Like Listening to a Ten Year Old Child

Listening to #Obama @ his live press conference is like listening to a 10 yr old tell you that " The dog ate my homework" / More #Lies & #BS

— Middleboro Jones (@Leadership_One) March 1, 2013

Congress on Vacation

And the difference between them being on the job and on vacation would be ????

The people's representatives in Congress are the epitome of government workers - overpaid, unqualified and lackadaisical - everything we have come to expect from government.....

GREED killed the American Unions

The Atlantic Magazine wrote a piece titled " Who Killed American Unions??"

The article was not very compelling....it focused on all aspects other than the key issue.

The one part of the liberal whining that goes on in this article is they didn't mention the key reason why Unions have cratered...

GREED.

Yes, GREED.  The Unions and their members got GREEDY.  That's what killed them.

Now, I understand and agree they are not the only ones who got greedy.  CEOs and other getting obscene pay packages, stock insiders pillaging the economy and causing chaos, etc. etc.  I see it and agree that they have caused as many issues for the American Economy as the Unions.

But, the question is " Who Killed American Unions??" - The main culprit is the Unions themselves.

The last three and half years have accelerated their demise but it started way before that.....
GREEDY UNION Members and their fat arse bosses used their muscle to bully and batter companies like GM, Ford & Chrysler into ridiculous labor agreements.

Public Employee Unions gamed the political system and conceived ridiculous laws and agreements that allow public employees to retire on sky high pensions inflated by overtime and into which many have never paid a cent.  They don't have any care that the agreements were  faulty and unsustainable.  it didn't matter that they got paid for standing down on the job or doing little.  They got the agreements put in place and even if it bankrupts the town, they want the money.

Union Leaders lined their pockets with dues paid by the members and did little other than make themselves rich on the backs of the workers.  They decided that they were entitled to the same type of compensation as those who ran the businesses.....GREED.  More and more was their only goal.

This is what killed the Unions and why today, they only represent a minor fraction of all workers.  Unions were needed when there were no laws to protect workers but in the last 40 years, the Unions became only about paying their workers and the Union Bosses as much as they could extort from the companies and government.

Now the companies have had enough.  The cost of a new car produced in Detroit had almost $10K cost tacked on to it to provide incredible huge pay & benefits to assembly line workers.  The added cost is borne by every person who bought a vehicle from the big three, while others like Toyota set up factories in Tennessee without Unions.  The new factories were able to produced excellent vehicles and cheaper.

That helped put the Big Three teetering on the edge....The market was cornered by cheaper, leaner, better.

Now, Towns and States are seeing the light.  They know that they have been had and the voters are pushing back.  Taxpayers have had enough. Voters have started fixing what has been known for many years.  It wasn't just enough to earn good money, these Union types needed to earn MORE.  And it doesn't bother them at all that it is costing others services or extra costs tacked on to things they want.

It is all about them and their need to satisfy their Greed.

That's what killed the Unions and for the author of the article in the Atlantic Magazine to miss that completely shows there still are people who don't want to acknowledge reality.

Reality is the Unions caused their own demise.  Their GREED and their need to be GREEDY to the detriment of all others.

And the Mass Media wonders why people aren't siding with the Unions....it is because they see the wanton GREED with their own eyes and recognize it for what it is - shameful.

Government Spending is the key issue of our time

This picture and the enclosed details are not what our country needs. It's time to take control of the runaway spending that have marked the last three years. We cannot allow our children's future to be spent by the feckless pols.


The latest chart from the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee, showing that under President Obama's budget plan, debt would be $73,000 per American in 2022:

By contrast, debt per person was still an astonishing $33,000 in 2008, at the end of George W. Bush's term, and $20,000 in 2000, at the beginning of Bush's presidency.

In just four years, President Obama’s policies will have added $6.4 trillion in new gross debt, for a total debt of $16.4 trillion by the end of this year.

· Per-household debt will have risen from $85,500 at the end of 2008 to $135,100 by the end of 2012.

· Average spending under the Obama Administration will be 33 percent higher than the four years preceding his term.

· Spending in 2012 will be $800 billion higher than 2008.

· Per-household spending in 2012 will be $7,000 greater than 2008—a 23 percent increase.

· Per-household spending in 2022 under the president’s budget will be $44,000, nearly $20,000 higher than in 2008.

· Per-household debt in 2022 under the president’s budget will be $195,000, more than double what it was in 2008

Vichy Obama

Mickey Kaus at the Daily Caller nails it. Brilliantly.

The fools in Washington, especially the Chief Idiot in the White House are spending our great, great grandchildren's $$$ and do not care about it as they will not have to be around to clean up the mess they leave behind.

And if the President is " outraged by the excessive spending ", he might want to speak to the First Lady who is one of the leading spendaholics of our tax dollars, 2nd only to himself of course.

Obama in Casablanca: Mickey Kaus
The Daily Caller

President Obama is shocked, shocked to learn there is a September Spending Spree in the federal government, leading agencies like the General Service Administration do things like blow $823,000 on a BS “training conference” in Las Vegas.

Chief of Staff Jacob J. Lew briefed President Obama before last week’s trip to South Korea.

Obama “was outraged by the excessive spending, questionable dealings with contractors, and disregard for taxpayer dollars,” Lew said in a statement to The Washington Post, calling for “all those responsible to be held fully accountable.”

P.S.: What’s worse, the idea that Obama is pretending to be surprised at routine government overspending, or the possibility that he actually is surprised? Put this down next to him learning that there is “no such thing as shovel ready projects.” …

P.P.S.: Yes, I know the big money is in entitlements, not in the discretionary budget. But before you cut grandma’s Social Security check, or her Medicare–and before you raise taxes–you have to convince voters you’ve really gotten the message to the GS-13s and 14s that we are in austere times and they can’t waste a dime. It’s serious! No funny business! … This is a message Obama has pointedly failed to get across. Go to Washington–it’s still Fat City and people are living like it’s Fat City, in part because they know D.C.-based columnists will always argue ‘the money’s in entitlements’ and defend them against cuts.

Glenn Reynolds from Instapundit chimes in:

D.C. — now not just “Hollywood for ugly people,” but “Hollywood for ugly people who party on your dime!”

MORE: Reader Rick Giovanelli writes: “Hmm, packed, expensive restaurants in the Capitol? People there spending lavishly and being out of touch with the rest of the country which is toughing out rough economic conditions? Pretty sure my daughter just saw a movie about this. Can’t think of the name of it, though. If only it had gotten some publicity recently.”

An Anti American Energy Policy

Is it any wonder why people feel that the present administration is determined to ruin us and drive our economy into the ground ?? You'll be paying $4 a Gallon for gas very soon and that is over 100% more than when Obama took office in January 2009.

According to the Wall Street Journal, while speaking on “the sidelines of a smart grid conference in Washington,” Energy Secretary Steven Chu had this gem when speaking about you, the American people, and your embrace of his green jobs and global warming agenda:

" The American public…just like your teenage kids, aren’t acting in a way that they should act. The American public has to really understand in their core how important this issue is."

Once again, the Obama Administration has decided to name call, condescend and demean the opposition rather than defend their policies which most Americans rightly understand would kill the economy, kill jobs and do nothing to help the environment.

If this isn't enough of a reason to vote out the present administration, I don't know what would be. This is the direct opposite of what our elected leaders should be doing as the extra $$$ spent on gasoline limits the ability of Americans to purchase the other things needed. This is what we get when we elect a candidate who should never been considered for the highest office in the land.

The answer is: Spend less. Period.

Well, Duh. This is a no brainer. We need to spend less or all we do is push the problem off to the next year....We are out of time or ability to push things off any further.

The POLS need to cut the spending and allow our country to get back on the right path.

The answer is: Spend less. Period.
The authors write that Washington needs to stop ducking the tough decisions.

