Your tax dollars at work

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
It wouldn't surprise me if that number is either wrong, inflated, or including costs that are common place.

Or, and I bet this is the case, it's 200 million in India's money.
 
Although it would seem hard to believe since that'd only be about 4 million if it was in rupee.
 
julius said:
Although it would seem hard to believe since that'd only be about 4 million if it was in rupee.
Click to expand...

I know, right? The number is so crazy it almost feels like it has to be a mistake. As I understand it, much of the money is for security, but in that case why stay at the hotel in the first place? Certainly, there must be an isolated estate. I'm fine with spending money on the Office of the President to keep our chief executive secure, but the spending choices seem extravagant especially given our current economic circumstance.
 
I don't see how you can spend $200 million a day on security. Don't we already own the equipment and don't we already pay the salaries of the people? Shipping it over there might cost a bit, but nowhere near that much. Anything purchased locally is going to be pretty cheap, especially labor. Doesn't pass the smell test. Especially since the link just says "it was reported that". Reported by who, from what source?

barfo
 
barfo said:
I don't see how you can spend $200 million a day on security. Don't we already own the equipment and don't we already pay the salaries of the people? Shipping it over there might cost a bit, but nowhere near that much. Anything purchased locally is going to be pretty cheap, especially labor. Doesn't pass the smell test. Especially since the link just says "it was reported that". Reported by who, from what source?

barfo
Click to expand...

It's a good question. I'll continue to look. I think much of the cost has to come from renting the hotels and paying the Indian jurisdictions for security is a bill we will foot.
 
Imagine how much a Presidential funeral and the resulting chaos would cost.
 
chris_in_pdx said:
Imagine how much a Presidential funeral and the resulting chaos would cost.
Click to expand...

My point is that I think it's possible to keep him safe and spend less money. Replace the Taj Mahal hotel with a private residence, for example. Meet the Indian PM in more private locations. I'm sure there are many others. Given our economic circumstances and the necessity of this trip (which is pretty low), it just seems profligate.
 
maxiep said:
My point is that I think it's possible to keep him safe and spend less money. Replace the Taj Mahal hotel with a private residence, for example. Meet the Indian PM in more private locations. I'm sure there are many others. Given our economic circumstances and the necessity of this trip (which is pretty low), it just seems profligate.
Click to expand...

Why don't you arrange a meeting with the Secret Service and ask them if the trip can be made more economical?

I understand your anger at wasteful government spending, maxiep. I agree with it in principle. But getting worked up about it does no good, since there's absolutely nothing a single person can do about it. And the apathy of the average American voter tells me that there's no "groundswell" of support for doing anything about it.
 
chris_in_pdx said:
Why don't you arrange a meeting with the Secret Service and ask them if the trip can be made more economical?

I understand your anger at wasteful government spending, maxiep. I agree with it in principle. But getting worked up about it does no good, since there's absolutely nothing a single person can do about it. And the apathy of the average American voter tells me that there's no "groundswell" of support for doing anything about it.
Click to expand...

An interesting response. I could swear we had an election last night that resulted in the largest republican gain in 62 years, primarily on the back of "the average American voter". I wonder where the apathy is?

I'm hardly worked up. I just found the scope and scale of this trip poorly timed and tone deaf.
 
maxiep said:
An interesting response. I could swear we had an election last night that resulted in the largest republican gain in 62 years, primarily on the back of "the average American voter". I wonder where the apathy is?
Click to expand...

Please. Elections are cyclical. I'm talking CHANGE. You seem to cling to this notion that Republicans are any better than Democrats and vise versa. American voters have been conditioned to think within this little box of ability to choose between two groups, neither of which has any real interest in rocking the boat. The Tea Partiers are delusional if they think that anyone that has been elected yesterday will facilitate real, bonafide CHANGE. It'll be business as usual, minus the occassional Fox News soundbite.

That may sound defeatist, but it's the truth. Neither aisle has any interest in fundamental government reform. Why would they, when pockets are being lined from all sides? When incumbent campaign "war chests" are overflowing, and the only ones with the financial abilty to run against them are themselves beholden to corporate and special interests with fat bank accounts?

