company. Further, in the URL is a field entitled "email=", and has not one, but two different recipients- one of them *might* be the group that actually handles the employment applications for the company. The other appears to be some man-in-the-middle. The gist is that you submit all of this information, which includes your SSN, DOB, and drivers licence number, and you have no idea who gets access to it, nor do you have any control.
Think of all the people who fill out job applications in general...they ask for a mess load of information. I'm prepared to support a law which states that a) an organization can only request as much information as is absolutely pertinent to the transaction at hand, and b) should that transaction not be fully realized, the data MUST be purged. There is no reason, for example, for a company that doesn't hire you, to have any detailed information about you. Period.
I had a mortgage broker casually tell me, "just email me your social security number..." While I was smart enough to tell him that his wouldn't be an option for security reasons, think of how many others don't have enough of a clue.
The problem with this is that it depends on when an individual's income data is sent to the state. It is certainly not sent every pay period. In many cases it is sent either quarterly, but in my state it's only once per year. So correlating in this fashion wouldn't work. However, in my state before you see a dime I get the chance to appeal. Believe me, everybody checks their records. The last thing any of us want is our mod to be increased by fraudulant claims.
Don't let your tinfoil hats make you conflate the Patriot Act with the rest of the laws on the books. Banks have been collecting SSNs since 1970 on most types of accounts to comply with the "Financial Recordkeeping and Reporting of Currency and Foreign Transactions Act of 1970" and various Bank Secrecy acts passed in the mid-80s.
The Patriot Act had virtually no impant on banking laws except to the extent it weakened (or strengthened depending on your perspectives) the procedures for getting info without warrants or court orders, and the number of agencies that can snoop domestic data sources.
More here:
http://www.uhuh.com/laws/31usc1051.htm
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
I think I saw this on an episiode of Myth Busters on the Discovery Channel. I think they proved it wouldn't work with to many localized rules.
Prove it.
Seven states have no state income tax: Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming. Two others, New Hampshire and Tennessee, tax only dividend and interest income.
The last time I was on, you had to go down and personally collect that check every couple weeks or whatever.
Sounds like a dangerous way to commit a crime - showing up once a week (ON TIME!) in a government office to collect the theft.
I could see it if they mailed it to your phoney box address - or better yet, Direct Deposit. Does unemployment do that stuff now?
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Unemployment in NY state:
(in casual language)
You have to have worked lately.
You have to not have been fired for not doing your job.
You have to be able to work (no health problems, etc).
You have to be actively looking for a job.
It only lasts for 6 months.
It doesn't pay near what a job does.
In practice it isn't as restrictive as it is on paper.
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
So we should just hand our money over to a morally bankrupt robber so that way he won't have to bother robbing us? I am sorry, there are plenty of poor people out there who choose not to mug strangers because they no that it is wrong. I support forms of social welfare but I do it because I believe in helping others. If every unemployed person was a violent criminal then you could be damn sure that I would do everything in my power to make sure they never touch that unemployment money.
They point out how almost everywhere, the claimant needs to claim in person... to have too many false faces is to share to wealth too widely, so why aren't they picked up by the staff working in the unemployment offices themselves?
Or is the fraud itself being exaggerated? Perhaps if there is a fraud, it's an internal one.
Wikileaks, no DNS
It used to be that only accounts where previously really required to have social security numbers were those that drew interest and thus had to be reported for income tax purposes. A non-interest bearing checking account needed no SSN.
Don't kid yourself on the impact of the Patriot Act on banking. The Customer Identification Program was required because of it - and the regulators view it as part of the Bank Secrecy Act framework - and have moved BSA/OFAC/CIP into a "safety and soundness" category for examinations.
A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
From the article:
biography
Michael Alter is president of SurePayroll, a payroll outsourcing company that processes and remits payroll taxes for more than 15,000 small businesses across the country.
The validity of the story aside, do you think perhaps that SurePayroll has the software to "detect" this "pervasive" crime?
To me, this story feels like a scare tactic sales pitch.
Most companies are so after your business I wonder if they would ever take the trouble to hunt you down. You could always claim stupidity if they called you back - I usually just transpose a few digits when I know the request is bogus. It would be an intersting experiement in separating people who really use it from those who just ask for it for the hell of it.