By GROVER G. NORQUIST & MIKE NEEDHAM & PHIL KERPEN & AL CARDENAS & DUANE PARDE & DANIEL J. MITCHELL 11/10/11

The federal government is spending too much money. Our nation has made more than $63 trillion in unfunded promises, to be paid for by future generations. It poses an existential threat to America’s dynamic, pro-growth economy. The solution to this problem is to reduce federal spending.

This is a fairly straight-forward point – but one that is lost in our nation’s capital, where tough choices are avoided on a daily basis.

A mechanism for dealing with our nation’s fiscal problems was set-up this summer: the supercommittee. Some are now suggesting that instead of addressing the real problems our nation faces — by reducing government spending — the supercommittee should recommend tax increases to meet its deficit reduction targets.

Tax increases are what politicians always do when they are not willing to govern—that is, to cut and reform government spending. The problem, of course, is that tax hikes crowd out and displace spending reform.

In the 2010 midterm elections, Americans rose up in opposition to runaway spending and elected a majority in the House who were publicly committed to opposing any and all tax increases and determined to cut the deficit by reining in federal spending. This new majority is now being put to the test.

Advocates of the supercommittee raising taxes instead of reducing spending by $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years (their deficit reduction mandate) have put forward several unserious arguments.

First, they say, “let’s compromise.” Let’s be balanced, they insist, and promise to cut some spending and raise some taxes. Having pushed spending way up, they now want to pretend this spending is normal or, at least, inevitable. It isn’t.

The solution isn’t to pay for the spending with tax hikes, but to spend much less. Why should anyone be asked to pay more taxes just so Washington can continue to overspend? The tax hike crowd has no answer.

What’s more, there are good reasons to be wary – we’ve been down this road before. In 1982, President Ronald Reagan was promised three dollars of spending cuts for every dollar of tax hikes. The tax hikes were real. But spending — in real dollar terms — went up, not down.

In 1990, the same trick was played out — this time at the expense of President George H.W. Bush and the American people. A two-to-one promise brought higher taxes and higher spending. When tax hikes are on the table, the talk about spending cuts evaporates. Oddly enough, the tax hikes remain.

The second argument is: “We won’t raise tax rates – we will just reduce deductions and credits.” Nonsense. Closing tax loopholes is all well and good. But doing so to raise revenues is just as much a tax hike as raising tax rates.

The tax hike crowd is trying to confuse tax hikes with tax reform. In fact, closing tax loopholes to raise revenue is ultimately antithetical to tax reform — there would then be less revenue available to use to cut tax rates.

The third argument is that we must raise taxes to avoid sequestration if the supercommittee fails. This argument demonstrates how misguided it is to legislate in a climate of hysteria. Politicians should not acquiesce, out of fear, to bad public policy.

Taxes, domestic spending and defense spending should be debated on their merits. Members of Congress should do their jobs and set them each appropriately.

Any congressman who wants to keep his promise to voters to oppose tax increases; to fight for lower spending, and to keep the hope alive for meaningful tax reform in the future must vote “no” on any supercommittee deal that contains a tax increase.

This tells Washington that the only way to get our country back on track is to rein in out-of-control spending.

Grover Norquist is the president of Americans for Tax Reform. Mike Needham is the chief executive officer of Heritage Action for America. Phil Kerpen is vice president for policy of Americans for Prosperity. Al Cardenas is chairman of American Conservative Union. Duane Parde is the president of National Taxpayers Union. Daniel J. Mitchell is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute

The Myth of the underpaid public school teacher

The party-line in political circles from DEMS and Unions is we need to spend more on public education. Teachers are underpaid and we need more money for education.

Bull.

We spend more per student in the US than any other country and get less back as our students rank 25th in the world, behind countries like Hungary and Poland. Poland! Where they were under the Soviet system up until about 25 years ago.

The Unions and the cohorts in political circles like to use the image of an overworked teacher for political gain. In reality, teachers are important but no less important than other workers. Yes, they educate children and that is important but so is the doctor, grocery workers who provide you with fresh food etc., etc. Teachers have a rigged system of tenure which leaves them isolated from performance review or scrutiny. Our education system is failing but the game goes on.

It is time we made education better, and that does not start with more $$$ for a group of workers who enjoy better wages & benefits than any other sector in today's economy. We pay too much for the poor return we get and it starts with putting the educators (Adminstrators too) under a microscope. There has to be a better way of educating our children and stopping wasteful spending.


Public School Teachers Aren't Underpaid
Our research suggests that on average—counting salaries, benefits and job security—teachers receive about 52% more than they could in private business
By ANDREW G. BIGGS And JASON RICHWINE - Wall Street Journal

A common story line in American education policy is that public school teachers are underpaid—"desperately underpaid," according to Education Secretary Arne Duncan in a recent speech. As former first lady Laura Bush put it: "Salaries are too low. We all know that. We need to figure out a way to pay teachers more."

Good teachers are crucial to a strong economy and a healthy civil society, and they should be paid at a level commensurate with their skills. But the evidence shows that public school teachers' total compensation amounts to roughly $1.50 for every $1 that their skills could garner in a private sector job.

How could that be? First, consider salaries. Public school teachers do receive salaries 19.3% lower than similarly-educated private workers, according to our analysis of Census Bureau data. However, a majority of public school teachers were education majors in college, and more than two in three received their highest degree (typically a master's) in an education-related field. A salary comparison that controls only for years spent in school makes no distinction between degrees in education and those in biology, mathematics, history or other demanding fields.

Education is widely regarded by researchers and college students alike as one of the easiest fields of study, and one that features substantially higher average grades than most other college majors. On objective tests of cognitive ability such as the SAT, ACT, GRE (Graduate Record Examination) and Armed Forces Qualification Test, teachers score only around the 40th percentile of college graduates. If we compare teachers and non-teachers with similar AFQT scores, the teacher salary penalty disappears.

While salaries are about even, fringe benefits push teacher compensation well ahead of comparable employees in the private economy. The trouble is that many of these benefits are hidden, meaning that lawmakers, taxpayers and even teachers themselves are sometimes unaware of them.

Data on employee benefits from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), for example, do not include retiree health coverage, which for teachers is worth about an additional 10% of their salaries. Because of differing accounting rules between the public and private sectors, BLS data also make teachers' defined-benefit pensions appear only slightly more generous than the typical 401(k) plan found in the private sector.

In reality, a teacher who retired after 30 years of service with an annual salary of $40,000 might receive guaranteed annual pension benefits of about $20,330. Under a typical private 401(k) plan, a guaranteed annual benefit might be only around $4,450 (assuming the money is invested in U.S. Treasurys and the employee buys an annuity).

BLS data on paid leave for teachers count vacation days only during the school year, omitting summer and long holiday breaks. A valid pay comparison should include this extra time off, in which teachers can enjoy longer vacations or earn additional income.

Properly counted, a typical public school teacher with a salary of $51,000 would receive another $51,480 in present or future fringe benefits. A worker in private business with the same salary would receive around $22,185 in fringe benefits.

Finally, despite recent layoffs, teachers still have greater job security than workers in private businesses. While employment in education declined by 2.9% between September 2008 and July 2011, according to BLS data, overall private-sector employment declined by 4.4%. Moreover, from 2005 through 2010 the unemployment rate for public school teachers averaged 2.1%, versus 4.1% for private school teachers and 3.8% for occupations that some consider comparable, such as computer programmers and insurance underwriters.

Job security protects against the loss of compensation suffered by the unemployed, and it also protects a position in which total wages and benefits are on average above market levels. This job security is surely valuable.

Consider that one-fifth of the highest-performing public school teachers in Washington, D.C., recently declined to give up even part of their job security in exchange for base salary increases of up to $20,000. According to our model—which factors in the probability of becoming unemployed, the average duration of unemployment, the level of unemployment insurance benefits, and the risk aversion of public employees—job security is worth about an estimated extra 9% of compensation.

