Obama takes wife out to NYC for an night

[RedHot25]

Originally Posted by Azure

Seriously Hoz, I see your point and all....but this really is a non-issue.

$1 million, $2 million.....big deal.

I agree but not the money. Its just that I don't get the things that are deemed as "big deals" regarding Obama. This, "Mustard Gate", etc. Granted this is a step above Mustard gate, but still.

And no its not anything personal to you HOZ. I just am trying to wrap my head around it all. Out of the all things that Obama could be criticized - and there are lots - we are talking about dates out with his wife and what type of mustard he puts on his burgers. Good times. Seems to be like a bad strategy error/approach by whoever is doing this, but what do I know...

[Azure]

Man, the 'mustard' thing was pretty cool, IMO.

Like I said earlier, stopping in at a burger joint to eat a good ol' fashioned hamburger is simply awesome.

[HOZ]

To put things to rest. NY Post estimates 24000 dollars to fly there and back. So it looks like my original estimate is too high.

Taxpayers footed the bill for the big night on the town, which included a total of at least $24,000 for the three aircraft used to ferry the Obamas, aides and reporters to New York and back. Dinner costs and orchestra seat tickets -- at $96.50 apiece -- were paid by the Obamas.
Obama's jet, a Gulfstream 500, served as a more modest Air Force One for the day in place of the customary presidential Boeing 747.
The White House declined to say how much the trip was costing taxpayers.


24K

[HOOT]

I don't know why I am even going to bother but....

Originally Posted by HOZ

I'd say airports make a lot more that the 8000 bucks for a plane landing

"Qantas pays more than $700 million each year in airport charges, property costs, licences and staff car parking," he said.

Well a lot of that $700M each year also goes to other things besides landing fees that you neglect to mention that part. However let's just say it is the landing fee's alone.

Page 138; bottom right hand corner: http://qantas.republicast.com/ar2007...eport_2007.pdf

As at
30 June 2007, Qantas Group airlines operate more than 700 international
services each week and fly to 85 international destinations (including those
operated by codeshare partners) in 38 countries, including Australia.
Domestically, the Qantas Group operates more than 5,000 flights each
week to 55 city and regional destinations in all Australian states and
mainland territories. Qantas also operates more than 200 domestic flights
each week within New Zealand.

That means 5900 per week, times 52 weeks is 306800 landings per year. Dividing that by $700M that is about $2,200 per landing fee on average. It is only that much if you don't include the other costs he says are associated with that $700M.

Airline Industry may sue over landing fees: Why would they do that?

This is why. Sydney Airport is trying to raise it's prices costing millions and millions to the companies who use that as their hub. If you take a 747 is carries approx. 160 passengers, times that by the $46.12 the Sydney Airport is charging and you reach a number of $7379.20 which is NOT more than $8,000.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/busine...205336897.html

Under the complex fee system at Sydney Airport, landing and departure fees add up to $46.12 per international passenger.

See what I did there? I said something and the showed proof of why I know it is true, not just think it is true to help my argument.

From the link you posted:

For transportation and security, the cost was approximately $73,000.

So that is a little less than 4% of $2,000,000. Can you finally admit that in reality this is very little money and isn't a huge issue to anyone but yourself?

[onetwo_threefour]

Thanks HOOT,

That pretty much jives with my hypothetical math several pages ago,but I didn't feel like looking up the details the way you did.

Good work.

[troutman]

Chris Matthews reacts:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_210021.html

Matthews called the attack a "cheap shot" and the trip as a sign that the president, unlike his predecessor, appreciates culture. He pointed out that the Republicans never complained about President Bush's frequent trips to Texas. "This is the kind of pissant criticism that makes you wonder why Michael Steele still has his job," Matthews exclaimed. "Is this jealousy, or just nincompoop anti-intellectualism?"

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by HOZ

To put things to rest. NY Post estimates 24000 dollars to fly there and back. So it looks like my original estimate is too high.

Taxpayers footed the bill for the big night on the town, which included a total of at least $24,000 for the three aircraft used to ferry the Obamas, aides and reporters to New York and back. Dinner costs and orchestra seat tickets -- at $96.50 apiece -- were paid by the Obamas.
Obama's jet, a Gulfstream 500, served as a more modest Air Force One for the day in place of the customary presidential Boeing 747.
The White House declined to say how much the trip was costing taxpayers.


24K

I'm fairly certain that that was in the original article YOU posted and I pointed that out about 4 posts in... WOW.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Estimate: 1-2 million dollars of tax payer money spent

What A guy!!!!


One wonders..............


again... had GWB done this during such an economic down turn (let us just say 9/11 did not happen) one wonders if we could still have hearing capabilities from the media outcry of wastefulness
?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????
???????????????????

Originally Posted by FireFly

Yeah, it said $24,000 for the aircraft and that the Obamas paid for their own meal and theatre tickets. I'm not sure where 1-2 million comes from except maybe hatred? Besides that being a HUGE difference... 1-2 million. I think if it cost $150,000 I'd be shocked.

