Thursday, July 22, 2010

There's your change; now live off it

Just what a weak economy needs as it tries to get its footing.
... as of midnight Dec. 31, the death tax returns — at a rate of 55% on estates of $1 million or more. The effect this will have on hospital life-support systems is already a matter of conjecture.

Resurrection of the death tax, however, isn't the only tax problem that will be ushered in Jan. 1. Many other cuts from the Bush administration are set to disappear and a new set of taxes will materialize. And it's not just the rich who will pay.

The lowest bracket for the personal income tax, for instance, moves up 50% — to 15% from 10%. The next lowest bracket — 25% — will rise to 28%, and the old 28% bracket will be 31%. At the higher end, the 33% bracket is pushed to 36% and the 35% bracket becomes 39.6%.

But the damage doesn't stop there.

The marriage penalty also makes a comeback, and the capital gains tax will jump 33% — to 20% from 15%. The tax on dividends will go all the way from 15% to 39.6% — a 164% increase.
... and there is more, a lot more.


Guest said...

You want money for the military and you want tax cuts - can't have them both.

Combat Wombat said...

Why not? What's the Federal government doing that it shouldn't be according to the Constitution? How about we just kill foreign aid to countries that don't really like us, except for the greenback? How about killing the mohair subsidy, the sugar subsidy, the (mega) agriculture and  oil company subsidies and the rest?  How about not tripling the national debt by a stroke of the pen? I'd bet a coupla trillion could pay for some new/old ships, planes and people.

ewok40k said...

You can cut spending or raise taxes,  there are only 2 ways of reducing the budget deficit. There is only so much spending that can be cut. Wanna have hyperpower status, carriers on all seas, you have to pay for it. The same goes for world standard of healthcare - i.e. everyone gets it, etc.
May I add Scandinavians manage to thrive under much heavier tax burden, and still be in top of the ratings for transparency. 
Ah, and somebody reminds the general public that war does cost money. A lot. If they dont want the tax hike they can buy bonds like their ancestors!

Anonymous said...

I just dissolved my mutual fund investments, yesterday and placed the cash in a very low yield money market at a credit union.

Only the Political Classes and government employees will weather this assault on personal freedom.

steveegg said...

I believe the operative word is "subsist".

UltimaRatioRegis said...

What is the Federal Government doing that it shouldn't according to the Constitution? 

Mandating health insurance.

Intrusion into private industry on an unprecedented scale.

Promoting and enforcing racial quotas in lending, military recruiting, Federal jobs.

Funding with tax dollars a lawsuit against a State for enforcing existing State and Federal laws.

Endorsing unequal protection under the law (hate crime legislation).

Regulation of the Financial Sector which makes entities de facto dependent upon capricious government whims instead of forces of the marketplace.

Using taxation powers to control the choices and activities of its citizens.

Not only allowing, but mandating, sub-prime lending practices (illegal until Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae began them) in order to fill racial quotas.

Stifling religion by declaring freedom of "worship" instead of religion, and all the major implications of that word.

Attempting to make illegal aliens US Citizens in direct contravention of US law and US Code.

Actively seeking abolition of the Electoral College.

The above is certainly not comprehensive, but it's a start.

To you and ewok, the cost of a CVN or two, indeed the entire defense budget, and the spending on the "wars" that is decried so loudly, is absolutely dwarfed by social spending. DoD represents a mere 22% of current budget.  Social spending is more than three times that. 

To slice the defense budget is the hackneyed but oh-so-popular Leftist solution.  It reduces and marginalizes the hated military, while at the same time is a wildly popular political gesture.  But all it does is leave us weak and does not significantly affect the debt.  Such a stunt is akin to a fat woman losing weight by cutting off her foot instead of dieting and exercising.

Big D said...

Yes, yes, we can!

Just cut the trillions in (largely unconstitutional) social spending that have just been added in the last few years.

Remember when total government outlays broke $1B?  It was just a few years ago.  Now, we're spending over 3 times that amount... and it ain't going to the military.

So, yes, we can cut taxes, and have money for the military.  We just have to stop doing the other stuff, which the federal government is not supposed to be doing per the Constitution in the first place.

Combat Wombat said...

My input was a badly attached comment to "Guest", below. My point was intended to be that the gummint is doing too much of what it oughtn't, and is piking on the things it ought do.

Apologies for the confusion.

