Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-16-2009, 09:37 PM
 
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,029,434 times
Reputation: 36027

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
Obama said the companies that accepted TARP should not have been continuing their old ways, cruising around in private jets going off to Vegas; he expected them as recipients of TARP to rein in their old spending habits. Do you think that was an unreasonable assumption?

The civilian companies that accepted TARP that Obama was talking bout were NOT putting out calls for bids on their trips as Soc Sec did.

Surely you see the difference.
Shouldn't the government also be reigning in their spending habits during our current troubled economy? People are getting laid off left and right so it's ok for our government to have this "conference" at a lavish hotel that's costing us 700,000? Many Americans have had to trim back their lifestyles and are struggling financially so this just seems to be a slap in the face by our federal government. Unless you work for the government, I don't understand how you can be ok with this expediture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-16-2009, 09:38 PM
 
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,029,434 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
I meant the govt employees -- they pay taxes too.
Yeah but a 100% of their income comes from tax dollars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 09:46 PM
 
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,029,434 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
Did you have a problem with Social Security managers going to meetings when Bush was president?
If I had known about these lavish business retreats, I would have been upset regardless of who was president.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 09:51 PM
 
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,029,434 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ciaerin View Post
Why could they not teleconference? Why did they have to have this meeting? What was so important that they had to waste 700k of taxpayers money? Lots of questions if you ask me.
Exactly! It is really sad that some on here are willing to accept this expense without questioning the necessity of it. I used to work in a governmental office and have seen firsthand how governmental employees can hold BS meetings. Leaner economic times requires a bit more discretion on our government's part. It's fine and dandy that they used the competitive bidding process but was this meeting actually necessary to begin with?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 09:53 PM
 
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,029,434 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
Yes it would have, but this is a fait accompli now, so....

They said in the statement no teleconferencing would be allowed and everyone had to be there. Since the managers are located all over the US, where would you have preferred they meet? They asked for bids, they didnt have a preference.
And you don't question WHY telecomferencing was not allowed? Especially as it could have saved thousands of tax payer dollars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 09:57 PM
 
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,029,434 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tank1906 View Post
$700,000 is peanuts.
Could I have some peanuts?????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 10:01 PM
 
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,029,434 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli View Post
$85/night is cheaper than my local Econolodge.
That's fine that they used a competitive bidding process but was this conference really necessary to begin with? Why wasn't teleconferencing an option? It would be nice if one liberal on this forum could actually think critically about this instead of just blindly accepting this wasteful government expense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 10:04 PM
 
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,029,434 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
$1000 a person including round-trip air from wherever in the US, food, hotel, EVERYTHING? For how many days? Wow, that is an astoundingly GREAT deal.

"Costs for the conference at the Arizona Biltmore Resort & Spa included airfare, hotel entertainment, dancers, motivational speakers, and food"

wow!
Were these items necessary for the conference?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 10:12 PM
 
3,332 posts, read 1,965,464 times
Reputation: 3363
Default apalling

I am stunned and amazed that anyone would try to defend these greedy arrogant government "employed" fools.

Ever see the Seinfeld episode where Elaine does that dorky dance?
These civil "servants" sure are lame looking... they should just stay home and listen to public radio while reviewing some old Ms. magazines and pining away for Yanni.

Pathetic
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-16-2009, 10:12 PM
 
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,029,434 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
Because they were public companies in danger of failing, at the time.

And they "could," Obama never took steps to stop them.
Isn't our government in deficit and in danger of failing? How can SSA actually justify this meeting on the tax payer dime?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:48 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top