This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Economy

  • Loving to Fly

    Apparently the former SECDEF wasn’t the only one regularly flying home most weekends.  It seems as if our VP loves flying on government aircraft, too.

    The VP has an official residence in DC.  He also owns a home in Wilmington, DE – about 110 miles away.

    As a Senator, he apparently took the train from DC to Wilmington on weekends.  Once he became VP, according to Biden the Secret Service put the kibosh on that for security reasons.

    However, as VP most weekends he’s still been going home. He’s a member of a rather exclusive club in Wilmington, and likes to golf there.  And since it’s his home, presumably he likes the area too.

    So he’s been flying home.  He’s generally been using Air Force Two to fly to Wilmington.

    Air Force Two is a modified Boeing 757.  It has an operating cost of around $8,800 per hour.  Add to that operating cost whatever it costs to get him to/from Andrews AFB to catch his flight and to/from his home in Wilmington, DE, of course.  Plus crew salaries, and travel expenses if they stay for the weekend.  Plus the travel expenses for his protection detail – as well as additional salaries for same whenever his family doesn’t come with him.

    Ya know, if it were me I think I’d just drive.  Seems to me that would be possible for the VP, too – even if he might have to wait until after rush hour to leave.  By the time he gets from his Naval Observatory residence to Andrews, catches his flight, flies to Wilmington, gets off, and then goes home, I’m guessing he burns at least an hour – if not closer to an hour and a half.  At off-peak hours, it’s only about a 2-hour drive.  And I’ll guarantee someone else will be doing the driving, too.

    And if the Secret Service nixed that (which is entirely possible due to security concerns if being done on a regular basis), I think I’d either just stay in DC most weekends – or at least see if Marine 2 might be available to take me vice Air Force Two.  Even a VH-3D has to be less expensive to operate than a 757.

    But we should feel sorry for our poor Mr. VP.  According to recent remarks Biden made to the National Association of Attorneys General, sequestration is going to force him to go back to using the train.

    Which brings a question to mind:  if it’s OK for you to resume using the train due to sequestration, Mr. VP – then why in the hell haven’t you been using it all along?

  • Sequestration? What Sequestration?

    I seem to remember hearing somewhere that the government was broke, and had to cut back spending as a result.  I think that was supposed to be the reason for something called “sequestration”.

    But I must have heard wrong.  Seems that the current Administration has just approved the release of nearly $500 million in funds to our firm allies the Palestinian Authority.  And they’ve asked Congress for another $200 million for the Palestinian Authority for this year, too.

    This is on top of the $250 million in “economic assistance” we just sent to our firm friends, the Muslim Brotherhood-dominated government of Egypt.  And the $37 million in additional education aid we gave that steadfast US “friend” Pakistan about a week ago.  And I’m sure there are a few other such giveaways out there that have happened during the last few weeks.

    By my math, that all totals close to a billion dollars.  I’m guessing it’s more than $1 billion when it’s all added up.

    And it’s all going to regimes that are often less-than-friendly to the US.

    Sequestration?  Yeah, that sequestration is really helping us cut back on nonessential Federal spending, isn’t it?

  • A Breath of Fresh Air

    Well, I have to say I’m surprised.  Apparently there is still some amount of respect for private property in Europe.

    The Parliament of Cyprus yesterday refused to approve the law required to seize place a tax on bank deposits.  The EU bailout of Cypriot banks is now in question.

    That in and of itself wasn’t too surprising.  But I did find it surprising that the vote against was unanimous.

    Let’s see what happens next.  Things could get interesting.

  • About That Bank Account of Yours . . . .

    Most TAH readers are fans of limited government.  Most thus have pretty strong reservations concerning a central government with expansive authority and power.

    But we have a few readers who seem to believe in and want a government with unlimited powers.  Others may be willing to accept such on an “emergency basis” or for a “limited time”.

    Well, here’s some food for thought.  Take a look at what’s going on in Cyprus today.

    If you’re still a fan of government with unlimited power after reading that – well, it’s still a free country. You’re entitled to whatever opinion you want, no matter how foolish.

    However, Cyprus apparently isn’t so free.  Be glad you live here and not there.

  • Obama: What debt crisis?

    ROS sends a link to an ABC report of an interview with the President in which he now claims that our debt is sustainable and that there is no crisis;

    “We don’t have an immediate crisis in terms of debt,” President Obama said in an exclusive interview with George Stephanopoulos for “Good Morning America.” “In fact, for the next 10 years, it’s gonna be in a sustainable place.”

    It’s an assessment that will throw cold water on the latest attempt to achieve a so-called grand bargain to reduce the deficit. After all, a grand bargain would require excruciatingly difficult decisions for both sides – for Republicans, it would mean raising taxes, and for Democrats, cutting future spending on cherished programs like Social Security and Medicare. If there is no crisis, why would either side do it?

    So, what happens if this latest effort to reach a deficit agreement falls through? Once again, the president’s answer was, essentially, no big deal.

    “Ultimately, it may be that the differences are just too wide” to get a deal, President Obama said. “That won’t create a crisis. It just means that we will have missed an opportunity.”

    So, I guess now that there’s no one else to blame he’s just going into denial about the debt. Then why did he raise taxes? And why does he want to raise taxes on even more working Americans if there’s no impending crisis?

  • “Fixing” the Economy, Eh?

    It looks like the current Administration really is doing a great job of “fixing” the US economy.

    In January 2013, disposable inflation income – adjusted for inflation – dropped 4%.  For those who’ve forgotten:  disposable income is what you have left after taxes and other mandatory deductions.