Combat Wombat said...

And the Scandi contribution to relief operations around the world, and defense of the "free" world, NATO, and the Pacific Rim, far from their native shore is???

S-tanks, Viggens and Subarus badged as SAABs don't really count....

UltimaRatioRegis said...

Heh.  Then I shoudl have been yelling at Guest. 

As Emily Litella would say, "Never Mind!"

MR T's Haircut said...

And you all didnt even see my lips mive when I said what URR did! 

Plan is simple.. CUT Taxes, DEREGULATE STUPIDITY (EPA, FTC, FANNIE, DOE) and watch the manufacturing come back..

Watch out for the back lash against Made in China crap... we are in for interesting times...

MR T's Haircut said...

Actually we can Guest,,, its called an ENUMERATED POWER... anything else is crap... we dont need the crap we can cut the porkulus spending and pay for a fleet of carriers.. but hey Joe Murtha sure does have a pretty airport...

xformed said...

I have learned, from the MSM and the Democrats, that "Constitutional" is in the eye of the beholder(s)....and they like to behold votes bought by tax dollars confiscated for that express purpose.

XBradTC said...

<span>You can cut spending or raise taxes,  there are only 2 ways of reducing the budget deficit.</span>

No, we're almost certainly on the front side of the Laffer curve. Cutting taxes would actually likely increase revenues. However, it isn't quite that simple. Marginal tax rates are hardly the most accurate indicator of tax burden. 
There are so many exemptions that 47% or so of filers either pay no tax, or actually receive more back than they paid in. 

As a single guy with no exemptions, I've always paid money into the system. That's fine. It is an obligation I have as  a citizen. But you can't indefinitely sustain a system where the federal government is ever increasing in size and scope and budget, while at the same time shrinking the actual tax base to somewhere around less than a quarter of the population. 

That's the strongest argument I've heard yet for tax simplification. 

As to defense cuts, I find it ironic that even while they call for fiscal restraint by cutting one of the few things Congress is explicitly called to fund, they are still increasing not only total expenditures, but accelerating the rate of increase. 

John said...

AMEN! to URR's list of places to start cutting!

Guest said...

Porkulus spending has been around since the beginning of the country.  George Washington had the first six frigates built at different shipyards that way he could spread the spending and get political buy-in for the ships.

And with a $500 Billion+ to spend, you don't think the DoD's budget is pork?  You don't see your Congressmen fighting tooth and nail for USAID contracts........

Guest said...

Backlash against Made in China crap?  That's not going to happen.  Too many people shop at Walmart.

sid said...

Why doesn't Mr. O cut out these million dollar per hour* jaunts....

*direct operating costs of the VC-25; plus thecosts  1 or 2 C-17s-which are likely needed more urgently somewhere else;plus the costs other air assets staged,plus costs of the vehicle convoy, and or the multiple aircraft VH-60 section...

and we won't even get into the local LEO overtime, the significant disruptions to air travel like the diverts into LAS the other day, or the costs to the hapless GA guys getting caught up in draconian TFR's.

All for what purpose?

For the sole purpose of getting this kind of drivel into a 15 second sound bite on the evening news...

That speech cost <span>YOU THE TAXPAYER</span> more in money and energy than any of you will make or use in many decades.

F*&%$ing hypocrite...

FCC said...

Tax tip to those on active duty [or with a 401(k)].

If you have the means (i.e., savings on which you have already been taxed once), then max out your retirement savings contributions for this year.  Even if you put it into a fund that loses 8%, you're still ahead of the game because your contributions would have been taxed a minimum of 15%.  Plus, not only is your tax liability reduced by the contributions ... you'll also likely received a decent tax *credit* for retirement savings.

I have been doing this for years and always have zero tax liability -- on E-7 pay, married, one kid, taking the standard deduction.  Learned it the year that I was voluntold to be a VITA.

ewok40k said...

Swedes, Danes and Norwegians have always done good job of their UN, NATO, and/or EU missions.
Danes have made the Salamanders fave FFG, the Absalom class. Some of them are hunting pirates off the Somali coast right now...
As for Swedes with their  S-Tanks and Viggens, they did their job which was to deter Russians from catching a country that was not protected by US guarantees via NATO. Hedgehogh strategy - you can eat me Mr Bear, but will my nutrition value really be worth all those needles in your nose, paws and mouth? Plus they covered Norwegians flank whole Cold War, free of charge.
Of course US needs to project power over the globe. The question is can it afford to waste cash on LCS while better designs, off the shelf are available worldwide?
Can it afford to build Supercarriers which can suffer new Kuantan in a confrontation with China when SSGNs can rain cruise missiles over airbases next to Taiwan with near impunity?
Can it afford to waste a decade or 2  trying to fix the V-22 while Marines are exploiting their workhorses CH-46 to the point of extinction?

