390
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 23 Feb 2026
390 points (99.5% liked)
politics
31035 readers
614 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
That is not how accounting works.
No...
That's literally how accounting journals work...
Quick edit:
Like, this is day 1 accounting stuff, it doesn't matter if it's a positive or negative.
-20 and +20 add up to a 40 error.
Just like +20 and +20 does, or -20 and -20 does.
They all add up to the same amount of "missing" money.
What an incredibly detailed and accurate way to dismiss the fact that, despite you clearly defining what accounting errors are, the Pentagon still can't audit itself successfully and therefore shouldn't be given more money.
You...
You think clarification is dismissal?
I'm fine answering questions to help people understand this, but you don't understand any of it and aren't asking questions...
You have an opinion on what the conclusion should be, so you want to debate facts to make your conclusion appear to be the only option.
But all of that would be pointless because you're choosing to remain willfully ignorant of how accounting ledgers actually work.
I just don't have the time for that.
You think that them failing audits is my opinion? I think you missed the point and wrote an accurate yet completely unnecessary post.
TLDR: you made a highly accurate "welllll actually" post that did nothing to counter the OPs statement.
Since about the 1500s we use double booking in bookkeeping, meaning the accounts look like that so that the balance sheet can balance and show 0 missing money. In most audits you don't "summarise" error accounts, you check the balance accounts, statements and you check for why there's stuff lying in the transaction accounts.
You should probably have stayed on a couple more days of your accounting class.
No. It's literally not.
Did you sleep through class? Maybe have a dream where the professor told you to make up missing money?
This type of discrepancy is, wait for it, accounted for. It's the point of bookkeeping. You know that money has been sent or received, you know how much you owe and how much you're owed. A check in the mail isn't going to cause a failed audit. 10,000 checks in the mail won't cause a failed audit. You can look back over thousands of transactions and know, "oh, we normally get that check on the last Friday, it's the last Monday, nothing to worry about yet." Any auditor would also look at the history of payments and not account for money that's not expected yet.
Stop going on the Internet and telling lies.