/.-ers) and people who ask for it and truly don't need it will usually comply. In most jurisdictions, it's not even legal for them to ask for it unless they plan to use it for a credit check.
I really think people don't check. Hell I have had root on hundred of boxes at big banks and ecommerce companies and according to my free credit reports none of my employers has ever asked for a credit report, at least from Experian.
Does a query like that even show up?
If an employer makes a query to one of the big three does it show up on the other two's systems?
I'm not endorsing the practice. Just be insistent and don't be an asshole (I know that's asking a lot of
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
The difference is, a private company owner/board is free to reep the proffits they make or set their own salary. While this is fine in the free market, ie where I choose to send my money, when it comes to the tax I have to pay I want to know that this money will be put to good use, I want the politicians and department heads to get a good salary for the work they do but no more. I want every penny that isn't used or is made in proffit to go back in to the system.
Heres an example: All the new busses in London have nice LCD screens because its great for advertising. However there are too few busses and overcroweding is bad (overcrowding = more revenue). Meanwhile ticket prices have been steadily rising above the rate of inflation (the mayor promised they wouldn't) and have almost doubled in 2 years, a recent headwave has left the busses un-usable because they have no air conditioning and yet the private companies who now own these routes have enough money for their bosses to get a hefty bonus. Fuck that is what I say, there is no 'choice' in what bus company you use, just as there is no choice in social security providers. They're given a free ride from your tax in various ways and provide a crappy service in return.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
The vast majority of crime isn't poverty induced.
If I steals something, but still own a television, I am not stealing because I'm poor, I'm stealing to keep my television.
If someone pays for -- for example -- alcohol, tobacco, illegal drugs, candy, a house with more than 1 bedroom room per 4 people, a radio with more than one speaker, they aren't stealing from poverty either.
They may be belpless in their addiction. They may be culturally blind and think that they need more luxury than they really do. They may have been deprived of a good home in their formative years. They may need help more than jail. None of these reasons are poverty.
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
Employees don't pay "unemployment tax" so a big part of your argument just flew out the window. EMPLOYERS pay into unemployment. Neither you, nor anyone else, has paid ANY money into ANY unemployment insurance as an employee.
You don't pay into unemployment. Your employer does.
(Waiting for all the cries of "but if the employer's didn't they would pay you the difference instead" - yes, in a perfect, frictionless economic world they might. In this one they wouldn't...)
The SCO lawsuit makes me wish my company were in Utah. We need a new building.
I'm in the wrong business
so this is one way it works, person A's SSN gets stolen by person B. Person B works under the assumed identity of person A and gets a "honest earned" check. Person B still claims unemployment because technically person B is out of a job. In doing so, person B does have taxes witheld, but the unemployment check is far greater.
my sister also came across some cases where some people didn't qualify because some system showed they were getting social security checks when the person hadn't received any. more often than not, when this was discovered, it was the case where somebody else was stealing their funds right from under their noses. similar things happened to their unemployment funds.
aside from these two types of cases, my sister would also encounter applicans where they were obviously not in need of medical assistance, but she could not go out of her way to investigate further. she simply had to go with what the applicant provided. eventually she got sick of the types of scams going on (as the 3 listed above) that she eventually quit.
This article is bogus. There is so much paperwork and verification in most states, that this kind of fraud is not possible on a massive scale. Plus no proff it occurs in the article.
You can complain about it all you want, but it won't stop you from suffering the consequences. Lots of homelessness+unemployment=lots of crime. That's not an edict from any social policy group or something that the bleeding heart liberals have set into motion by secretly convincing all of the people on the low end of the socioeconomic ladder that they have to eat even if they can't afford it. History tells us that it's true. It's emperical and no exceptions in urban modernity exist. Living things want to eat. Hungry living things will use their muscles and their will to try to make sure it happens.