Chris van Avery said...

Add to these rosy prospects Bernanke's recent statement that the economy's in a period of "unusual uncertainty", and I'm quite worried. That sounds a whole lot to me like, "We have no %*$@*^$ clue what's going on!"


Now we know how the gvt is going to pay for Obamacare and Bail-Out-Gate and BP-Gate and the trip to Chealse's wedding and his trip to Maine and Murtha's airport etc etc etc.  Remember... Change Change Change (and I am NOT talking about what used to be in our pockets).

I need a happy place... quick!

G Lof said...

Here some facts that we have to remember.


1) That cutting defence spending on the short term does not save money over the  long term. In fact, It is very costly in terms of live and proterty if the we don't have the recources to deter wars And the money 'saved' is eventual paid in the future as the need to replace people and equipment happen sooner.

2) increasing taxe rate over a certain percentage, result in decreased revenue for the government. This is not because of sume supply side economic theory, but because it low return on investment by for people who invest they savings. The lower the rate of return results in lower rates of investing, which inturn results in lower tax revenues. If we need money than by all means increase taxes on those paying a 10% tax, but don't expect increasing tax rate on those paying a 35% rate  to a 40% rate to increase tax revenues.

3) When a president travels it cost money, and the Amerian people pays for it. And vacation with kids, can't be changed on a wim. All we can ask is that the president does not get carried away.

4) of the two types of stimulist spending done by Bush and Obama, that by Bush seem to created payback to the government, where Obama's seem only to drain the treasury.

sid said...

GB isn't "my boy"...

Granted, the excesses of presidential travel have been increasingly out of control for a number of years now.

But, to your specious point...

GB never spent the amount of time criscrossing the country in search of lameass photo ops -at a mil or so an hour- like this guys is doing.

GB never tried to gut the oil industry while he and his wife bruned ~6 tons of fuel -paid for by TAXPAYERS- an hour just to go see a Boradway show.

Or to get 30 seconds of sound bite time for Harry Ried and his cap and tax bill.

GB never purposely sent an entire industry into near financial collapse, while enjoying the same perks -but much more grandiose and on the TAXPAYER's dime.

A perk that may not be fit for "fat cats", but is sure good enough for Mr. O's dog.

Oh, and that wasn't a "private" jet.

It was bought and paid for by TAXPAYERS!

So yeah guest...

"your boy" Mr. O is an "I got mine;Let them eat cake" HYPOCRITE.

RhodeIslander said...

55 % Death Tax.   Using the LOW estimate of $10 trillion dollars to be passed along from present generation to their kids within the next decade,  that would raise over $5 Trillion for the US GOVT.

Based upon the medium estimate of $25 trillion dollars being passed from DAD/Mom to kids within the next 10 years,  that would bring in around $14 Trillion tax dollars from Uncle Sam within the next decade.   So, good luck repealing ESTATE TAXes  ! ! ! !

The Democrat's just love to spend other folks' money.   Wow,  TRILLIONS more to spend on ______ (fill in the blank)  !!!  Drool, drool, drool ....

Anonymous said...

"my boy" GWB didn't drive hundreds of thousands of Americans out of work- and then enact a 'health care' bill that would TRIPLE the National Debt.

That puts him miles ahead of YOUR boy Barry.

JFH said...

Not to be pedantic (which usually means that I will be) but, dividend income won't be taxed at 39.6% for most people... dividends will merely be taxed as regular income (even though, the corporation has already paid taxes on the dividend that they sent you).  Therefore, unless you're in the top tax bracket, therefore your dividends will probably be taxed only at 15%, 28%, or 31%, equating to a increase of 0%, 87% or 107%...

Besides, most dividends are so small these days, it ain't that big of a deal.  Banks which historically had the highest dividend yields are obviously not returning those yields now.

Therapist1 said...

Posting this here is like kicking the choir in the gonads.  :)

CDR Salamander said...