One important caveat: Our research is in terms of averages. The best public school teachers—especially those teaching difficult subjects such as math and science—may well be underpaid compared to counterparts in the private sector.

Nevertheless, most public school teachers would not earn more in private employment. According to our analysis of the Census Bureau's Survey of Income and Program Participation, the average person who moves into teaching receives a pay increase of almost 9%, while the average teacher who leaves for the private economy must take a pay cut of over 3%.

This is the opposite of what we would expect if teachers were underpaid. It also helps explain why more people seek teaching jobs—as measured through the number of teaching graduates and applications for teaching positions—than can possibly find them.

In short, combining salaries, fringe benefits and job security, we have calculated that public school teachers receive around 52% more in average compensation than they could earn in the private sector.

The compensation premium is especially relevant today, as states and localities struggle with budget deficits. Restraining the growth of teacher compensation—in particular, pension and retiree health benefits that outstrip what comparable private-sector workers receive—could help balance budgets and perhaps restore school resources lost to rising labor costs. Broader pay reform should give school administrators greater flexibility to reward the best or most-needed teachers with high salaries and benefits, while encouraging the least effective ones to improve or to leave the profession.

Effective reform, however, requires knowing all the facts about teacher pay. Policy makers and the public should not accept at face value that the typical teacher earns far less than he or she would in the private sector. The evidence points to a very different conclusion.

Mr. Biggs, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, and Mr. Richwine, a senior policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, are authors of the new paper, "Assessing the Compensation of Public School Teachers" (aei.org/paper/100259).

Spending " The little people's money "....easy for the Justice Department

Once again, we have those inside government acting as if there is an endless supply of $$$. To them, there is....it is your hard earned money and it is easy for them to spend as after all, it is "The little people's money" and that makes it sweeter for them.

The Justice Department personnel who are responsible for this should face the "justice" of being fired.


What Recession? Justice Department Spent Nearly Half a Million on Refreshments
Published September 20, 2011
FoxNews.com

If the 2008 financial crisis caused the nation to tighten its belt, the Justice Department didn’t get the memo.

The federal agency spent about $490,000 on food and beverages at 10 conferences, including $16 apiece for muffins, more than a dollar an ounce for coffee and $32 per person on snacks, according to a new report from the Justice Department’s inspector general.

The half-a-million-dollar tab represented more than 10 percent of the $4.4 million total cost of the events that were held between October 2007 and September 2009.

“Some conferences featured costly meals, refreshments, and themed breaks that we believe were indicative of wasteful or extravagant spending – especially when service charges, taxes, and indirect costs are factored into the actual price paid for food and beverages,” the report reads, citing a $76-per-person lunch at one workshop.

The inspector general made 10 recommendations to improve oversight and minimize conference costs, all of which were accepted by the Justice Department.

Republicans shook their head in disbelief.

"$16 muffins and $600,000 for event planning services are what make Americans cynical about government and why they are demanding change," said Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"The Justice Department appears to be blind to the economic realities our country is facing," he said. "People are outraged, and rightly so. The Inspector General's office just gave a blueprint for the first cuts that should be made by the (deficit-cutting) supercommittee."

The Justice Department implemented a new conference policy in April 2008 after a previous audit found wasteful spending at events held between October 2004 and September 2006. Among the examples were $53-per-person lunches and a $60,000 reception that served Swedish meatballs at $5 a piece.

In the September 2007 report, the inspector general said the agency had “few internal controls to limit the expense of conference planning and food and beverage costs at DOJ conferences.”

The latest report aimed to determine whether the new policy was working.

“Our assessment of food and beverage charges revealed that some DOJ components did not minimize conference costs as required by federal and DOJ guidelines,” the report reads.

In 2008 and 2009, the department hosted or participated in 1,832 conferences costing $121 million.

At a Washington, D.C., legal conference, the department spent $4,200 on 250 muffins -- or more than $16 apiece, the report said.

At another conference, the department's Office on Violence Against Women spent $65 per person at a lunch for 65 people. Coffee cost more than $1 an ounce. A snack break at the same conference cost $32 per person for Cracker Jack, popcorn and candy bars

SLICK MITT ROMNEY UPDATE - ROMNEY wants to spend up to $3 MIL of Utah's Tax $$$ to rig the primary system in his favor

SLICK MITT ROMNEY UPDATE

Looks like the editorial board of the Salt Lake Tribune sees right through the "shallow as piss on a flat rock" move by ROMNEY to gin up the primary system by trying to move the UTAH Primary at an estimated cost of $2.5 million to $3 million to Utah Taxpayers.

Well, after all, that is the little people's money and why should we care about wasting that??? There's plenty of where that came from after all. We'll just make them pay more...

Is this REALLY what you want to see? Another stuffed shirt with delusions of grandeur, preaching cost cutting to you out of one side of his mouth, while WASTING tax dollars to try & rig the primary system in his own favor.

We have been living under a " DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO " President for the past 2 1/2 years, the last thing we need is another.

To the citizens of UTAH, Tell SLICK MITT to take a flying leap into the Salt Lake as otherwise, he'll be hosing you down for a few million tax dollars that I would suspect are sorely needed elsewhere.

Don’t move primary
Editorial / Salt Lake Tribune

If individual Utah residents want to write a check to support the presidential campaign of Republican Mitt Romney, there is nothing to stop them.

But if Romney backers want the whole body of Utah taxpayers to cough up as much as $3 million to hold an early 2012 primary election, one that would serve no purpose other than to make Romney look good for about a third of the next 24-hour news cycle, that’s asking way too much.

Romney is said to be leaning on his many supporters in Utah political circles — prime among them Lt. Gov. Greg Bell, whose portfolio includes supervising the state’s elections — to move up the state’s presidential primary from late June to sometime in early spring.

The acceptable reason for such a move, which would require an act of the Legislature, would be to make Utah more of a player in the nominating process by drawing the attention of all of the candidates at a point when it still matters.

But the real reason for such a shift would be so Romney could maximize his standing as the favorite candidate of Utah Republican voters and embarrass one of his chief rivals, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman. Polls show that Romney now outpolls Huntsman among Utah Republicans by a margin of more than 2-1.

Bearding the lion in his own den, which is how Romney would spin a Utah primary victory over Huntsman, would clearly be of more value to Romney if it happened in early March, when the nomination will likely still be up for grabs, rather than June 26, when one, or both, of the candidates with Utah links may already have been eliminated.

Now the state’s presidential primary is set for the same day as the primaries for those seeking state office. It’s a lot cheaper that way. Estimates for having a separate election just for the presidential hopefuls run from $2.5 million to $3 million.

That is money that would be hard to find, and harder to justify, in such tight fiscal times.

It is also doubtful that it would really boost Utah’s profile that much. Other GOP hopefuls would be unlikely to spend much time or money here, knowing that they’d be all but lost in the Mitt vs. Jon tug o’ war.

It’s too late now. But anyone who really wanted to make Utah a destination for presidential candidates would have long ago gotten behind a plan from four years ago to unite with New Mexico, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Nevada and Colorado for a real Western States Primary. That would truly offer candidates a trove of delegates worth pursuing.

Of course, that was Jon Huntsman’s idea.
The Salt Lake Tribune.

While BOSTON is home of World Class Sports Teams, it is also home to World Class HACKS/POLS/ GREEDY UNION TYPES

While the RED SOX and BRUINS show all that BOSTON is home of WORLD CLASS TEAMS, we have the other side of what happens in our state that shows we have some WORLD CLASS IDIOTS too....

THREE ARTICLES say it all when it comes to MASSACHUSETTS HACKS/POLS/GREEDY UNION TYPES - all three of these stories are reported on one day...