If you think that's not how it "should" be, that's completely fair and I won't argue with you a bit. But yes, I'll hand over my money to social services to avoid having to hand it over at gunpoint. You may think that you have more control than me over the fabric of the causal nexus, but I'm just not that omnipotent. I understand and have to face that so long as I have things that other people feel that they need as much or more than me, sooner or later I'm gonna hand some of it over somehow whether I like it or not, while alive or over my dead body, and there are more safe (through secure public institutions) and less safe (in alleyways) places to make the exchange.
I mean, I think that tigers "should" let us walk into the jungle and pet them. That fur looks really soft. But in general, despite what I think about the big cats and what they ought to be like, I'm gonna give 'em a wide berth. Same goes for electricity. Why the hell is it so dangerous to run 50A through your body? Something ought to be done. Why should we continue to surrender to the tyranny of physics?
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
Ok, about 10 years ago my dad was fired from his job because he would not lie to a customer about some shifty pricing. My mom had just had a baby and there were now 3 of us kids. The only way for us to make it till he found another job was to live off unemployment/wellfare. Some people actually need and deserve this stuff... so go ahead, try and disprove it...
"A truly wise man realizes he knows nothing."
Civil Servants can be fired. And they pay into their retirement just like anyone else. A retirement system that sucks so much by the way that they had to create a seperate optional system for retirement called a thrift savings plan, which is like a 401K. You see, they still have to pay into the pension (FERS) because the government is dependent on that money to borrow from and also to help keep social security solvent but the government sort of said "look, we know future civil servant retirees are going to get screwed in this deal, so we are going to give you the option of having another retirement account, however we are still going to need you to pay into this other account which you will never be able to get the money back from."
Is this spawning a new *Identity Piracy*? People are cool with Online piracy (which incidentally was on /. a few posts ago) and illegal dload stuff made by others, So why raise a hell over someone dloading 'your info' and using it. After all, you still have (your identity) right?
Just sharing it around...
No, I mean, prove that there is a 9 to 1 ratio. I am betting that you just pulled the number out of your behind.
I have an image in my mind of someone in an emergency room. The hospital can't varify his health insurance ID with his retinal scan because his retina is somewhere on interstate 95 and they also can't verifiy his credit cards because the finger that he used for the original ID is somewhere else on interstate 95.
If he survies his life is about to become very interesting.
JACEM
DOC Disinformation Obfuscation and Confusion
The carrot to FUD's stick
I read lately (wish I remembered where) that somewhere around half (60%?) of medical costs in the US are paid for by the government.
- My guess is that this large proportion is one of the main drivers behind increasing medical costs. (People see government money as free, making less resistance to increasing costs.)
- Another would be people (lawyers) looking for an easy buck through lawsuits.
- The third driver is a widespread fundamental misunderstanding of insurance. Buying insurance is supposed to be MORE expensive, on average, than doing without. Medical insurance is no exception. The more medicine is covered by insurance the more expensive it will be.
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
Those unemployment numbers are just pulled out of their aZZes.Percentages mean nothing in this case anyway. Where I live, I estimate the unemployment COUNT as one unemployed person to three employed ones. Looks like we are no longer a developing country, and are fast becoming a third world one. If Jeb Bush runs for Prez, I'm voting for him, that will complete the trifecta that will finally drop this country in the sheatter. The wealthy are all starting to leave this country, like rats from a sinking ship.Then maybe us true Americans can start over and fix it. Don't spend, that's the secret.If folks would quit buying every little gadget and shiny thing they see, the chinks, dot-heads, and traitors like IBM won't make any money. -"We now return you SHEEP to your regularly scheduled program, and don't forget to click the ad banners,(we need more CRACK and HOOKERZ)." -slashdot ed.
Reading "BasketBall Diaries" presents a few scams that were used to defraud social services in similar ways.
It may be easier now, but this isn't new.
unemployment claims file YOU!
I'm sure if there actually *IS* a problem and this article isn't just a cheap plug for "Fraud Stop 2006 XP Special Edition" we'll start hearing about the IRS wanting to know where all those missing 1099-Gs went this time next year.
We pray for the end of ignorance and superstition
Yes, the cable and satellite companies are paying each customer $5629.02 this month in compensation because your privacy was risked when the customer database was hacked.
On an entirely unrelated note, all cable and satellite TV providers have raised their rates by $5629.02 this month. They companies cite an unanticipated increase in expenses as the reason for the rate hike.
