The Most Expensive Presidency Ever?

I saw this article today out on FB:

Trump Tower security is costing the 

US taxpayer $400000 every single day

There are so many things about this to know and keep in mind, it's pretty stunning.

That figure alone, $400,000 per day---nearly one half million dollars a day for security for the man in the White House who has not divested and who will not divest from his portfolio, Emoluments Clause or no.

Screw you, America. He has money to make.

Forget that it could--and likely would--cloud his decision making for and on the nation. He and his money are far too important to be bothered with our legality and laws.

Second, think about this. Do some math.

$400,000 per day turns out to be--wait for it--146 million dollars per year.

Just for this President. And only because he won't, again, divest himself of his business portfolio and hey, it's more fun flying back to NEW YORKE SITTY so he can be in his own tower on whatever floor, surrounded by very tacky, lowbrow gold furniture and furnishings.

New Yorkers have to love the inconvenience of having this bonehead in town, too, don't you know? Blocking the streets, making traffic yet more impassable. It must be even more awful.

Then, let's do some more math, fellow Americans.

Over four years---if, God forbid, he makes it that long, given what we've seen of the first two weeks--Mr. Trump and his very reckless, impetuous presidency would cost us, cost you and I, cost the nation 584 million dollars.

Just to keep his tower, his building and him, secure.

That's just under two thirds of a billion dollars.

For security.

For this one President.

Understand and keep in mind not just that this is unprecedented (spelled and used correctly here, please note), but how completely unprecedented this all is. No president has ever needed or required or asked for this kind of security and protection. We've never had this kind of additional, unnecessary expense before. 

This, on top of the fact that Mr. Trump never divested of his business holdings, make this one of the most dangerous and expensive presidencies in the history of the nation, without question.  It's a dangerous presidency because of the risks we incur getting him in and out of New York City but also because of those same risks just having him there, fulfilling his selfish whims.

That it's the most expensive presidency we have ever seen or will likely ever see is shown just in the math, above.

So much for Right Wingers, "Conservatives" and Republicans wanting to be the government of small spending, eh?

Okay, Republicans and Trump Supporters, The Next Four Years Are All On You

Yes, Republicans and all who supported and voted for Donald J. Trump for president, after today, he and all he does and all the ramifications are all, every one of them, on you.

Sure, Mr. Trump is already taking us down his deep, dark "rabbit hole" and we'll all suffer but his actions? The blame for what he does and says and tweets and all the ramifications? Even the ones from the election to today, while he was only president-elect, everything from November 8 to today and for as long as he is president, it's all on you. We have you and your vote and your actions to blame.

The economy?   On you.

The nation's international standings?

You.

Any debt or debts he accrues?

Wars?

All.

On you.

And believe me, if he should do anything right and/or well and good, sure, you absolutely get any credit there.

Should that occur.

Same for Mike Pence, as Vice President or, God also forbid, President.

You get all the blame.  It's all on you, to repeat.

You wanted this. You voted for it. You supported him and all he represented then and represents since.

Yes, he's all our President, the nation's President but not because we voted for him, not because a majority of us voted for him.  You did this.

So buck up and suck it up, kids, because Mr. Trump has already shown us all, since that fateful November election day last year that this is going to be a bumpy, bumpy, unpredictable ride.

It's just on your hands.

The Truth About America's Spending, Debt and Deficits

Quote of the day--on the national deficit

So, why, exactly, can't we have a jobs bill for Americans, especially so we can repair our infrastructure?

Seriously.

Link to original article--get it all here:  What People (Don't) Know About The Deficit

President Obama's budget proposal

Click on picture for easier viewing, as ever.



The first one alone nearly makes it worthwhile, singularly.

Further proof: There will be no streetcars, no convention hotel

The Star evaluates Kansas City's past, present and, really, future, given our spending and lack of leadership and vision. It's a good article, really, a great interpretation:

KC is paying a big price for falling behind

It's a good, smart, brief read:

"Kansas City’s overall outstanding government debt of $2.32 billion works out to $5,028 owed by every resident. That’s the second highest load when stacked up against 10 other peer cities (see chart on link, below).