Review why GWB stopped playing golf and then review how many holes BHO has played at you expense - oh, I'm sorry, he is borrowing this, make that your children's expense.

xformed said...

One thing you know they won't fill in the blank with is "Defense Spending"

xformed said...


You didn't place enough $%$#&*&@)(*&s in that statement.

xformed said...

Crack your books again, Guest.  The President never spends any moeny.  They approve of what Congress can manage to finally agree on.  Congress debated, then funded the six frigates.  Also, if you can bother to take the time to read it, Ian Toll's "Six Frigates" will let you know the Feds lived off of tariffs on imported goods back then, so they had to limit what they could do, since they weren't taking from everyone's paycheck, like they do now, to get billions to spend to buy the votes.

DM05 said...

Heard yesterday the real rich and uber rich (OK, for demo-rats that's often like household income of $60K plus for taxation purposes but in reality maybe $200K plus) are holding their $$ spending close now. Where last year, they were helping the economy while jobbed and jobless spending languished, this impact is negative to the sputtering economy. Any wonder why? Of course these richer people fuel jobs, contribute capital to build & expand businesses, pay an inordinate amount of taxes, contribute to community activities, and may be rich for a reason, entrepreneurship being pretty common. Even though many aspire to be richer, being a sorta American Dream, they're considered evil and on par with GM, banks, insurance companies, and BP. With these rates, more looming mortgage nastiness, and elected social engineers with little private sector business expertise, hold on for the ride folks....Consider me one that truly despises the clueless elected bastards for the impact on the country, our economy, my family, and there's alot of 'em.

Salty Gator said...

more like goosing your GTE's with JP-5 instead of DFM.  Always good to fire up the base on Diversity Thursday

Salty Gator said...

You are being.......whatever that word is.  You are not considering 2nd, 3rd order effects.  Kinda like when the navy decides that transformation would be really cool without considering the logistics, training, manpower, sustainability and maintenance issues.

When rich people stop spending, what do you think happens to the rest of the economy?  Hint: it goes tits up

Salty Gator said...

multiply that by Bill Clinton's HAIRCUTGATE when he tied up an entire airport for three hours to get a $300 haircut while AF-1 was sitting on the ramp, waiting.........

And then square it by NYC date night, vacationgate, and PAULMCCARTNEY BEATLEGATE while oil was flowing and he hadn't even called BP's CEO yet (intimidation?).

Salty Gator said...

like me.  because it is economical and I'm not going to pay my hard earned cash just so that some fat ass union boss can make millions off of some poor schmuck's dues.

Alpha Check said...

Sal, Yeah Bush barely took any vacation days in his first year.

LT B said...

xformed, please do NOT cloud the arguement with history and facts.  Please approach the argument with emotion.  Workers of the world unite!

Guest said...

From Six Frigates (pg 44-45),
  "Washington wanted the six firgates built in six different seaports, to be chosend based on, 'wealth and popilousness,' both to spread the financial benefits and to ensure that a handful of Philadelphia Quakers would not become the nation's exclusive source of experties in the construction of ships of war.....A local sea captain...pointed out that the War Office plan would require six separate agents and six master builders....Knox replied flatly that the president's decision would stand, adding that 'it is just and wise to proportion...benefits as nearly as may be to those places or states which pay the greatest amount of support' and saving 'a few thousand dollars in expenses will be no object compared with the satisfaction a just distribution would affofd.'"

So much for my history and facts.  If YOU are going to quote a book, read it.

Fact Check said...

Below is a list of speeches GWB gave during the 2006 electiosn - looks like he did plenty of traveling.

Since there is forgetfullness - the economic meltdown happend BEFORE the 2008 elections, when GWB was still in office.

And a recent Pew poll (7/16/10):
    In Pew’s most recent “News IQ Quiz,” 47 percent of respondents thought Obama initiated the Troubled Asset Relief Program, compared to just 34 percent who correctly guessed it was former President George W. Bush.

"Bush has spent more than a year of his presidency" at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. On August 19, 2005, "he broke Ronald Reagan's record of 335 days for America's most vacationed president and went on to take the longest presidential vacation in 36 years," Dale McFeatters August 8, 2006, in a ScrippsNews editorial.

Chris G. said...