    That’s the largest single-month drop since 1959 – or in at least 54 years.  I say “at least” because 1959 is when the statistics for monthly changes in inflation-adjusted disposable income begin.

    Consumers spent a bit more in January 2013, even while having 4% less to spend.  What that means is that consumers are saving less or going further in debt.  Neither is a good thing for the economy’s long-term health.

    Other indicators, except for inflation, were similarly bad.  Inflation was about the sole bright spot – 1.3% for the Jan 2012-Jan 2013 period.  However, even that low level of inflation hurts when disposable incomes are shrinking.

    And in case you were wondering – yeah, the new taxes which kicked in at the beginning of the year were the primary cause of the drop in disposable income.

    Details can be found here.

    Oh, by the way:  that 1.3% inflation (Jan 2012 to Jan 2013) does not include the recent spike in gasoline prices.  That price spike happened largely in Feb 2013.  On January 28, 2013, the national average price of regular-grade gasoline was $3.296/gallon.  On February 25, 2013 – $3.722/gallon – an increase of $0.426/gallon, or over 12.9%, in less than a month.

    On another “cheery” note – under the current administration, the Federal government has now added $6+ trillion in new debt – in 4 years and 40 days.  That’s “trillion” with a “T”, or

    $6,000,000,000,000.00+

    That’s an average of not quite $1.5 trillion in new Federal debt added during each of the past four years.

     

    The words of Pyrrhus of Epirus come to mind:  “Another such ‘victory’ and we shall be utterly ruined.”

  • Where the (Federal) Money Goes

    Quick – what Department or Agency of the Federal government spends the most?

    If you said the Department of Defense – not even close.  That’s a “NO GO” at this station.

    It’s not the Social Security Administration, either.  I was rather surprised by that.

    Rather, the dubious “honor” goes to the Department of Health and Human Services.  According to the 2011 Financial Report of the US Government (chart, p. v), HHS now spends approximately 24 cents out of each Federal dollar spent – or nearly 1 out of every 4 dollars spent by the Federal government.  Social Security is second with 21 cents; DoD is third with 20.  The remaining 35 cents are spent by the VA (about 5 cents out of each Federal dollar), on interest payments to the public (7 cents per dollar) and the rest of the Federal government combined (spends the remaining 23 cents).

    Something is seriously wrong when we are spending literally 45% of Federal outlays on what are only a partial list of Federal social welfare/unearned entitlement programs (others exist outside of HHS; the SNAP program, AKA “food stamps”, spends $80 billion annually but is run by the Department of Agriculture).  It’s also seriously wrong that this unearned entitlement spending totals more than twice that spent on defending the US.  But that’s precisely the case today.

    It’s not the job of the Federal government to feed, clothe, house, or provide medical care for everyone in the USA.  It’s also not the Federal government’s job to provide income for for everyone’s retirement.  Those are all individual responsibilities.  But to a large degree that’s exactly what the Federal government is doing today – and it’s not so slowly bankrupting the country.

    Gee – thanks, FDR and LBJ.  Thanks a lot.

  • Chuckling Contentedly, Deep in the Heart of Texas

    When Rick Perry flubbed his presidential chances so badly on the national stage, there were many among his supporters who were bewildered at his seeming inability to transfer his many successes in Texas to the national stage. Although just as frustrated as those folks were, some of us were not quite as baffled because there was a suspicion within us that Rick Perry simply didn’t want the job nor the heat and heartbreak it entails. There was a sense that Perry was simply contented with being the popular and longest serving governor of the world’s 14th or so largest economy. He was a big frog in a big luxuriant pond who didn’t really see any advantage to becoming a bigger frog in the admittedly larger, but stagnating swamp the first four years of Obama’s reign had produced.

    If Perry did indeed self-destruct it was probably not consciously; but there’s an inescapable feeling that he certainly did not give it his best shot. He had to well know how contentious national governance had been for the last Texan president, George W. Bush, with such an unrelentingly hostile media, and that his own occupation of that office couldn’t really offer a future any sensible politician would eagerly embrace. Especially when he could just go back to Texas and bask in the role of being the popular, down-home, chief executive of one of the world’s most successful economies. Ask yourself, given that choice, what would you do?

    So here we are many months down the road and Barack Obama is saddled with all the problems of an idling economy, a steadily rising China, a crumbling Middle East situation and a renascent Al Qaeda on the African continent, and where do we find Rick Perry? How about touring taxed-to-damned-near-dead California businesses, touting the hugely friendlier and vastly more favorable business environment in his flourishing Lone Star state than in Guv Moonbeam’s headed-for-default disaster which lamely still calls itself golden?

    Similar enticing offers are being made to the many huge economic engines in New York and Illinois with the tempting message that not only will you be taxed far less in Texas, you’ll have legal protections against frivolous lawsuits and when you invest your hard-earned profits in your business, your home and your family, you can protect them with all the firearms you choose to have at hand because Texans damned well believe in the inalienable 2d Amendment right of defense of self, loved ones and property.

    So you tell me who’s having more fun: a supremely confident Rick Perry who knows how to govern, out there in California gathering even more low-hanging fruit for an already flourishing Texas economy or that desperate amateur in the White House who’s spinning his wheels in an office he’s clueless to occupy? Perry’s walking the walk, adding jobs by the thousands while the guy who won the big contest is still just talking the campaign talk about doing something. Look at their respective pics: the loser Rick, the older of the two, has a little grey around the temples, unchanged from the campaign, while the victor is going big-time grey from forehead to neck nape and from one huge ear to the other. Somehow I think I can hear Rick Perry chuckling contentedly, deep in the heart of Texas.

    And probably in his jaunts up and down the Left Coast as well.

    Crossposted at American Thinker