T UNION TREASURER steals $250K from fellow Union members to afford himself a very nice lifestyle...still has T job even though he has admitted he took the cash...This type of fool got his job because he knew somebody...turns out they trusted this greedy idiot and paid the price...

A WESTERN MASS HACK (aged 38) gets a PATRONAGE position from GOV. DEVAL " SPEND IT ALL" PATRICK that guarantees him $110K pay & benefits for life....likely up to 50 years as he is retiring at age 38....Deval Patrick supporter ya know.....

And just when you thought it couldn't get worse, GOV. DEVAL " SPEND-IT-ALL " PATRICK decides he doesn't care what voters think, he is giving 4000 State Managers a RAISE not caring that this will pull $10 MILLION dollars MORE out of the budget where the levels of funding for programs are at drastic levels already....


SO to sum up.... We have a Union Thief (Isn't that redunant?), Hackorama retiree robbing you for 50 years worth of $$$ for almost NO WORK and an Idiot Governor who hasn't got a clue - Did I miss anything???

Sad to say, no I didn't.

T union tells court ex-officer stole dues
Local 600 says its treasurer took $250,000
By Eric Moskowitz - BOSTON GLOBE
Globe Staff / June 10, 2011

The MBTA Inspectors Union says its former treasurer stole $250,000 from membership dues, withdrawing cash, writing checks to himself, and spending freely with a union credit card.

Officials at the union, known as Local 600, say they discovered the alleged theft only after Brian C. Sheehy ran unsuccessfully for the union presidency, then scrambled in vain to retain his old post and avoid turning over bank records to the new officers of Local 600.

The union’s allegations have come to light in US Bankruptcy Court, where Sheehy filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection one day before he was scheduled to be tried by a union tribunal seeking to recover the money.

The union has asked Bankruptcy Judge Frank J. Bailey to prevent Sheehy from using Chapter 7 to avoid repaying Local 600. And the US trustee charged with administering the bankruptcy has asked the judge to dismiss Sheehy’s filing altogether, saying his $70,000 income from the MBTA is too much for him to qualify for Chapter 7 protection.

Sheehy, a 41-year-old Quincy resident, still works for the T as an inspector on the Red Line, because he has not been accused of stealing from the MBTA and because the matter is pending, said a spokesman for the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority.

Sheehy then paid the union $93,000, apparently hoping the new officers would accept the sum and drop the matter, according to the filings.

When that failed, he filed for bankruptcy and made what Local 600 says were legal maneuvers to avoid repayment and shelter assets that include a vacation home in Dennisport that he shared with his wife, an executive at an investment firm.

The alleged theft has roiled Local 600, the union that represents the 320 inspectors and chief inspectors who work in the MBTA subway and bus system, managing stations, responding to emergencies, helping customers, and providing a uniformed presence.

Those inspectors contribute 1.5 percent of their pay for union dues, money that was supposed to fund organizing, labor negotiations, member defense in job disputes, and other expenses, but much of which is now missing. The union, run by a full-time president and volunteer board, lacked financial safeguards and other controls to discourage theft.

The Sheehys have apparently separated. Sheehy, who is due back in court June 28, told the court last month that he had moved from their four-bedroom home in Quincy to an apartment nearby.

Eric Moskowitz can be reached at emoskowitz@globe.com.


Who says $100 doesn’t buy what it used to?
By Howie Carr - BOSTON HERALD
Friday, June 10, 2011

This time it’s an anonymous back-bencher state rep, Chris Speranzo of Pittsfield. He’s been handed extremely early retirement as the next clerk magistrate of the Pittsfield District Court for approximately $110,000 a year.

Not bad for a 38-year-old hack who can now hold this no-heavy-lifting job for the rest of his layabout life. Did I mention he’s a Democrat?

Speranzo will be replacing a guy who’s been gone for two years, one Leo Evans. I’ll bet you didn’t even know Evans was gone. I’m also guessing you never heard of this Speranzo character until this moment. I wonder whether he voted for the very ethical Sal DiMasi for speaker in 2007.

In 2006, Speranzo donated a C-Note to Deval Patrick. Not a bad return on investment — $100 in return for, according to actuarial tables, more than $5 million over the next 50 years or so. And that doesn’t include the free health insurance, plus all the extra dough the clerk magistrate can collect from OKing bail for the local perps.

What’s hard to figure is just how little the kleptocracy cares about pretending to observe the niceties of those proverbial nationwide searches. The Dreaded Private Sector continues to wither, and yet one after another, these worthless unemployable Democrat coatholders are taken care of, one way or another.

Consider the last couple of months. The wife of the state rep from Hingham: a judgeship. The defeated Democrat candidate for sheriff of Bristol County: a $103,000-a-year job as a college hack. The 78-year-old retired senator from Bristol county: a $120,000-a-year sinecure at a different community college.

I called Mary-Ellen Manning, the Democrat governor’s councilor who in a few weeks will have a chance to vote on this Sal DiMasi acolyte.

“He is 38 years old — odds are he’ll be collecting a paycheck for 50 years,” she said. “A half century. This is supposed to be a justice-delivery system, not a jobs program for Deval’s contributors. It’s a closed shop. You only have a chance if you’re on the team. Something is really wrong out west.”

Speranzo did not return a call yesterday seeking a comment.


Deval Patrick raises eyebrows, ire
By Hillary Chabot - BOSTON HERALD
Friday, June 10, 2011 -

Lawmakers and unions slammed Gov. Deval Patrick yesterday for triggering a pay-raise bonanza to the tune of nearly $10 million with a 3 percent salary hike for as many as 4,000 state managers — even as Bay State residents face frozen salaries and unemployment.

“There are people in the private sector who haven’t seen a raise in years. Most people feel lucky if they have a job,” said outraged state Rep. James Miceli (D-Wilmington).

Jay Gonzalez, Patrick’s finance and administration secretary who released the news of the pay raise, argued that state managers haven’t gotten a raise since July 2007.

It’s do as they say, not as they do,” said Steve Killion, president of the Cambridge Police Patrolman’s Union. “It’s unfortunately the way (Patrick) does business. He does what he wants and he hurts all the hard-working people in this state.”

Shortly after the administration announced the raises yesterday, the state Senate hit back, unanimously approving an amendment that would force the governor to control his personnel costs and detail efforts to control spending on staffing.

“This perfectly illustrates the point as to why you have to have reporting on spending and accountability,” said Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester), who filed the amendment. “You can imagine our surprise — he’s issuing a broad-based pay increase when we’re in the middle of a conference committee and struggling with serious (budget) cuts.”

Senators are trying to close a $1.9 billion budget gap — made worse by a cutoff of federal stimulus funds. Students at the University of Massachusetts will be whacked with a 7.5 percent fee hike while cities and towns took a $65 million cut in state funding. The pay hike, set to go into effect on July 1, comes only months after Patrick ousted MassDevelopment director Robert Culver for considering pay hikes at the quasi-public authority.

Sad news....More Americans work for the government than in manufacturing, farming, fishing, forestry, mining and utilities combined..

THIS is not a good trend...and based on POTUS' actions, it will only get worse.

We've Become a Nation of Takers, Not Makers More Americans work for the government than in manufacturing, farming, fishing, forestry, mining and utilities combined.. By STEPHEN MOORE - WSJ.com

If you want to understand better why so many states—from New York to Wisconsin to California—are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, consider this depressing statistic: Today in America there are nearly twice as many people working for the government (22.5 million) than in all of manufacturing (11.5 million). This is an almost exact reversal of the situation in 1960, when there were 15 million workers in manufacturing and 8.7 million collecting a paycheck from the government.

It gets worse. More Americans work for the government than work in construction, farming, fishing, forestry, manufacturing, mining and utilities combined. We have moved decisively from a nation of makers to a nation of takers. Nearly half of the $2.2 trillion cost of state and local governments is the $1 trillion-a-year tab for pay and benefits of state and local employees. Is it any wonder that so many states and cities cannot pay their bills?