 You're not "ahead of the game". If it's a TSP or 401k contribution, it'll be taxed when it's withdrawn, at whatever your rate is then. Maybe that rate'll be as low as 15%, but you would've lost the 8%, then been taxed.

 If it's a Roth IRA, you pay the tax up front.

 So heck yeah, it's a good idea to max retirement savings, but it's not quite as good as you say.

sid said...

Fact Check, you should change your name to strawman.

<span>BUSH IS NOT THE ISSUE!!!!!!</span>

The Big O wants all of us to tighten up and pay more taxes. Wants us to live with a smaller carbon footprint. Does NOT corproate heads to use private air travel...While he is jetting about in a 747 with a C-17 or two in trail.

If he is all about cutting back. Then the man needs to start showing us how with his own behavior.

How much did that weekend in Maine <span>cost the TAXPAYER</span>?????

And, while we're at it...Kick Nancy Pelosi's ass of those C-32's!

Hey barney Fwank...

You want to cut the military budget? Start at Andrews. Dispose of half the VIP fleet today.

And pass a law that says elected officials can only use USAF transportation for official state visits....Which does NOT Congressional "fact finding tours".

Lemme ask you this fact check. How many elected officials in the Senate and Hose are NOT sporint a net worth in the seven figures?

They can click into Orbitz like the rest of us if they want to go somewhere.

Fact Check said...

I agree, Bush is not the issue.  If I read your post correctly the issue is you feel our elected leaders should not be doing as much travel on the government's dime - valid point.  But when you add Pelosi, Frank and Obama to the complaint you instantly bring a level of hypocracy to the discussion.  They aren't/haven't done anything that has been done before by Bush, Gingrich, Hastert or other Republicans in office.

And when most members of Congress fly home, they do so on commercial air.  Actually, had a coworker run into a well known Congressman sitting in coach recently.

sid said...

<span>They aren't/haven't done anything that has been done before by Bush, Gingrich, Hastert or other Republicans in office. </span>

Bravo Sierra Fact Check. You are still trying to do the strawman deflection.

And for the record, I've thought that the Good Little Deal at Andrews has needed a real cutback for a good number of years now.

When a president goes to New Jersey for a purely political rally, and causes the havoc to the National Airspace System (I know I was working that day) that O caused, then its real obvious the perk is being abused and is out of control.

First off, why the VC-25 and not a C-21?

And why is it thast nobody want to admit the inconvenience -and money lost- to many thousands airline passengers these junkets cause?

But all those DC denizens just love their power perks.

But, the point is, the Big O is about "change"

I see how he wants us to change...while he basks in Imperial perks.

At least Carter donned a sweater when he told us to sit in the cold in our houses.

This guy jets his dog to Maine for the weekend.


<span>And when most members of Congress fly home, they do so on commercial air.  Actually, had a coworker run into a well known Congressman sitting in coach recently.</span>

What do Congressmen say to each other every Wednesday morning?

"See you Monday afternoon!"

And, as an FYI, its a rare pol that "sits in the back". I've personally witnessed this idiot throw tantrums that would embarass a three year old because she didn't have a first class seat on more than one occasion.

Alpha Check said...

Fact Check,  

You forget that the goal here is to degrade Obama, not have a principled approach.  I'm sure these very same people were calling for Bush to stop traveling and quit taking out the 747 to clear brush in Texas, or something.

sid said...

Actually...I said the same thing then Alpha Check.

Why should he have been taking the VC-25 instead of a C-21 to Crawford?

The fuel savings alone would have been quite substantial over all the times he went.

Back in '91, while headed to Trinidad and nearly missing my connection in Miami, I was right pissed that Bush 1 was there, dallying about showing off the then spankin' new VC-25 to some local functionaries.

But again Alpha, the difference is O is telling us why we can't...While he very certainly can.

UltimaRatioRegis said...


Methinks Alpha knows all the answers, including what we think and why we think it. 

Likewise with the travel stuff, there was plenty of loud objection here to GW Bush's TARP expenditure.  I thought it was a violation of free market principles and a giant overreach of governmental authority. 

But, unlike Obama, GWB did so reluctantly, thinking (wrongly IMHO) that he had no choice.  With BHO and his communist and fellow-traveler compadres, such violation and overreach is their GOAL.  Never let a good crisis go to waste, remember.  Use every chance to consolidate and expand governmental power and authority.  They want nationalization of means of production, nationalization of energy sources, and redistribution of the wealth to create a huge class of those whom they are assured will vote for them, and to themselves.  Economic theory straight from the 21st COMINTERN.

