We have no reliable evidence that the costs are really $200M.

Seriously, if we are spending 200 million per day, than I'd rather pay to have the other countries presidents visit us in the US. We can pick up the tab.

Frankly, I don't want to fire off too many insults, so I'm going to calmly shut my mouth after saying "I strenuously disagree."

Seriously, if we are spending 200 million per day, than I'd rather pay to have the other countries presidents visit us in the US. We can pick up the tab.

More government handouts, eh?

With all the threats of global warming and the excessive amount of carbon and pollution that this trip will cost, the President should just stay home and video conference with India. Show me he is serious about stopping green houses gasses and save a huge chunk by just not going.

Without knowing the numbers, I'd venture a guess that a single coal plant puts out more CO2 in a single day than this whole trip. I could probably find or I could calculate a rough estimate for a typical coal plant, but it'd be hard to estimate the output for a Presidential trip.

Isn't that why businesses use video conferencing a lot more in general. It is because it is a major cost and time savings versus flying everywhere. Sometimes you need to fly, sometimes you don't.

 

I wonder if the oval office will eventually re-evaluate this stance and travel less or if in general the president is a figure that needs to always be flying places for pure appearance standpiont?

 

And I am ok with him flying within the US and to big sumitts.

 

Also, at this point I'm speaking more generally, not just in terms of Obama but more just the president position in general. It is an interesting debate if it costs that much to send him places, imo.

To put it in terms that liberals use, IF the costs reported are accurate: Just think of all the teachers and policemen that could be hired with that money! A 5 day trip costing a billion dollars! Just think of all the children that could help! Why does Obama hate children and cops?

Isn't that why businesses use video conferencing a lot more in general. It is because it is a major cost and time savings versus flying everywhere. Sometimes you need to fly, sometimes you don't.

 

I wonder if the oval office will eventually re-evaluate this stance and travel less or if in general the president is a figure that needs to always be flying places for pure appearance standpiont?

 

And I am ok with him flying within the US and to big sumitts.

 

Also, at this point I'm speaking more generally, not just in terms of Obama but more just the president position in general. It is an interesting debate if it costs that much to send him places, imo.

 

With all due respect India is going to be kind of an important country for like the next thousand years. The White House probably uses teleconferencing everyday, with people all over the world. But the President can't get cooped up in Washington, because leaders of other countries sure won't.

 

And the cost of this travel or the contribution to greenhouse gases is probably insignificant. I get the whole message thing, but come on.

I wonder if the oval office will eventually re-evaluate this stance and travel less or if in general the president is a figure that needs to always be flying places for pure appearance standpiont?

Frankly, I think it's very much the latter. As long as that man is both the symbol of America and the most powerful single person in the world, large scale Presidential travel is an absolute must, for both strategic, diplomatic, and economic reasons.

And the cost of this travel or the contribution to greenhouse gases is probably insignificant. I get the whole message thing, but come on.

Of course, if we were really worried about that, we could put a price on carbon emissions and take that legitimately into account.

Of course, if we were really worried about that, we could put a price on carbon emissions and take that legitimately into account.

It's already (supposedly) at $200 million a day, you wanna double that with carbon offsets?

It's already (supposedly) at $200 million a day

 

What source are you using for this? And in the grand scheme of things this is what is getting you riled up with our current state of affairs? Really?

itt we witness how speculation passes into fact and dominates discussions of ultimately meaningless issues while important issues are ignored.

$200 million a day isn't "meaningless" That would fund my hometown school system for four years. Its that exact attitude that has put us $14 TRILLION in the hole.

$200 million a day isn't "meaningless" That would fund my hometown school system for four years. Its that exact attitude that has put us $14 TRILLION in the hole.

You're saying that the $200 million is a totally BS number? Yeah, I could buy that .

$200 million a day isn't "meaningless" That would fund my hometown school system for four years. Its that exact attitude that has put us $14 TRILLION in the hole.

Think about it, people talk about how much of her personal fortune Meg Whitman pissed away during her campaign (between 160 and 170 million). And that is still less than going to India will cost in one day.

 

That blows me away. Don't you guys realize just what a great deal of money we are talking about when we say 200 million per day?

 

I swear, I'm starting to think caufield makes some sense with cut back government programs and see which ones we need and don't need. Obviously that is a huge extreme but man, I really am not a proponent of the government having the ability to do this sort of stuff and in general the mass inefficiencies that go on blow my mind.

 

I'd love to see a kaizen-burst down on the government. I realize it is typically something done for manufacturing companies, but man, it would be interesting to see how much waste really exists. The problem is our government is the largest conglomerates in the world so fixing it over night is impossible.

I'd love to see a kaizen-burst down on the government. I realize it is typically something done for manufacturing companies, but man, it would be interesting to see how much waste really exists. The problem is our government is the largest conglomerates in the world so fixing it over night is impossible.

Actually, the bigger problem is that each side has its own waste that it's going to protect until the end of time because that side doesnt' believe it's waste. The DOD is sacred for one side, Social Security is sacred for the other side. (of course, Medicare is a whole nother issue...whichever side wants to cut waste out of that...welll....)

Think about it, people talk about how much of her personal fortune Meg Whitman pissed away during her campaign (between 160 and 170 million). And that is still less than going to India will cost in one day.

 

itt further proof of unsubstantiated claims passing into fact

You're saying that the $200 million is a totally BS number? Yeah, I could buy that .

 

So is someone going to show any proof it isn't real, or is this one of those things where it just keeps getting repeated until everyone takes it as gospel?

itt further proof of unsubstantiated claims passing into fact

What unsubstantiated claim am I making? Why don't you please enlighten me. I didn't write the article stating the 200 million and I haven't seen you get off your ass and show me something to prove it wrong.

What unsubstantiated claim am I making? Why don't you please enlighten me. I didn't write the article stating the 200 million and I haven't seen you get off your ass and show me something to prove it wrong.

This totally reminds me of religious arguments...

We have no reliable evidence that the costs are really $200M.

 

 

There is also nothing to prove that it isn't, except your speculation.

Think about it, people talk about how much of her personal fortune Meg Whitman pissed away during her campaign (between 160 and 170 million). And that is still less than going to India will cost in one day.

 

That blows me away. Don't you guys realize just what a great deal of money we are talking about when we say 200 million per day?

 

I swear, I'm starting to think caufield makes some sense with cut back government programs and see which ones we need and don't need. Obviously that is a huge extreme but man, I really am not a proponent of the government having the ability to do this sort of stuff and in general the mass inefficiencies that go on blow my mind.

 

I'd love to see a kaizen-burst down on the government. I realize it is typically something done for manufacturing companies, but man, it would be interesting to see how much waste really exists. The problem is our government is the largest conglomerates in the world so fixing it over night is impossible.

 

 

So is someone going to show any proof it isn't real, or is this one of those things where it just keeps getting repeated until everyone takes it as gospel?

 

 

What unsubstantiated claim am I making? Why don't you please enlighten me. I didn't write the article stating the 200 million and I haven't seen you get off your ass and show me something to prove it wrong.

 

Did you guys just intentionally ignore both the article and my post?

 

The quote comes from a guy who clearly would have no idea of such things.

 

And there is absolutely no reason to believe this cost is significantly greater than when Bush went to India. I mean, let's deal in some basic logic here. What would have changed? The basic needs are basically identical. Besides, the President himself has little to do with decisions of how security is handled - the USSS does that independently, and for good reason.

 

I can understand being upset that it costs $200M... if it actually did. But we have no reason to believe that is true, nor do we have any reason to believe its any higher than it was for the previous President.