Could the Mayor's streetcar line and the convention hotel happen?

Sure, I guess. It could. Possibly.

Is it likely?

Given the lack or weakness of leadership locally (and even nationally), I wouldn't put money on it.

Link: http://www.kansascity.com/2012/05/05/3594782/the-stars-editorial-kc-is-paying.html

Skelton and Moran---two "top travelers" in Washington

There is a study out right now from the "Sunlight Foundation, a nonprofit that uses technology to try to make government more transparent. In early June the organization released its latest massive data dump on the expenditures that House representatives make from their Members Representational Allowances, or MRAs." They "show what the House spent on itself in the last six months of 2009 and first three months of 2010." Frequent fliers: The top two travelers in the House? Democrats Chellie Pingree of Maine, who has 197 travel expenditures, and Ike Skelton of Missouri, who had 163 expenditures. Neither was close to being the top spender, however. One high-spending traveler was Republican Jerry Moran of Kansas, who had 145 expenditures and an $82,000 taxpayer bill. Not good, Jerry. It's not good if you want to get elected to the Senate. And not good if you don't want Todd "I'm more Conservative than you" Tiahrt attacking you. Link to original post: http://www.aolnews.com/house-money/article/the-other-congressional-spending-how-the-house-spent-1-billion-on-itself/19522761

On opening the paper today

The Star today, this morning, continues to impress. Just seeing the front page of the paper today cofnirms this. If you only saw the 3 front page articles today, you'd know it was good writing, research and reporting, with great local color. One was about on the new minority look and shape of Garden City, Kansas and what it means for the people there and that town and so, of course, for America at large. Terrific. The second good and important one was on the Kansas City University of Biosciences and Medicine and their problems with former University President Karen Pletz. Finally, even the weakest article, the one on DNA testing of track dogs and associated, illegal dogfights, was still good reading and writing. You can see that this continual empasis on local stories, area residents and towns and cities makes for a great paper and is, as I've said before, the thing that will save local newspapers (for as long as they will exist in the transition to the internet and wireless news). So good on you, Kansas City Star and thanks very much for revitalizing the paper.

While the House of Reps in Washington does the right thing

Good news from the House of Representatives yesterday:

"'Pay-go' vote: The House on Wednesday passed, 265-166, legislation that would reinstate a "pay-as-you-go" statute that requires tax cuts or new benefit programs be paid for with tax increases or cuts to other programs. If the "pay-go" law is broken and new legislation adds to the deficit, automatic spending cuts would kick in to make up the difference. The bill, which now goes to the Senate and is endorsed by President Obama, would help put the government's books in order after an annual deficit that is projected to quadruple this year to more than $1.8 trillion."

Take that, Republicans--who voted it out of our government during those insane days of their rule from 2000 to 2008.

And they say they're for "small government" and keeping government costs in line.

Democrats first put "pay-go" into law, to keep spending down, Republicans took it out and now, Democrats are putting it back into law.

What ought to happen now is that our government decides to never again take this out of our laws. We don't need or want irresponsible spending period or ever again.

It's far weaker than the original plan put into effect in 1990 but it's still an improvement.

We need to push these people harder so they're more responsible with taxes, as we all know.

Link to story:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5giSoolIfWOKtaayFimI6hMt5Du9QD99JR5LG0

Important reads and site for all of us

I decided some months ago to only put up my own writing--with some, few exceptions.
This is one of those.

If you don't read or watch the Alternet site, you should. They have great, important material out there--not just the current, temporary and hilarious antics and fights within the Republican Party and Rush "Porkulus" Limbaugh vs. Michael Steele vs. the Republican Party. (though those are some GREAT laughs).

The one that turned my head is this one:

We're in the Midst of an Epic Battle over the Direction of this Nation
By John Cavanagh, Foreign Policy in Focus. Posted March 5, 2009.

It really tells, very well, just where we are, what we're doing and where we might be going right now, as a nation and we could all use that information.