FCC said...

Good point.  And actually, the best COA is to determine the exact amount of Traditional IRA/401(k)/TSP contributions you need to eliminate tax liability; then put the rest into a Roth.  I also consider it a fairly safe bet that all the TSP funds (certainly, at least the G fund) will have appreciated enough by the time that I'm 60 to offset the taxation.

(This is assuming, of course, that taxation doesn't inflate as much as the funds will -- oh, crap!)

Old NFO said...

Just remember, you are all subjects, not citizens.  Everything you have actually belongs to the government and they will allow you to keep whatever portion of it they think is fair.  At the rate government is expanding it's reach into our wallets, and what used to be our private business, there will soon be no private sector left except that part directly beholden to government.  We are rushing into a corporatist state.  Mussolini would be so thrilled. 

Old NFO said...

Guest hasn't bothered to check his facts.  When taxes, especially on business and it's creators, go down revenues go up.  When those taxes go up revenues do not, at least not for long.  It's funny how leftists understand economics when they propose raising cigarette taxes to lower demand, but they are too stupid to understand that raising taxes on economic activity does the same thing.

Andrewdb said...

I am not sure about this one.  Putting the issue of alleged "global warming" aside, I tend to think the President, CinC and Leader Of The Free World (tm) should behave like it - and that means he probably should not be carrying his own luggage around (pity Jimmy Carter didn't figure that out).  Having a large entourage - that actually does something, rather then just tell him how wonderful he is- is part of the theater of being the leader of the most powerful nation on earth.

I went to GWB's first inaguration (if you haven't been to one when your side wins, go - it's great fun!).  Bill Clinton had a dinner at the Library of Congress the night before he left office. We were walking down Penn. Ave. when the motercade went buy - blocks long it was.  There was no doubt who had just gone past. I don't think that is a bad thing - unless the President starts believing his own propoganda.

sid said...

Andrew...I'm not talking about official State visits....

Its those personal trips and political stumpings...

A 747 2 C-17s 10 armored vehicles and a couple of VH-60s is wayyyy over the top.

Alpha Check said...


I love that you know what GB was thinking.  That's impressive excuse making.

"<span>But, unlike Obama, GWB did so reluctantly, thinking (wrongly IMHO) that he had no choice."</span>

Had Democrats wanted to cut AF-1, and send the President commercial carrier, or on a G5 executive (they're way nice btw, if you haven't been in one I suggest it), the Republicans would go on and on about cutting the military, and risking security.  Now that Obama's in office, Republicans want to cut the executive transport, but that somehow isn't cutting the military, or risking security.

Personally, I think a BBJ would be a nice compromise for the long trips to fit the comm gear, and senior staff. Let the Press fly commercial.

UltimaRatioRegis said...


You ain't seen the football since kickoff.

sid said...

<span> Let the Press fly commercial.</span>

They already do for the most part.

Alpha Check said...


Great critique.  I really like how you're specific.  Not only do you know what they think, you think what they think is wrong.  Impressive.  So when you're watching football, do you know what all the players are thinking too?  I think I'll call you Sookie, because you can read people's thoughts:

<span>"GWB did so reluctantly, thinking (wrongly IMHO) that he had no choice."</span>

sid said...

As the 10 and 15 second sound bites from this purely political blitz around the country assault you from the 24/7 news folks this week...

Barack Obama, US president, takes to the road this week on his “summer of recovery” drive amid concern that the White House has lost the political narrative over its handling of the economy, in spite of having taken strong steps to bring it back from the brink

Just remember how much the pablum is costing <span>YOU THE TAXPAYER PER SECOND!!!</span>....

(and if your flight is delayed, or you miss your connection...don't blame me)

And spare the "Bush did it too!" tripe

(egregious, excess travel on your dime transcends BOTH parties-so there)

Since he wants us to redistribute the wealth...then he needs to lead from the top.

sid said...

How many getaways have YOU THE TAXPAYER enjoyed this summer?

Seems some of the Obama family gets to go on another little jaunt in Spain in a few days.

The White House announced today that First Lady Michelle Obama and her younger daughter, Sasha, will visit Spain next week on a "private, mother-daughter trip" along with longtime family friends
You know this trip wasn't booked on Orbitz....Where a seat in coach (when was the last time YOU THE TAXPAYER rode in first?) costs around a grand and some change per person round trip Dulles to Madrid, as a general point of reference.