Sad to say, and I hope I'm wrong, but the only real change will happen in this country when: a) people get hungry and rise up with the weapons they've stockpiled, or b) the Chinese loan notes default.
 
chris_in_pdx said:
Please. Elections are cyclical. I'm talking CHANGE. You seem to cling to this notion that Republicans are any better than Democrats and vise versa. American voters have been conditioned to think within this little box of ability to choose between two groups, neither of which has any real interest in rocking the boat. The Tea Partiers are delusional if they think that anyone that has been elected yesterday will facilitate real, bonafide CHANGE. It'll be business as usual, minus the occassional Fox News soundbite.

That may sound defeatist, but it's the truth. Neither aisle has any interest in fundamental government reform. Why would they, when pockets are being lined from all sides? When incumbent campaign "war chests" are overflowing, and the only ones with the financial abilty to run against them are themselves beholden to corporate and special interests with fat bank accounts?

Sad to say, and I hope I'm wrong, but the only real change will happen in this country when: a) people get hungry and rise up with the weapons they've stockpiled, or b) the Chinese loan notes default.
Click to expand...

I think no such thing. I prefer small government to large government. I'm not a Republican. What I'm trying to say is that last night wasn't a vote for the GOP, it was against the Obama agenda.

Change occurred last night and will need to occur in 2012, 2014, 2016, etc. Government needs to live within its means and the baby boomers need to stop demanding we pay for their standard of living.
 
maxiep said:
My point is that I think it's possible to keep him safe and spend less money. Replace the Taj Mahal hotel with a private residence, for example. Meet the Indian PM in more private locations. I'm sure there are many others. Given our economic circumstances and the necessity of this trip (which is pretty low), it just seems profligate.
Click to expand...

So you think hiding and cowering in fear is the correct response to terrorists threats. I'm more of a flip-em-off kind of guy.

A large reason for these trips is to give the people around the world to see and hear our leader, probably the most effective thing for us long term.
 
Obama should use Gotomeeting.com

carbon footprints people! :ohno:
 
MARIS61 said:
So you think hiding and cowering in fear is the correct response to terrorists threats. I'm more of a flip-em-off kind of guy.

A large reason for these trips is to give the people around the world to see and hear our leader, probably the most effective thing for us long term.
Click to expand...

You worked for the government and now are an externality to a simple transaction. In other words, you've spent your life spending other people's money. It doesn't bother you when the government wastes money we don't have because that's been your life. It bothers me.
 
I wonder how much of that is $$ already spent on their salaries (as was asked earlier in the thread). And along with barfo, I wonder why the US would tell India how much they would spend, as if it's any of their concern.

Sounds trumped up to me.

I have no doubt they spent a fair amount on trips, nor do I doubt all presidents have. What I do doubt, or at least have a hard time believing, is that it cost 200 million a DAY. Maybe it was 200 million for the TEN days, and it was lost in translation.
 
maxiep said:
You worked for the government and now are an externality to a simple transaction. In other words, you've spent your life spending other people's money. It doesn't bother you when the government wastes money we don't have because that's been your life. It bothers me.
Click to expand...

One thing is crystal clear, you have no conception of what either adedicated civil servant or a Realtor actually does.
 
Personally, it costs what it costs and is probably worth spending what it takes to secure the president and anyone he chooses to bring along.

The problem for the president is that it looks hypocritical because he's talked to corporate america about extravagant excesses.
 
Coconuts removed from trees in preparation for Barack Obama's India trip

So I see conservative talking heads making a big stink about this, too.

I've lived in Hawaii and on property with coconut trees. Those things would seriously hurt you if they fell on you. Or kill you. We had to cut the coconuts off our trees at least 3 times a year for liability reasons alone.

Sheesh, give it a rest, guys.

Even if it were $200M/day, it's cheaper than an emergency stimulus bill by a long shot.
 
I think something that hasn't been said in this thread is that India is a very important strategic partner. The US president going there is good for the country. There are some things you can't do via skype.

barfo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SlyPokerDog
Politics How two men leveraged access to Trump and Persian Gulf crown princes into millions of dollars
Replies
3
Views
236
GriLtCheeZ
GriLtCheeZ
SlyPokerDog
OT Some Kind of Heaven
Replies
9
Views
472
Lanny
Lanny
SlyPokerDog
Science 1491
Replies
2
Views
285
dviss1
dviss1
M Two One
UTM: M Two One (answers)
Replies
26
Views
1K
Sir Desmond
Sir Desmond

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top