You can find it here:
http://www.alternet.org/workplace/130106/we%27re_in_the_midst_of_an_epic_battle_over_the_direction_of_this_nation/?page=entire

Here's another very good one from the same site and it speaks for itself:

What It's Going to Take to Stave Off Another Great Depression
By Dean Baker, The Guardian. Posted March 5, 2009.

Link: http://www.alternet.org/workplace/130155/what_it%27s_going_to_take_to_stave_off_another_great_depression/

Finally, here's a really good column also from Alternet.org that's both sobering and somewhat lighthearted, which is rare:

1/3 Of America Is Crazy: They Think Their Jobs Are Safe
By Jill Andresky Fraser, Tomdispatch.com. Posted March 5, 2009.

Link here:
http://www.alternet.org/workplace/130154/1_3_of_america_is_crazy%3A_they_think_their_jobs_are_safe/

I put these up because I think they are all 3 important reads and because I think the site may be overlooked by the "man on the street". I think they're too important to miss or overlook.

Have a great day, everyone (in spite of our outlook).

Will we ever learn?

It seems the answer is "no".

The question is, will the American people ever learn that the answer to all questions and needs is not, in fact, to throw money at the problem.

Two examples come to mind recently.

One headline I saw this week points out the President Obama is requesting $634 billion over the next 10 years for a "health care overhaul".

What a mistake.

We don't need to throw even MORE money at our health care system. Doctors and hospitals and insurance companies have taken too much money from the system already.

Money INTO the system isn't the issue. Too much of our home incomes and national wealth is already spent on health care. (And defense, too, but that's another article).

What we need to do with our health care system is what the rest of the world has already successfully done--and that is, take the profit--the ugly, fat, oversized, bloated, killing profit--out of health care in the United States.

But it won't happen.

We don't have the will or the understanding to make this happen.

We’ll never get the health care system we need because the American answer to health care is to throw more money at it when what we really need to do is take the profit out of health care, the way the rest of the world has done. Everywhere but here in the US. We love profits. We love corporations. We’re greedy.

And stupid.

The other news note I saw this week was that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton just got back from the Middle East and is asking for--did you see this?--900 million dollars to rebuild the Gaza Strip.

Are you effin' kidding me?

In the first place, continuing to support the madness that continues to go on in the Middle East just makes us ridiculous enablers. Shooting, killing and blowing each other up in the Middle East should stop, period. Everyone would agree to that. Throwing money at rebuilding that mess again and again just allows for it to go on.

Years ago, when we used to have money in the United States, this wouldn't have made sense, either. But now that we're either near-broke or financially bankrupt (and it's hard to argue we're not), it's beyond our capacity. We can't afford it any longer, clearly.

We're broke, folks.

We can't any longer afford to throw money--big, small or whatever--at our problems.

We can't be the drunken sailor with our money--and our future--any longer.



Link to stories described above:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/obama_budget
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090224/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_us

We need to get this hog out of the trough

Last evening I watched the movie "Why We Fight", about the United States build-up to attack Iraq in 2003, the actual attack and its aftermath.

Very enlightening, for sure.

Besides President Eisenhower's warning to keep the "military-industrial complex" in check, which is so frequently repeated lately, it was illuminating on exactly what we've don over there and showed a rather direct and blatant connection between Darth Dick Cheney, Halliburton, KBR and the situation.

So this morning I searched for some US Department of Defense data on our military budget and came up with some staggering information.

No surprise, really. We've heard some of this stuff for years.

As a country, we all seem really concerned, still, about Russia--or the people and land mass that used to be called Russia.

First of all, you have to know that the United States GROSSLY outspends ALL OTHER NATIONS ON THE PLANET in this ugly, wasteful, paranoid defense spending. We pay about 711 billion dollars a year on all this stuff.

Keep in mind, we have acres and acres of old military jets and other equipment, decaying in the desert. That's where a lot of this spending has gone.

Other nations spending, you might ask?

Number 2 on the list, in terms of spending, is all of Europe at $289 billion.

