The Royal Family Topic

This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Posted by tecwrg on 10/1/2012 7:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 10/1/2012 7:48:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 10/1/2012 3:48:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 10/1/2012 3:27:00 PM (view original):
Unless one can argue against the validity of the $1.4b number, it's sitting out there to be debated on it's own merits.

But here's another source of some information:

http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2012/08/the-obamas-and-unfettered-spending-of-taxpayer-money-2455372.html
It's a huge amount of money. Whether it's OK or not depends on context.

Is it just really expensive to have a president? Or is this level of spending out of line with what we've seen before?

We know it isn't out of the norm, since Bush cost more in 2008. So the reasonable person would move on with their life, understanding that it costs a lot of money to take care of a president and his family 24 hours a day as he runs the country.
Do you really not understand the fallacy of this argument ("Bush spent more, so it's not a big deal")?
Jimmy murdered 16 people.  Tommy only murdered 14 people.  Tommy's 14 murders are not a big deal because Jimmy killed more people.
But it isn't murder. That's the problem with your analogy. Everyone agrees that some amount of taxpayer money should be used to pay the salaries of the president, vice president, and staffs of both offices. Everyone agrees that some amount of money needs to be spent on secret service, armored cars, police escorts, and planes and helicopters for travel. And so on, and so on.

The reality is that none of us have ever worked in the White House. I have no idea how much this stuff should cost. The only guide I have is how much we've spent before. If Bush cost $1.6 billion, then $1.4 billion on Obama isn't some crazy thing we should all be freaking out about. It's in line with historical precedent.
10/2/2012 11:26 AM

So you're saying that $1.6 billion is an acceptable baseline that cannot or should not be questioned or challenged?

As long as Obama and everybody else who follows him stay at or below that number, all is good?

10/2/2012 11:50 AM
Nope. I'm saying we don't know. Obviously, 1 murder is wrong. But is it wrong to spend $1 million on secret service to guard the president for a year? How about $10 million? I don't know. And neither do you.

We need context. The fact that a shitload of money was spent isn't in its self wrong.

And, realistically, we don't even know if the number is right. The guy who wrote the book hates Obama. How credible is he as a source?
10/2/2012 11:56 AM
How credible is Bush's $1.6 billion number?  Maybe that number was invented by the Obama book guy's evil twin brother.
10/2/2012 12:24 PM
Maybe it was. I'm not upset about how much we spend on the president.
10/2/2012 12:34 PM
Possible frivolous spending of your tax money by the nation's top executive and his family does not upset you?
10/2/2012 12:41 PM
Not particularly. Did it upset you in 2008?
10/2/2012 12:46 PM

It wasn't brought to my attention in 2008.  I probably would have questioned it, yes.

10/2/2012 12:56 PM
Eh, I guess my point is we really don't know how much is frivolous. I'm sure some of it is, but I don't know how much.
10/2/2012 1:00 PM
◂ Prev 1234 Next ▸
The Royal Family Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.