Every state in America today except for two—Indiana and Wisconsin—has more government workers on the payroll than people manufacturing industrial goods. Consider California, which has the highest budget deficit in the history of the states. The not-so Golden State now has an incredible 2.4 million government employees—twice as many as people at work in manufacturing. New Jersey has just under two-and-a-half as many government employees as manufacturers. Florida's ratio is more than 3 to 1. So is New York's.

Even Michigan, at one time the auto capital of the world, and Pennsylvania, once the steel capital, have more government bureaucrats than people making things. The leaders in government hiring are Wyoming and New Mexico, which have hired more than six government workers for every manufacturing worker.

Now it is certainly true that many states have not typically been home to traditional manufacturing operations. Iowa and Nebraska are farm states, for example. But in those states, there are at least five times more government workers than farmers. West Virginia is the mining capital of the world, yet it has at least three times more government workers than miners. New York is the financial capital of the world—at least for now. That sector employs roughly 670,000 New Yorkers. That's less than half of the state's 1.48 million government employees.

Don't expect a reversal of this trend anytime soon. Surveys of college graduates are finding that more and more of our top minds want to work for the government. Why? Because in recent years only government agencies have been hiring, and because the offer of near lifetime security is highly valued in these times of economic turbulence. When 23-year-olds aren't willing to take career risks, we have a real problem on our hands. Sadly, we could end up with a generation of Americans who want to work at the Department of Motor Vehicles.

The employment trends described here are explained in part by hugely beneficial productivity improvements in such traditional industries as farming, manufacturing, financial services and telecommunications. These produce far more output per worker than in the past. The typical farmer, for example, is today at least three times more productive than in 1950.

Where are the productivity gains in government? Consider a core function of state and local governments: schools. Over the period 1970-2005, school spending per pupil, adjusted for inflation, doubled, while standardized achievement test scores were flat. Over roughly that same time period, public-school employment doubled per student, according to a study by researchers at the University of Washington. That is what economists call negative productivity.

But education is an industry where we measure performance backwards: We gauge school performance not by outputs, but by inputs. If quality falls, we say we didn't pay teachers enough or we need smaller class sizes or newer schools. If education had undergone the same productivity revolution that manufacturing has, we would have half as many educators, smaller school budgets, and higher graduation rates and test scores.

The same is true of almost all other government services. Mass transit spends more and more every year and yet a much smaller share of Americans use trains and buses today than in past decades. One way that private companies spur productivity is by firing underperforming employees and rewarding excellence. In government employment, tenure for teachers and near lifetime employment for other civil servants shields workers from this basic system of reward and punishment. It is a system that breeds mediocrity, which is what we've gotten.

Most reasonable steps to restrain public-sector employment costs are smothered by the unions. Study after study has shown that states and cities could shave 20% to 40% off the cost of many services—fire fighting, public transportation, garbage collection, administrative functions, even prison operations—through competitive contracting to private providers. But unions have blocked many of those efforts. Public employees maintain that they are underpaid relative to equally qualified private-sector workers, yet they are deathly afraid of competitive bidding for government services.

President Obama says we have to retool our economy to "win the future." The only way to do that is to grow the economy that makes things, not the sector that takes things.

Mr. Moore is senior economics writer for The Wall Street Journal editorial page

" It was a recipe for waste, a scatter-gun approach that raised many public expectations, but in the end provided few achievements and fewer yet jobs"

Guess the idjit-in-charge and his administration full of fools got it wrong again......The CBO now estimates the cost of the Stimulus Plan was *more* than the OBOTS had previously estimated...

Wow....a real shocker eh?? And does it matter to them? No, after all, he & the rest of his ilk will be on the Federal Dole for life....while we (you,me, our children and their children, etc.) will be paying the bill for this foolishness for the rest of our combined lifetimes.....Talk about " Highway Robbery " ...You can't spend yourself out of a hole but these fools have wasted our National Treasure to line the pockets of their political allies and only succeeded in digging the hole deeper.

CBO raises its stimulus cost estimate, again
By Stephen Dinan

The Washington Times
8:02 p.m., Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Congress‘ chief scorekeeper has again raised the cost estimate of President Obama‘s two-year-old economic-stimulus program, calculating it will end up costing taxpayers $821 billion — or $34 billion more than originally projected.

And the economic boost from the added government spending is beginning to wear off, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said in a new report Wednesday. The CBO said that in the final three months of 2010, the stimulus was paying to keep between 1.3 million and 3.5 million people in jobs, both down from the peak recorded in the prior three-month period.

The drop was expected, since the biggest chunk of stimulus money was spent out during fiscal year 2010, which ended Sept. 30.

Mr. Obama‘s stimulus program turned two years old last week, but it remains a thorny political issue.

House Republicans sought to cancel several billion dollars in unspent stimulus money as part of the $61 billion in spending cuts they passed Saturday, and Republicans on both sides of the Capitol have introduced legislation to try to reclaim other money or audit what was actually spent.

“The Department of Energy alone had $39 billion in stimulus money — all, I might say, borrowed — $9 billion more than its entire budget. It was a recipe for waste, a scatter-gun approach that raised many public expectations, but in the end provided few achievements and fewer yet jobs,” said Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, New Jersey Republican, in the debate last week.

But Democrats said the remaining stimulus funds should be spent.

“There are people who are now at their 99th level of not being able to get employed and get unemployment insurance. They need these jobs,” said Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas Democrat, during the floor debate.

Estimates for the actual cost of the stimulus have changed dramatically, rising from the initial $787 billion price tag to reach $862 billion, then falling to $814 billion and now ticking back up to $821 billion.

The increased overall 10-year cost of the stimulus comes mostly from higher Medicaid spending in 2010 and a higher payout of refundable tax credits in 2011, CBO analysts said.

© Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Certainties in Life - Death and Obama's FY2012 Budget: Taxes, Taxes, and More Taxes

There's a certain irony that POTUS released his Fiscal year 2012 Budget today....It was his "love letter" to our money.....as he intends to try & take more of it from us for his spending.

You'll hear a lot of political wrangling about the subject BUT when the deficit runs to an all-time high on his watch, he OWNS this one.

The subject of Death & taxes is nothing new....here is some history on the phraseology:

Meaning

A rather fatalistic and sardonic proverb. It draws on the actual inevitability of death to highlight the difficulty in avoiding the burden of taxes.

Origin

Several famous authors have uttered lines to this effect. The first was Daniel Defoe, in The Political History of the Devil, 1726:

"Things as certain as death and taxes, can be more firmly believed."

Benjamin Franklin (1706-90) used the form we are currently more familiar with, in a letter to Jean-Baptiste Leroy, 1789, which was re-printed in The Works of Benjamin Franklin, 1817:

"'In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes."

Another thought on the theme of death and taxes is Margaret Mitchell's line from her book Gone With the Wind, 1936:

"Death, taxes and childbirth! There's never any convenient time for any of them."


SO....let's look at the updated version of this game, courtesy of the "Empty Suit" who presently resides in the Oval Office. Just for reference, here's a shot of the clock that keeps track of it for you from this weekend....the totals are higher (as you read this)

Obama's FY2012 Budget:
Taxes, Taxes, and More Taxes
From Ryan Ellis on Monday, February 14, 2011 12:00 PM
WWW.ATR.ORG

President Obama released his budget this morning. Rather than focusing on Washington’s over-spending problem, the budget calls for higher taxes on families and small businesses to pay for even more government spending. Under the Obama budget, tax revenues will grow from 14.4% of GDP in 2011 to 20% of GDP in 2021. By comparison, the historical average is only 18% of GDP.