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
I am looking for someone who knows how to hack social security databases. Please post your script. ;)
"They should just privatize the system. It's insurance."
Two years ago, when I was just starting on unemployment, there was a brief big stink in the press about many states outsourcing their unemployment and welfare management. An outsourcing firm in Wisconsin has grabbed up contracts for 28 states (with the trend increasing). The punchline to this (travesty of justice) joke was that the Wisconsin firm outsourced their workload to Bangalore, India.
Since that time, there has been a backlash in only one state, NJ, while I am certain that more states have sdopted outsourcing welfare and unemployment services.
How many IT pros out of work would have preferred the opportunity to work at the low end of their pay scale for the state, rather than "twist in the wind"? BTW: The late great state of Connecticut reported last year that 78,000 IT professionals were laid off from their jobs, all while the number of H1-B "slots" for employers in this state increased by 60,000.
Between offshore outsourcing, onshore outsourcing with L1-A and H1-B visa holders, and downward wage pressure from illegal aliens in the automotive, construction, and medical services fields, there will be no viable American "middle class" in 10 years. The transition to a "Wal-Mart" economy will have been completed.
Be sure to thank your state legislators, your Congresscritters, and our same-same two party system for all their hard work on your behalf.
And you obviously can't read. slug-head pointed out that a tax on payroll, no matter WHO sends the physical check to the state, will effect the take home pay of employees.
Seriously, the EASIEST economics courses teach you this stuff. Take one.
The slashdot crowd are such a bunch of hypocrits. Here is an article on "Identity theft" and the words steal and stolen are being thrown about without the least sense of irony..... However just a few articles ago "Software Piracy Seen As Normal" there were the usual suspects complaining in all seriousness that stealing software was not stealing but copyright infringement because you can't steal software when the original owner still has a copy.
I don't believe identity thieves remove your identity when they steal it. You still have it or do you wake up in the morning and wonder who you are.
The bikini - security through obscurity since 1943
I want my private key to be swordfish.
"Why does your fiancee keep putting her masters degree on the application if it's losing her potential jobs?"
Here's a valid reason. Because a four-year gap* on the resume is hard to explain.
*Or howver many years you have to add to Undersell yourself.
You are correct - I could argue that most bank's CIPs already conformed to the Patriot Act but I won't disagree with you aftre doing a little more research; since the FDIC has issued guidance on the subject it looks like the Patriot Act has gotten its grubbly little fingers into a lot of new places, not just the highly publicized or obvious ones:
4 04a.html
x .html
http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2004/fil0
The FDIC Financial Institution Letters make interesting reading in general:
http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2005/inde
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
Was unemployed here in Texas; collected for six months without ever talking or seeing a human. Signed up on the net, updated job search info on a phone menu.
Of course, the company informed them of my status, which isn't going to happen if you just call them up and say "Hey I lost my job".
I don't believe identity thieves remove your identity when they steal it. You still have it or do you wake up in the morning and wonder who you are.
You're absolutely right. These people should properly be called "Unlicensed Identity Copiers".
My other first post is car post.
Not true for unemployment. I was working for a company in Pennsylvania when I moved to Oregon. Six months later I got RIFfed and collected PA unemployment for five months, all over the phone. I set up direct deposit when I registered, and weekly filing was done via an IVR system. The only time I even spoke to a real person was during the initial call, and they just took the information I gave them, presumably verified it, and started issuing me checks.
Interestingly enough, I'm currently working on a project where we're rewriting the unemployment system in one of the flatter states. You can bet I'll be bringing up this article in our next staff meeting, and we'll see if our design needs to be changed (figures, something like this comes up two weeks after design reviews are over!)
Just junk food for thought...
400 AUD = 168 GBP (or $307 US) according to xe.com.
That's over 3 times as much as you get here in the UK. Why so much?
Here is the problem, unemployment is considered the percentage of people IN THE WORKFORCE that do not have a job.
You are suggesting that the current definition of workforce is wrong (and may not reflect the modern workforce), but you need a NEW definition.
The problem with YOUR solution is your unemployment would be at 30% and rising, and NOT because of changes in the economy.