China? No. 3 at $211 billion.

Russia is number 6, for pity's sake, at $70 billion a year.

Why the paranoia, Amerika?

Who's the real "war monger"?

Why are we still fighting World War II by being in Germany and Okinawa, etc?

Why are we still building nuclear submarines? The next war will absolutely, simply be an air war. We know that. That's the way we've fought our most recent wars. (I refuse to call them skirmishes. It's too tame for what we do.)

Either that or it will be the continuing war with terrorists, which we've, again, known all along and you don't fight terrorists with nuclear submarines.

Between what we send overseas, mostly to the Middle East, for oil and what we waste on Department of Defense spending, this is clearly not sustainable.

We'll go bankrupt keeping this up.

Not as though we aren't already.

We have to get this pig out of the trough.

We'll all be and do better for it.

We need to have our Congressional representatives stop voting to continue these stupid, expensive, useless appropriations for war.

We can certainly educate, clothe, house, feed and nurse a whole lot more people with all that money.

It would be far better spent on "butter" than guns.
___________________________________________________

Anup Shah, World Military Spending, GlobalIssues.org, Last updated: Saturday, March 01, 2008

New developments

Well, big new developments this morning, concerning the economy and neither is good.

First, wholesale prices are up a whopping 1.1 percent in March, nearly triple the expected increase. Added to it is that this is "the largest increase since a 2.6 percent rise last November, which had been the biggest one-month jump in 33 years."

Yeah, that's 33 years. Zounds.

In itself, it's just not good news, of course. With everything else that's going on--all the bad news like the deficit spending we're doing, the war in the Middle East, the ridiculously, embarassingly low dollar on the world market, etc.--this is what the Federal Reserve and most economists absolutely didn't want and wanted desperately to avoid. With the falling dollar and a slowing economy, virtually all conversations about that same economy virtually always ended with "Well, at least we don't have any inflation."

And here's why:

With a slow economy or recession and inflation, you get the dreaded "stagflation" of a stagnant economy and inflation.

Now, economists know very well what to do for one or the other, but when you put the two together, it makes for a heck of a mess, a very difficult situation because they just don't know what to do. For inflation, you increase interest rates, to slow the economy. For a recession, you cut interest rates. Either is simple. Together, it's a stinker. You really have to walk a tight rope.

And frankly, if you were a student of history, you would know that this is almost inevitable, given that this President and his administration took us into their arbitrary war, with all it's spending. In the 60's, it was President Johnson's war in Vietnam, with all it's spending--and no tax increases--that brought us to the inflation, later, in the 70's. Different presidents and administrations paid dearly for that--right Mr. Carter?

But that's what is so great about this President. He was never a student of history. Don't know anything about how economies work? Don't know how those same economies work with high spending, low interest rates, low tax rates and more tax cuts for big business and the wealthy? Don't know anything about creating power vacuums in a despotic country, especially in the Middle East? No problem. Don't worry your pretty little head. Your friends will take care of you and your friends, for sure.

Okay, so here we are with a "bad moon rising." We need some good news and here it is: The good news, if there is any, is that the Fed will now be much less likely to cut interest rates further. MUCH less likely. You can bet on that. The one thing that REALLY concerns that group is inflation. So now, the dollar will be much less likely to drop a whole lot farther, even though today it did, what with the psychology of the markets and all. It's not great news, but it's something.

The second big development today---yeah, just second--is that oil hit $114.00 a barrel today. Yup. Read it again: $114.00 a barrel for oil. It did back off but hey, it hit it. And the lower the dollar goes, the higher oil will go, certainly.

The thing is, I'm sure the Current Occupant of the White House--as Garrison Keillor and I like to call him (he created it, of course)--has no idea what to do about the economy. Heck, the Fed will hardly know what to do so how would he?

So, folks, all I'm sayin' is, it ain't good, it's not getting better and they won't know quite what to do. Terrific, huh?

Kevin Phillips says we're sliding into our "post-abundance" period. My description of his theory, not his.

My point is that we should all start paying attention now.