Tax hike lowlights include:

•Raising the top marginal income tax rate (at which a majority of small business profits face taxation) from 35% to 39.6%. This is a $709 billion/10 year tax hike

•Raising the capital gains and dividends rate from 15% to 20%

•Raising the death tax rate from 35% to 45% and lowering the death tax exemption amount from $5 million ($10 million for couples) to $3.5 million. This is a $98 billion/ten year tax hike

•Capping the value of itemized deductions at the 28% bracket rate. This will effectively cut tax deductions for mortgage interest, charitable contributions, property taxes, state and local income or sales taxes, out-of-pocket medical expenses, and unreimbursed employee business expenses. A new means-tested phaseout of itemized deductions limits them even more. This is a $321 billion/ten year tax hike

•New bank taxes totaling $33 billion over ten years

•New international corporate tax hikes totaling $129 billion over ten years

•New life insurance company taxes totaling $14 billion over ten years

•Massive new taxes on energy, including LIFO repeal, Superfund, domestic energy manufacturing, and many others totaling $120 billion over ten years

•Increasing unemployment payroll taxes by $15 billion over ten years

•Taxing management capital gains in an investment partnership (“carried interest”) as ordinary income. This is a tax hike of $15 billion over ten years


•A giveaway to the trial lawyers—not letting companies deduct the cost of punitive damages from a lawsuit settlement. This is a tax hike of $300 million over ten years

•Increasing tax penalties, information reporting, and IRS information sharing. This is a ten-year tax hike of $20 billion.

Add it all together, and this budget is a ten-year, $1.5 trillion tax hike over present law. That’s $1.5 trillion taken out of the economy and spent on government instead of being used to create jobs.

The “tax relief” in the budget is mostly just an extension of present law, and also some refundable credit outlay spending in the tax code. There is virtually no new tax relief relative to present law in the President’s budget.

Read more: http://www.atr.org/obamas-fy-budgetbr-taxes-more-a5844##ixzz1DxwOe04i

NJ Governor - "Sick leave is for when you're sick- It's not supposed to be a second taxpayer-funded retirement payment."

Our man in New Jersey strikes again at the rigged systems that reward the feckless hacks that are on the state employment rolls - Limiting how they can rig the system in their favor and cutting the WASTE that has been allowed for far too long....

NOW, if we can only get someone like him into the Massachusetts State House....we tried but POTUS' Buddy SPEND-IT-ALL Deval Patrick got reelected by the DEMS and Unions....The economic crisis might force Deval's hand but he is a "tool" for the unions so we will keep paying idiot hacks in Massachusetts, even when they don't deserve the extra pay they will help themselves to.....Greedy Bastards.


NJ gov. signs law capping pay through arbitration
By David Porter
Associated Press / December 21, 2010

WAYNE, N.J.—Gov. Chris Christie signed a bill Tuesday that caps increases to police and firefighter pay awarded through arbitration, a measure he called the most important of the proposals in his so-called toolkit to help towns control costs.

Tweet Be the first to Tweet this!Yahoo! Buzz ShareThis With Democratic Senate President Stephen Sweeney looking on, Christie hailed the passage of the bill as a testament to bipartisan cooperation.

"We've proven over the last year that Republicans and Democrats can get things done together," he said. "Mayors have been yelling and screaming for these kinds of reforms for years."

The bill caps salary awards, including longevity pay and automatic step increases, for police and firefighters at 2 percent when their unions engage arbitrators to settle contracts.

It also fast-tracks the arbitration process by giving arbitrators a 45-day window to rule on disputes and limiting the appeal process to 30 days. In addition, arbitrators' pay will be capped at $1,000 per day or $7,500 per case, whichever sum is lower.

Christie said Tuesday that some cases in arbitration have dragged on for years, and that fear of excessive arbitration awards has hampered some towns' ability to conduct effective contract negotiations.

"Arbitration works when it's balanced," said Sweeney, who is an organizer for the International Association of Ironworkers. "But the system has gotten out of whack over the last 20 years."

Pension and health care costs are not included in the cap. Christie said the cap will lapse in April 2014, at which time lawmakers will review its effects and consider modifications.

"This is the most significant individual bill in the toolkit," Christie said.

Municipalities have been clamoring for tools to help them control costs since the Legislature approved -- and Christie signed -- a 2 percent cap on annual property tax increases that goes into effect Jan. 1.

Christie said residents could see a difference in their tax bills by August, but that the effect likely won't be seen until the end of 2011 or beginning of 2012.

"It's one of the major issues we're dealing with," Hoboken Mayor Dawn Zimmer said after the signing. "This gives us the tools going forward to make sure it's fair for the residents of the city of Hoboken and of New Jersey."

The governor said another primary target is sick leave policies for public employees, some of whom routinely get tens of thousands of dollars in unused sick time when they retire. Christie noted a case in Parsippany in which four police officers reportedly were due a total of $900,000 upon retirement.

Christie signed a bill this year that limits state employees to receiving $15,000, and he said Tuesday a similar measure in the Legislature for school, government and public safety workers needs to be toughened.

"Sick leave is for when you're sick," he said. "It's not supposed to be a second taxpayer-funded retirement payment."

Politics as usual in Massachusetts - Governor "Spend-it-all Deval" Patrick is packing his bags...for out of state travel....right after re-election

Massachusetts is home to POTUS' best buddy, Gov. Deval " Spend-it-all" Patrick (Governor bought himself a new Cadillac upon getting elected with TAXPAYERS funds, earning himself the nickname of "Cadillac Deval" ).....These old buddies who have very similar out look on things....They both pander to the Unions, both use issues of race when it suits them politically, feel that your tax money is theirs to squander on their political hack buddies and (wait for it...) like to write books about their favorite subject - THEMSELVES.

POTUS has TWO autobiographies.....Governor Doofus had to write one as he likely felt that he had to try to keep up....So what would a newly re-elected Governor do?? Work on education reform, pension reform? Making state government more responsive to the citizens?? Eliminate wasteful spending??? Noooooooo....he is planning on Globetrotting, pimping his book and doing anything BUT being the Governor that is needed for the state of Massachusetts......pissa.

Well I am NOT surprised as Political Birds-of-a-Feather flock together....and these two idjits are a pair of real Dodo Birds.....Hopefully to soon be politically extinct. Potus first in 2012 and Gov. Doofus in 2014.....

This must be for Deval's version of the " World Apology Tour" just like his buddy the President.

Heaven help us....please.


The taxi’s waitin’
By Brian McGrory
Globe Columnist / January 5, 2011

It was with great relief that I saw the headline on Boston.com yesterday that our excellent governor, Deval Patrick, said he would be getting out of the State House and traveling more in his second term.

Lawrence continues to teeter on the edge. New Bedford, Fall River, and Springfield have unemployment rates of 13 percent or higher. People from Pittsfield to Provincetown are fearful of rising taxes and jettisoned government services. And seeing the governor constantly in their communities, especially this soothing and thoughtful governor, will go a long way toward rallying the citizenry toward better things.

And then — gulp — I kept reading. Ends up, he’s not talking about traveling around the state. He’s talking about traveling out of state, even out of the country, on economic trade missions, presidential campaign trips, and to promote his upcoming book.

In retrospect — and with a nod to Peter, Paul and Mary — maybe Patrick should have made his campaign slogan: “All my bags are packed, I’m ready to go.’’

Even better, picture a rally with the state parole board singing, “There’s so many times I’ve let you down.’’ Then Lieutenant Governor Tim Murray offers: “Hold me like you’ll never let me go.’’

All together now: “I’m a leavin’ on a jet plane. Don’t know when I’ll be back again. Oh babe, I hate to go.’’

This is degenerating into something far less than we hoped, this reelection, a slippage not born of the inexperience that Patrick had four years ago, but of a seeming arrogance that is profoundly misplaced. Some trusted adviser should call Patrick every morning with a reminder that more than half the electorate voted against him on Election Day.

