There was also the point about lack of granularity and follow-through.
replyThe government has the power to ruin your whole life, so it's reasonable that they have high standards of evidence to ruin your life. But if they can't secure a conviction they do nothing, they'll let you open another NGO and apply for another government grant as if nothing happened.
A business has the power to inconvenience you by refusing to do business with you. That's less ruinuous than what the government does so it's OK that their standards of evidence are lower.
But perhaps there should be something that the government can do in between nothing at all and ruining your life. Otherwise the same frauds will happen again and again.
I agree, but you've already mentioned the issues with the government having a punishment system that isn't based on the courts. We all know how great the secret no-fly list is.
reply> If pressed, I would say the take away from the article is that the fraud investigators should have been more willing to use race/ethnicity
replyThis is not a fair or reasonable conclusion from what the article actually says.
That's what I'm getting from this article too. It's giving "Nick Shirley in the style of lots of extra words".
reply