2113
D.epartment O.f G.overnment E.nshitification
(lemmy.dbzer0.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
2113 points (100.0% liked)
Enough Musk Spam
2839 readers
29 users here now
For those that have had enough of the Elon Musk worship online.
No flaming, baiting, etc. This community is intended for those opposed to the influx of Elon Musk-related advertising online. Coming here to defend Musk or his companies will not get you banned, but it likely will result in downvotes. Please use the reporting feature if you see a rule violation.
Opinions from all sides of the political spectrum are welcome here. However, we kindly ask that off-topic political discussion be kept to a minimum, so as to focus on the goal of this sub. This community is minimally moderated, so discussion and the power of upvotes/downvotes are allowed, provided lemmy.world rules are not broken.
Post links to instances of obvious Elon Musk fanboy brigading in default subreddits, lemmy/kbin communities/instances, astroturfing from Tesla/SpaceX/etc., or any articles critical of Musk, his ideas, unrealistic promises and timelines, or the working conditions at his companies.
Tesla-specific discussion can be posted here as well as our sister community /c/RealTesla.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Warning everyone that I could not find a source for this and this Twitter post isn't any evidence in itself. So if you're saying I told you so, then you're just as susceptible as the people who believe $300m was being sent to 11yos without any explanation.
I found two sources for this info.
https://en.as.com/latest_news/bad-news-for-social-security-beneficiaries-this-new-proposal-would-stop-payments-to-170000-people-n/ says:
A link in that text goes to https://www.govexec.com/management/2025/03/ssa-weighs-axing-payments-170000-beneficiaries/403740/ and it gives an example:
It may be that the OP read that and extrapolated it to mean orphans would be cut off ... which may or may not be true.
Those are for SSA, not SBA. They don't explain why SBA would be brokering business loans with 11yos. There is likely a valid explanation here, but the media doesn't need to get up in arms until more details are available.
DOGE looks to be what's getting all up in arms here. If there's suspicion of corruption, investigate, Don't just cut it all off! This isn't a car factory, it's food and shelter, aka the economy!
Of course I think he knows this and is actually trying to bring about a recession so he can seize whatever power he can
I agree, but the Twitter post isn't DOGE and is potentially incorrect. You don't battle disinformation with more disinformation.
I don't see anything about SBA in the articles above.
There's nothing unlawful or untwart about an 11yr old getting a business loan if they have a business, that's just a motivated kid. If not investigate and then shut it down if it's fraud, don't just read the title and cut it based off that.
You clearly don't know the basics of how an SBA loan works so I'm not sure why you are even making statements as if you're an expert.
Also, I'm not giving an opinion on the legality of the situation. I'm stating the Twitter post is based on no provided evidence so everyone in this thread defending against another ridiculous statement with more ridiculous statements shows that both sides are equally willfully ignorant and susceptible to propaganda.
I'm on the side that thinks it's likely a record keeping error because the names do not match the SSNs. Also, banks are the actual lenders behind SBAs and it's highly unlikely that in one specific year, banks decided to loan out over $300m to over thousands of businesses with credit checks that did not match the name returned on an SSN with the name of the person being lent too.
That's not a counterargument that's a bad attempt to strawman. Similarly there are zero age restrictions on an SBA loan, none zero.
There's no need to defend against either, they're both legal.
Probably, that doesn't change the fact that it wouldn't be illegal even if the ages are correct.
You think children are getting undeserved money from the government.
I think children are getting money from the government.
We are not the same.
Regardless of evidence provenance, children need to be our most sacred class of people, followed by the elderly and disabled. It shouldn't even be a question about how and why we take care of them, we just fucking should.
Misinformation is real, so I see part of your point, but the people outraged at this are WILDLY different from the people outraged that kids might be getting money they don't "deserve". Can we not just be nice to each other? This isn't actually a zero-sum game.
No, I actually think SBA lenders are not sending any money to 11yos. I think this is most likely a record keeping error.
I do also think the Twitter post is confusing SSA and SBA. The SSA sending social security I am 100% for. SBA lenders sending money to business I am also 100%, even if they are 11yos. I just think it is highly unlikely that in a single year, banks decided to loan an unprecedented $300m to 11yos and that those thousands of loans all had mismatching names with their SSNs.
I'm just saying everyone shouldn't go rallying behind this person who is making claims without any evidence. It's just as dumb as DOGE.