For example, a 70 year old retiree that isn't working... is he unemployed?
A housewife raising 3 kids, is she unemployed?
That same housewife doing buying/selling on eBay for a few months, does her status change? Is she unemployed if she stops? Was she employed?
A 20 year old that works in construction that stops working in the winter, is he no unemployed? Is he unemployed based upon whether his is looking for work, or still unemployed but not need to look for work because he'll have a job in 3 months.
Now, what about a college student at age 20. Is he in the workforce?
I'm not saying that the government's definition is good, and I think that the payroll service completely ignores how much of our economy (at LEAST 5%) is in the fringe... take the 400,000 people that, according to eBay, earn their living buying/selling on eBay... whether that number is correct or not, there are SOME people that make their living buying/selling on eBay, because I have met 2 of them. Therefore, the number is at LEAST 2 and probably NO MORE than 400,000, but I have no idea what it is. However, I can GUARNTEE you that no "payroll survey" picks them up. The household survey has other problems, but it DOES capture those people, but it misses others.
Our measurement of unemployment is wrong, but your simple metric, # of people without jobs / # of people, won't work. It needs to be # of people IN WORKFOCE without jobs / # of people IN WORKFORCE... otherwise, a wealthy housewife is considered unemployed, as is the college student and retiree, which trashes our ability to understand the "misery" factor of the unemployment.
Alex
You do not need to be privatized to have crap like that happen. Far from it.
Same thing here, however, what most seem to be missing is that you don't just get money from nowhere. The company you got laid off from has to pay the unemployment, so you can bet if someone who is not unemployed files against a given company, that company is going to appeal the unemployment.
Another thing that I don't think has been pointed out: Michael Alter is the president of SurePayroll, it says so right there at the top of TFA. Gosh, I wonder if SurePayroll might be offering some type of anti-fraud software? I bet they soon will be if they aren't now.
you're all figments of my deranged imagination
Come on people you do this with insider help. You think it doesn't happen. This year 18 people were arrested at the Phila, PA IRS facility for stealing payment made to the IRS... Insider all the way!
Getting people to sign in at least monthly would make a lot of sense to me... Fortnightly is better, since the signer's faces will be that bit more familiar. Weekly probably drains too much in the way of resources for the gain, and risks interrupting the flow of a genuine search for work.
Good luck in fixing at least your piece of the system, though!
Wikileaks, no DNS
Illegal Immigrants!!!
Shut down the fucking borders!!!
At any rate, I can't imagine this is a pervasive crime. It's not like you can just submit a SSN online and receive $400 in your mailbox each week. They need to verify that you were working, how long you were working for, that your employer was paying your unemployment insurance, that your employer does not contest your unemployment claim, and that your employer terminated you through no fault of your own.
There is no way this is happening on a mass scale.
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
The real fraud isn't this, I doubt unemployement fraud of this kind is much of a factor if other states are doing anything like Missouri and North Carolina are. (I don't know about anyone elses system, but I assume they follow similar rules and each have their own new hires database and require the employer # to be on file and verify it with the employer, and the employer had to pay in to get it..etc)
The real fraud money that you can get from just a social security number is: Student Loans, and if you are really pushy and brazen (and it helps to be a so called minority for most of them) government grants.
Its not that hard to enroll in 7 different classes a week under 7 different names, show up for a month, and disappear with the money. Each semester you can pocket quite a bit till they get hip to what you look like.
Applying for those farming grants takes some time and paperwork, but I've never known them to come out and actually verify that you aren't growing corn/wheat/cotton on your land, or even that you own land. Worth a try, worst that happens is they ask to verify something you don't have and you hang up.
Freedom is merely privilege extended unless enjoyed by one and all.
No, its the same Lockheed Martin acting as a supplier to the social security administration, providing IT services. Simply being a customer of Lockeed Martin does not mean that Social Security has been privatized. If the Social Security administration counts as privatized because they procure services from Lockheed, you may as well say that the Catholic church has been privatized themselves because they had Ford build the popemobile.