Already, the governor has spent the bulk of November either on understandable vacations or holiday trips. Before and after, though, his public schedule has been noticeably absent of the kinds of public events that were a staple during his yearlong campaign.

And now, to casually say that you’re going to take to the skies — presumably at the expense of the streets — to help your state, something has gone wrong. Couple this with his refusal to release the names of the people and entities that are funding Thursday’s inaugural celebrations until after it’s over, and those sounds you’re hearing are alarms.

Patrick’s book, “A Reason to Believe: Lessons from an Improbable Life,’’ is going to be no small source of friction (I said friction, not fiction) when it’s published in April. Broadway Books doesn’t pay $1.35 million for a memoir and not expect the author to do a full-out tour and media campaign.

You can already see it, the jobless rates still hovering in the 12 to 13 percent range in the industrial cities, the murder tally in Boston heading for another year over 70, and our governor live from New York with Meredith Vieira on the Today show or signing at a Barnes & Noble in Chicago. Remember us, the voters?

The governor’s advisers do what they often do when anyone dares question him. They act shocked that we can’t understand the critical work he performs by recruiting businesses that will save the Massachusetts economy.

The big problem is, we’ve never needed Patrick more at home. Beacon Hill is an unholy mess. The state budget is facing major shortfalls. Services that have already been slashed will be cut yet again.

Patrick should be wrangling more from public employee unions. He should be reforming the unwieldy human service agencies. He should be further streamlining business regulations. And he should be constantly checking in with the businesses we already have, seeing what it is that they need to prosper and grow.

He wants to take the occasional trip to China or Brazil or a Vegas trade show — sure. But please, governor, not an endless itinerary of book promotions, presidential campaign stops, and trade missions.

The rest of us will be singing, “Already I’m so lonesome I could die.’’

Brian McGrory is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at mcgrory@globe.com.

© Copyright 2011 Globe Newspaper Company

One-term to be President spends tax money like water - " not since the days of the Pharaohs has a head of state travelled in such expensive grandeur"

All Presidents go on Foreign Trips overseas but REALLY? Did he have to act like this right after the DEMS got a message from the Voters that their EXCESSIVE SPENDING was NOT what we need.....must be nice to be POTUS and not care what the voters think....Can you say ONE-TERM PRESIDENT???

You might like to think this kind of article was from FOX News.....nope - The BRITS wrote this one.

Bomb-proof tunnel with air conditioning: Obama's security go to extraordinary measures for his tour of the Gandhi museum

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 3:08 PM on 6th November 2010

250 U.S. business executives with Obama on 'biggest ever trade mission'
$200million Asia trip cost denied but the President will have huge entourage

President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle arrived in India's commercial hub of Mumbai on Saturday, days after voters punished his Democrats in mid-term elections.

Probably not since the days of the Pharaohs or the more ludicrous Roman Emperors has a head of state travelled in such pomp and expensive grandeur as the President of the United States of America.

While lesser mortals – the Pope, Queen Elizabeth and so on – are usually happy to let their hosts handle most of the security and transport arrangements when they venture beyond their home shores, the United States creates a mini-America on the move to ensure that nothing is left to chance.

Obama arrives in India at the start of a ten-day tour of Asia. At the heart of the White House caravan is ‘The Beast’, a gigantic, ‘pimped-up’ General Motors Cadillac which security experts say is, short of an actual battle tank, probably the safest road vehicle on the planet.

But an outlandish car is only the start. Mr Obama will fly, of course, on Air Force One, the presidential private jumbo jet, which, boasting double beds and suites, is fitted out more like a luxury yacht. Some reports suggest it costs around $50,000 (£31,000) an hour to operate.


Of course threats can come from any direction, so a squadron of U.S. naval ships will patrol offshore. Some reports have claimed that 34 ships, including two aircraft carriers, will be involved (not far off the size of the Royal Navy’s entire Surface Fleet) but the White House has denied this.

The pair were greeted wtih flowers and gifts as they stepped off the plane

On land, as well as The Beast, Mr Obama’s entourage will travel in a fleet of 45 U.S.-built armoured limousines, half of which will be decoys. He will also travel with 30 elite sniffer dogs, mostly German Shepherds.

The White House has, according to some reports, booked the entire Taj Mahal Palace Hotel in Mumbai, the city’s most luxurious. It is not uncommon for the grander heads of state to reserve a floor or two, but a whole hotel is unprecedented. This hotel was the main target of the 2008 attacks by Pakistani militants which left 166 dead.


Republicans assert their power to a humbled Obama as Democrats eke out two more victories
More bad news, Mr President... Obama no longer 'world's most powerful man'
China warns a flood of new U.S. dollars could spark a fresh global economic crisis

As to the cost of all this, the White House will not reveal details – which has allowed Mr Obama’s political foes to bandy about sums including a widely-quoted $200 million (£123million) a day. Whatever the figure, it makes the costs associated with the Royal Train and the late Royal Yacht Britannia seem like small change.

It is also reported that a bomb-proof tunnel will be erected for Mr Obama ahead of his visit to Mani Bhavan - the Gandhi museum - on Saturday.

According to Daily News & Analysis, U.S. secret service agents visited the museum on Monday to plan Mr Obama's security during his tour.

They were accompanied by Mumbai Police officers and civic officials of the D ward where Mani Bhavan is located.

While they were inspecting the route and the buildings lining the path to the museum, U.S. security officers noticed a nearby skyscraper in the highly populated area that could pose a threat.

To the amazement of the Indians accompanying the U.S. agents, it was apparently decided to erect a bomb-proof over-ground tunnel, which will be installed by U.S. military engineers in just an hour.

The kilometre-long tunnel will measure 12ft by 12ft and will have air-conditioning, close-circuit television cameras, and will be heavily guarded at every point.

It's being built so it is large enough for Mr Obama's cavalcade to pass through and will be manned at its entry and exit points.

Security measures: A kilometer long bomb-proof tunnel will reportedly be erected on the route to Mani Bhavan - the Gandhi Museum - ahead of President Obama's tour of the building on Saturday

The material that the tunnel would be made of has not been released but officials said that the structure would be dismantled immediately after Mr Obama and his party leaves the area.

Meanwhile the furore over reports that his Asia trip is going to cost taxpayers $200million a day has been dismissed by the Obama administration who called the figure 'wildly inflated'.

Last week an Indian government source told the NDTV channel: 'The huge amount of around $200million would be spent on security, stay and other aspects of the Presidential visit.'

The claim was immediately seized upon by talk show hosts and rights wing politicians who relished the opportunity to rub salt into Mr Obama's wounds saying the trip was a waste of government funds during the country's recession.

But the White House have refused to reveal the true cost of the three-day trip to Mumbai and Delhi.

'The numbers reported in this article have no basis in reality', White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said.

He added: 'Due to security concerns, we are unable to outline details associated with security procedures and costs, but it's safe to say these numbers are wildly inflated'.

The White House have said these claims are exaggerated but with any presidential trip, Mr Obama travels with a large number of staff and security detail includes his own aircraft and fleet of secure vehicles.

There will also be tens of thousands of Indian police and members of the military protecting the US delegation.

Secret Service agents travelled to India last week to address security concerns at locations the president is likely to visit.


Mr Obama will visit India, Indonesia, South Korea, Japan and China as part of a 10-day state tour of Asia.

Indian policemen await deployment orders outside the Taj Mahal hotel. President Obama is scheduled to stay at the hotel this weekend

The trip has sparked some criticism in the U.S., which is battling high unemployment and stagnant economic growth.

Mr Obama will spend three days in India, and will also visit New Delhi.

The White House will be hoping to secure more than $10 billion in new business for American firms in what is the biggest trade mission in US history.