I suspect the Obamas -and entourage- will go aboard VC-32.

As there are lies, damned lies, and statistics, I suspect there is likely more than a little obfuscation swirling about concerning "Direct Operating Costs" of the VC-32.

So lets just stick with some nominal fuel numbers of just the VC-32 alone for a flight from DC to Malaga and back:

Fuel Price (per gallon of Jet-A) - ~$2:20 (conus) ~$2:40 (Spain)
Burn (in gallons) -  7940 eastbound/8560 westbound
Total Burned In Gallons - 16,500
For just a nominal burned fuel cost alone:

Eastbound    $17,468.00
Westbound  $20,544.00
          Total    $38,012.00


The next time the Big O preaches to us about our carbon footprint

“He was very strong about the need to put a price on carbon pollution and make polluters pay,” Senator Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., said in the White House driveway following the meeting. 

May I suggest we let him know just exactly where that "carbon footprint" would look best come 2012.

Just "hope" the door doesn't smudge it...

sid said...

As the Obamas took in a bit better than 5.5 million $$$$ last year...

President Obama and First Lady released their 2009 federal and State of Illinois income tax returns on Thursday; they reported adjusted gross income of $ 5,505,409 out of $6,114,931 total income. They donated $329,100 to 40 different charities.

Then how come WE THE TAXPYERS are shelling out for this little, 'private, mother-daughter trip with longtime family friends' ???

Oh....Now I see why...

We are told Michelle Obama will make an official visit with Spain’s King Juan Carlos and Queen Sophia. An official visit is needed to justify the use of tax-payer dollars for the mother daughter bonding vacation.

How conveeeeen-ient.

This is the most hyocritical batch of crooks to inhabit 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. since....


If the Big O makes it to a second term, it will make Nixon's tenure look like the epitome of standup ethics....

sid said...

Seems I'm not the only one starting to get that distinctive whiff of pigs slurping at the trough

(remember that particular olfactory joy at Dam Neck?)

Not cognizant that the masses have already blacked her out of mind,  Mrs. Barack Obama has put a media blackout on her latest holiday including an about 30-room reservation for herself, daughter, friends and bodyguards at a five-star hotel in Benahavis, Spain.

sid said...

In terms of total costs of this "private mother daughter trip" with a quick visit to a King and Queen just so, YOU THE TAXPAYER, gets to foot the bill...

A quick look at the map between Malaga (the closest airport big enough for a VC-32) and Benhavis/Marbella indicates an ~80 km road trip.

So, the question now begs: How much do those burned fuel costs -carbon footprint- go up once you add the vehicle convoy (assuming there will be one)...or the two or more VH-60s (assuming thats the way they'd go)?

Oh... and the costs of the one or two C-17s to transport whatever is needed?

C-17 fuel burn per hour= 3248.5 gallons

And how much will the cash strapped Spainiards have to fork over for security?

Then, when you see the little bit of footage of our self-appointed queen cavorting with the Spainish Royalty....Be mindful of of what it cost YOU THE TAXPAYER to make it happen.

Grumpy Old Ham said...

True dat...but as sure as I'm sitting here sweating my you-know-whats off on a humid DC evening, one of the trolls will appear and cackle "Yeah, but look at all the trips Boooshh took..."

GMAFB, and no, I'm not referring to the mythical Green Mountain Air Force Base...

sid said...


sid said...

Forgot this, from just a week ago...

The federal government is the largest energy consumer in the U.S. economy, and the combined reductions would be the equivalent of removing emissions from 235 million barrels of oil, the White House said.
<span>Employee travel and commuting account for the biggest category of what the White House calls indirect sources of pollution, so the main way to limit them will be encouraging employees to travel less for business and to use mass transit for their commutes.</span> Other sources of indirect pollution are waste disposal and energy that is lost through inefficient electricity transmission.

How much did that little appearance on The View cost YOU THE TAXPAYER today?

Oh, and how much carbon does this puppy pump out?

Fuel burn per hour = ~3700 Gallons.

3700*~$2.20 = $8140.00 per hour in direct fuel burn costs

So, when you watch Joy Behar show us what the Big O is all about...

Just tally up the above figure for the per minutes on camera.