(For the record, I have no idea who built the Pope's car, but I'm sure that it sure that it wasn't built by altar boys)
the defrauding of state government unemployment benefit programs is the most underpublicized identity theft crime
This makes some sense. I'd guess if I were responsible for some 300 million people's benefits, I'd sure as hell not like everyone to know about my screwing up.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Most cases I've seen in the paper involve the employer getting a kickback from the employee. In many cases the business instigates the fraud and gets lots of low paid workers into the scheme. Take a look at the amount of money involved and the nice recurring setup. Now imagine it with a hundred phony laid off employees...
Since when does the Social Security Administration handle unemployment benefits?
Sure, get rid of those taxes. How long would it take for employers to reduce salaries by exactly that amount? Exactly as long as it would take for us to face a tight job market (at present, it would be near immediate). Then you can't get those savings in the first place.
My wife had to go in for a meeting, file papers, and they contacted her employer. Someone trying to do this "scam" here would have a tough time. I doubt the truth of this story.
I don't know, $1 million might not be worth it to someone who gets caught. Several years in a prison cell with "Bubba" might be a deterrant.
-Vendal Thornheart
This is low hanging fruit for law enforcement.
26 weeks to figure out the fraud.
1 physical location that the checks are delivered to.
Check cashing papertrail.
Massive duplications of information in claim recipient information.
In fact, the only reason that I can think of why law enforcment isn't all over this already is lazyness. Or, perhaps, that the unemployment benifit system is about to undergo a political attack for negligence in an effort to reduce the already pathetic benefits that are currently available in this country. Let's see, why would the politicians want to attack unemployment benifits... Humm... I wonder what would happen to state coffers if claims went up by +30% in the next 18 months.
BTW, I'm not particularly sympathetic for the state and federial agencies involved, but I'm a little conflicted here. I fully believe in a lightly regulated job market, but I know first hand that workers (white and blue collar) get screwed on a regular basis (and know this first hand having worked both white and blue collar jobs).
Still, this is *EXACTLY* the kind of fraud that government encourages when they make public statements like "workers voluntarily enter and leave the job pool" to explain why unemployment benefits are the way they are. That's the kind of statement the an aristocrat would make about their "subjects"... we all know we have to pay the rent and that this is reality (not that we just hop in and out of the job pool because we "feel like it").
At it's most basic level, unemployment benefits are nothing more than an actuarial exercise (designed to make states money and help you as little as possible) with two notable features: 1) The money you pay into the system on a monthly basis is designed to keep the system infrastructure running + payments to the (recently) unemployed for average rates of unemployment and 2) The average rate at which people find jobs after their benifits run out does not produce a large enough homeless population to cause a revolution. Beyond these two "safe guards", we're all eating 5 pound blocks of cheese.
Looks like it's a good time to be in the unemployment business.
Lesson learned: No security will ever be secure if a human has a hand in it at any step.
> Did you know that in some boroughs of Chicago,
> unemployment is over 60%?!
Alright... this absolutly *screams* google maps.
$100 to the first person who is able to do a google maps implementation that shows all of the following (by election districts: local, state and federal):
- Unemployment rates (by street or block if possible)
- Crime location including date and type of crime
- local, state and federal tax reciepts by street/block
- job creation by street or block
Once we're able to *SEE* the problem, we might be able to actually come up with solutions.
Send the implementation URL to the following location with payment instructions:
anonymoustroll@gmail.com
This is simple: give a thumb-print
Now - at the time benefits are sought.
Future - when joining the workforce
Always: run matching scans - weekly - across states
Catch double/triple 100 dippers and use minimaly intrusive biometrics
not rocket science
Brilliantly said! Where are those mods when you need them? Come on, someone mod parent "insightful"...
"The question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me." --Ayn Rand
It's true that they cannot "steal" your identity, only copy it. But after they copy your identity then the real theft can occur.
This would not be news. This weekend I in the NYC Port Authority and I saw a poster for a girl about 17 missing in NYC. I wonder why FOX 'News' hasn't pick this up. This is a shorter trip then Aruba. Guess as their overall ratings slip they can't afford real vacations, so a hot story in Aruba serves two needs. This is not that I don't care about the fate of Natalee Holloway, its a sad story. But the Aruba thing is a tempest in a teakettle. /offtopic
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23