Mr Obama is bringing 250 U.S. executives including GE chief Jeffrey Immelt and Honeywell's David Cote, which the U.S. India Business Council says is the largest such delegation to ever accompany a president on a foreign visit.

Lesson Today at School -- We canned teachers, got Federal Stimulus $$$ and now won't rehire anyone....Talk about a high crimes & treason

Lesson #1 - Public Employees are not going to share anything they are given.

The " I got mine" mentality is a CANCER that has ineffected all Municipalities and State governments....

Lesson # 2 - When DEMS in Congress & POTUS rush back to Washington DC to do anything, it can't be good. HASTE MAKES WASTE x 10

Lesson # 3 - We were just robbed. The Fat-Arse School Administrators got $10 BILLION of your tax-dollars to re-hire teachers. GUESS WHAT??? They aren't going to do it.....they want to KEEP the money in case they run into issues next year.....“We’re also looking at a pretty bad budget, so we may decide to hold all or some of the money for the next year,” said Steve Horowitz, assistant superintendent of personnel services at the Pomona Unified School District.

This is a CRIME - They took the money and now are basically telling you & me, SCREW YOU.....We'll spend this on my pet projects and still keep the Teacher/Student ratio as high as hell. "And what are you gonna do about it??" is likely the next thing they'll say to you.....

We never learn these lessons - We keep handing our money to people who only care about one thing - THEMSELVES.....Not education, not students, not Teachers.....They rewarded themselves.

And they got the Doofus-in-Charge in WASH DC to help them with the crime.

Color me " Not surpised in the least." Just Angry as hell.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Given Money, Schools Wait on Rehiring Teachers

Virginia Lee Hunter for The New York Times
By MOTOKO RICH
Published: August 17, 2010

The money for schools to rehire teachers, counselors and support workers is instead being set aside by school districts worried about cuts to come in the current school year
As schools handed out pink slips to teachers this spring, states made a beeline to Washington to plead for money for their ravaged education budgets. But now that the federal government has come through with $10 billion, some of the nation’s biggest school districts are balking at using their share of the money to hire teachers right away.

With the economic outlook weakening, they argue that big deficits are looming for the next academic year and that they need to preserve the funds to prevent future layoffs. Los Angeles, for example, is projecting a $280 million budget shortfall next year that could threaten more jobs.

“You’ve got this herculean task to deal with next year’s deficit,” said Lydia L. Ramos, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles Unified School District, the nation’s second-largest after New York City.

“So if there’s a way that you can lessen the blow for next year,” she said, “we feel like it would be responsible to try to do that.”

The district laid off 682 teachers and counselors and about 2,000 support workers this spring and was not sure it would be able to hire any of them back with the stimulus money. The district says it could be forced to cut 4,500 more people next year.

In New York City, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg committed to no teacher layoffs this year in exchange for not offering raises. A spokeswoman said the city’s budget had already taken the federal aid into account.

In New Jersey, where about 3,000 teachers were let go in May, Gov. Chris Christie’s administration worries that the federal aid will only forestall difficult decisions later, and it is unclear how much will be spent immediately.

“It’s a real double-edged sword,” said Michael Drewniak, a spokesman for the governor. “This money will not be there next year, and we’re not going to get back up to the funding that they had previously been used to.”

A $26 billion federal aid package, signed by President Obama on Aug. 10, allocates $10 billion for school districts to retain or rehire teachers, counselors, classroom aides, cafeteria workers, bus drivers and others — with the remainder of the money directed toward health care for the poor, emergency personnel and other state purposes.

The education measure requires states to distribute the money for the current school year, but allows school districts to spend it as late as September 2012. It also allows schools to roll back furlough days. The education department estimates it could salvage about 160,000 jobs.

“We can’t stand by and do nothing while pink slips are given to the men and women who educate our children or keep our communities safe,” President Obama said last week. “That doesn’t make sense.”

Though preserving jobs will be good for the economy, it will disappoint out-of-work teachers and parents who have been expecting a surge in rehiring. Many districts, like Kansas City, Kan., face the likelihood of midyear cuts, and administrators will count themselves lucky to save jobs. In the nation’s fifth-largest district in Clark County in Las Vegas, administrators are eager to hire some teachers, though they wonder what they will do when the federal money runs out.

“We’re a little wary about hiring people if we only have money for a year, but we know that’s the intent of this bill,” said Jeff Weiler, chief financial officer for Clark County schools.

In Texas, Republican Gov. Rick Perry so far has rejected the new federal education dollars. Should he relent, Houston’s superintendent, Terry B. Grier, proposes to use $40 million to $70 million of it to extend the school day and year, and to hire tutors. He does not plan to rehire 414 people — including quite a few certified teachers — laid off from the central office staff.

“We can’t treat this money as if it’s a supplement to a jobs bill,” Mr. Grier said. “I want to put people to work to help children.”

Still other obstacles loom for districts, not the least of which is timing. School has resumed in many districts in struggling states, including Arizona, California and Illinois. Assigning new teachers and juggling classrooms could disrupt students. In California, the budget picture is further clouded by the state’s failure to pass its own budget for the coming year.

Even administrators in districts that start school after Labor Day have only weeks to rearrange class rosters. And with classes largely set in many places, they might more quickly deploy the money by hiring support personnel, like those tutors in Houston.

In Arizona, where most schools opened this month, nonteaching employees are more likely to be recalled. “It would be hard to add teachers this year,” said Paul Senseman, a spokesman for Gov. Jan Brewer. “But the funds could be used on any school-level position like counselors, after-school programs, aides, nurses or coaches.”

Teachers’ unions are strongly urging districts to use the money right away to keep class sizes manageable and to reduce the jobless rolls. “The intent is to help districts avert layoffs now,” said Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers. “Kids don’t have a pause button.”

Joelle Beck, a 25-year-old high school English teacher in O’Fallon, Ill., received notice in March that she would be laid off at the end of the school year. She recently was hired to oversee an in-school suspension program for just over half the pay she received as a classroom teacher.
“When the economy first started going downhill,” Ms. Beck said, “I naïvely told my husband, ‘Well, they’re always going to need teachers.’ ”

With the national unemployment rate stuck at 9.5 percent and private sector companies hiring cautiously, local governments are an important source of jobs and consumer spending power.
State and local governments have let go 102,000 more employees than they have added in the last three months, and economists are concerned that with revenue so depressed, school payrolls could shrink more in coming months.

Though grateful for the aid, districts like Los Angeles are worried about how to create some budget stability year to year. In Pomona, Calif., the district has yet to decide whether to hire back about 68 teachers laid off in the spring.

“We’re also looking at a pretty bad budget, so we may decide to hold all or some of the money for the next year,” said Steve Horowitz, assistant superintendent of personnel services at the Pomona Unified School District. He added that the money might be used for bus drivers or custodians, or to roll back five furlough days for teachers.

Administrators in South Florida hope that an economic upturn, particularly in travel and tourism, will help close their future budget gap and are planning to bring back teachers. At the Broward County Public Schools, an operating deficit of at least $145 million is expected next school year.

“Frankly, from my perspective, it’s better to hire them now,” said James F. Notter, superintendent for Broward. Of the 1,300 pink slips to school workers in the spring, about 555 went to teachers. The district has recalled nearly 400 of them and now hopes to use the federal aid to rehire the remaining 155.

Teachers who spent the summer in limbo are painfully aware that at best, the new federal aid may be a temporary lifeline. Latravis Bernard, who was laid off last spring as a physical education teacher at an elementary school in Miramar, Fla., for the second year in a row, is holding out hope he will be recalled.

In the meantime, Mr. Bernard, a 33-year-old father of four, has accepted a post as a special education intern, for half his previous pay, at a different school in the Broward district.

“Even if I get brought back this year,” he said, “what’s going to happen next year? It’s really discouraging.”