Hmph. I was right. Although I was the 6th post, not the 4th.

[loob job]

Originally Posted by HOZ

To put things to rest. NY Post estimates 24000 dollars to fly there and back. So it looks like my original estimate is too high.

Taxpayers footed the bill for the big night on the town, which included a total of at least $24,000 for the three aircraft used to ferry the Obamas, aides and reporters to New York and back. Dinner costs and orchestra seat tickets -- at $96.50 apiece -- were paid by the Obamas.
Obama's jet, a Gulfstream 500, served as a more modest Air Force One for the day in place of the customary presidential Boeing 747.
The White House declined to say how much the trip was costing taxpayers.


24K

Your original estimate was out of this world high not just high.

[Burninator]

It's tough to criticize spending habits like this of the president. It's not like he has much of a choice when it comes to security, which I imagine is a large portion of his bills. I think it would be unreasonable to expect someone to stay in their house all the time and avoid all non-essential and non-governmental travel just to save on security costs. Unless the US taxpayers don't mind their president turning into Howard Hughes then I sure they don't mind the expense. But if I was a US taxpayer I'm not sure I would be happy about paying for his plane ride, but again that falls into security costs as well. It's probably not worth the security risk to have the president fly economy to save a trivial amount of money in the big picture. If he was abusing this then I could understand the criticism, but there hasn't been enough time for him to do that.

There was an Alberta MLA (I think) a couple years ago that used a private jet (instead of private car) to take a family vacation a couple hours away. Word got out and it seemed that the RCMP made up a security risk that she had to cover up the totally unnecessary flight. An Alberta MLA doesn't have the same security risk as the president of the US and the criticism against the MLA was justified.

[mykalberta]

Personally while I dislike Obama, I have no problem with this per say. I do have a problem with the US government or any government picking up the tabs for reporters.

The transportation costs alone for Aircraft are approx 8K (price per flight hour) * flight hours for round trip * number of aircraft used. Which is approx 8*2*3 = 42K at standard leasing rates for a GF550.

However its under the standard 3 hour minimum time so unused time is normally charged at 1/2 flight hour rates so 8 * 2 * 3 + 4 * 1 * 3 = 54K and that is just for aircraft leasing.

Now these aircraft have approx 14 seats in them. Now I am sure the Obama's travel alone with security - I have no problem with that. But 2 planes with 28 seats total for aides and reporters? Why do aides and reporters need to travel with them at all for a "night on the town". I think its likely the Bush's did similar things, but they didnt have the need to try to show themselves as liberalite superior to everyone else.

Security, helicopters, etc etc are all extra and not included in the above.

I used market rates above as that is a ballpark estimate as to what it would have cost if gone private or if the aircraft were owned since the utilization of owned gov aircraft is likely very low compared to a private operator.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

I think its likely the Bush's did similar things, but they didnt have the need to try to show themselves as liberalite superior to everyone else.

Laugh. What exactly is "liberalite superior"?

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Laugh. What exactly is "liberalite superior"?

Originally Posted by troutman

Chris Matthews reacts:

Matthews called the attack a "cheap shot" and the trip as a sign that the president, unlike his predecessor, appreciates culture.

The Flaming Liberal himself answers the age old question of what the Liberalite Superioirty Complex is.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

The Flaming Liberal himself answers the age old question of what the Liberalite Superioirty Complex is.

Fair enough - going to a play implies superiority.

I also heard he used to go the library, and he doesn't have a single Toby Keith song on his iPod. I didn't know it meant he was a Liberalite Superior, but now I do.

[valo403]

Chris Matthews as a "liberalite superior"? I can get that.

But attending a Broadway show makes you a "liberalite superior"? Really? That's a joke right?

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Personally while I dislike Obama, I have no problem with this per say. I do have a problem with the US government or any government picking up the tabs for reporters.

As do I - but you'll never see a newspaper call out the government for that!!

[Akai-Sesui]

Assumption - it is fair that Obama can go out and have a night out with the wife.
Analogy:
Would you expect the CEO of a large company to drive from Calgary to Toronto for a business meeting? It saves a lot of money right?
On the surface it looks that way...but the CEO's salary is fairly high...and he/she should be doing more important things than sitting around in a bus to get from point A to point B.

Come on man...he's the president of the United States. Just like with many high-level execs, when he travels he needs security...the price-point of his travel is high because it ensures that he gets where's he going to-and-from in a quick-orderly-safe manner.
And because he serves as a symbol of hope for a lot of Americans (whether or not that hope is misguided is another story), he goes out there to show everyone that things are alright and that they're going to get better.

How confident would you feel in your country, if your elected leader were to sit in his/her protected office 24/7 without ever leaving the safety of his secure perimeter?
And how about this... would it be cheaper for Obama to fly to New York for his show? Or to bring the show to him? What if he were to go economy class and gets killed by a psychotic-republican? Wouldn't the costs to the country be even higher?

So the President went to see a show...big deal; if the economy is such a big concern, shouldn't we be talking about GM and how as tax payers we're getting screwed out of several billions of dollars?