Sure am glad the Big O is all about conserving fuel.

And it sure is a shame we can't burn the hot air unleashed on The View today.

The, "Audacity Of Living Like You Can't" Administration....

sid said...

Here is something the Axelrods (and Roves for that matter) are oblivious to....

Here is some -publicly available- information concerning the impact of a "VIP Movement" (wonder who) on the National Airspace System...

EWR161503591400 MILES+CZYSECURITY693838032DA

So, for the many thousands of airline passengers inconvenienced by this ultimately inconsequential visit -already costing, YOU THE TAXPAYER, somewhere in the 7-8 figures- here is what its costing them:

If you were planning to get to Newark tonight  from a 1400 nm radius -so thats Atlanta, Houston, Dallas, Denver, Chicago, Milwaukee, and any smaller burbs, plus most big airports in Canada- tonight....

Average delay is 69 minutes with a max of 122 minutes.

So, now you know who to blame if you miss that flight to Paris, or wherever, tonight.

sid said...

That didn't format here is the FAA advisory...

PROGRAM RATE: 38/19/38/38/38/38/38/38/38/28/38/38

EFFECTIVE TIME: 281434 - 290459 SIGNATURE: 10/07/28 14:37   

Grumpy Old Ham said...

On top of the cost, just think of the additional carbon footprint created by all those idling engines on the ground, and the ones boring holes in the sky due to arrival holding addition to the carbon footprint noted below.

Won't *anyone* think of the *chillllddrreeennnnnn*???

sid said... goes beyond that.

Don't forget these are <span>direct costs</span> to the airlines, which have been in the tank since 9/11.

You can add in many, many thousands more for crew costs, airframe and engine depreciation, etc.

Dr.&Mrs. FatCat don't know to blame their nemesis  because their vacation to the Costa Del Sol got cut short a day. Nope, they take it out on the poor gate agent usually.

All so we can see the heat generated on that couch in The View.

Oh No!!! Thats Global Warming!!!!!

sid said...

So,  I've been keeping an eye on Flight Explorer...holding in progress at all fixes for EWR.

Some international flights in there too. International diverts can get really, really, ugly.


Grumpy Old Ham said...

I'm with you there sid...but all those airlines are just fat-cats to be shaken down, too...

I'm just trying to use the language the Obamabots will understand.

sid said...

From the OIS page...

Taxi delays in EWR

EWR-30 0151ZDC/OTHER:VIP Movement

Redeye80 said...

You know I don't mind the President acting Presidental.  As the HMFIC, he can do what he wants.  What I don't like is mixing politics and being Presidental on our dime.

For Barry to come down to NOLA and see the progress of the oil spill is not a bad thing.  But adding on a fund raiser to the trip isn't right.  BTW, he not the first to do this and certainly will not be the last.

I just hope he enjoys his four years, I don't see a second term.

Anonymous said...

Well guys, if you want to get pension checks that don't bounce, VA benefits, etc, you need to come up with the money. Get it?

sid said...

Back earlier in the year, I was in the jumpseat trying to get out of LaGuardia when AF-2 stopped the show. As that airport is simply obsolete, any disruption like that throws them into gridlock.

Whle we could see some ac tion across the field, none of us stuck in the conga line had a clue about the goings on across the field. After several flights asked WTF with no response from ground somebody piped up that, "Its Biden" on the freq. Later I read he was there for a dinner.

So, while, YOU THE TAXPAYER, are footing the 7 figures per hour bills it costs for these kinds of things...And if you are planning to get into or out of LGA...


sid said...

As the economy sags into deflationary doldrums...arguably caused by the Big O's socialist policies over the last 19 months... I sure am thrilled to see Queen Sleeveless debark from that VC-32 -modern royal barge that it is- in the Costa Del Sol...

For an unnecessary visit costing perhaps ...TWO MILLION BUCKS A DAY?!?!

Just warms your heart doesn't it?


The least she could do...WHILE PI$$$$ING AWAY OUR TAXDOLLARS TO VISIT THE HAUNTS OF ECSTASY DEALERS... is to take a trip to Landstuhl with Sasha...

Perhaps thern our dear little Princess can get a jump on her mother and feel some pride in her country for the "first time in her life."

Yeah Queen Sleeveless. You are making many of us "Hungry for Change"....

And your cake sucks.

2012 ain't that far away