The Republican Thread

[Soxbadger]

himm, if we find out that the cost is more like 5 million a day, will people will still argue that 200 million a day was a reasonable cost?

 

Well the premise of my argument is that the US is spending whatever they justifiably have to spend to make the trip and keep the President safe.

 

For the sake of not fighting numbers, I am just using the $200mil and saying "If that is true, then its okay". I dont have any information of whether its true or not, so I just feel that is a dead end road. I dont know the operational costs of Presidential travel, nor do I know what other countries spend on similar trips. $200mil may be completely out of line, $200mil may be average, there just is no way of knowing with out having the number in context.

 

Because I have no way of putting the number in context, I have no way of knowing whether or not spending $200mil is reasonable. Reasonable is defined by the circumstances, which I would have to know before commenting.

[StrangeSox]

I'm skeptical that $200 million is the operating costs for an aircraft carrier. (Are you including fuel? Salaries of the people on board? Cost of planes? What is included in that number? That sounds way too low)

 

Check the graphs starting on page 4, breakdowns for each ship. No total line, but you can guestimate:

 

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports.../MR948.appj.pdf

[mr_genius]

I dont think anyone believes that India will cut ties with America. But I dont think its a good idea to snub them either. I also dont believe that the US is spending money just to spend money, and that if it is $200mil a day, there is a justifiable reason.

 

What would be the incentive to spend lavishly in India for no reason?

 

And we rely on India too. India will become one of the largest markets in the world. The US will need the Indian markets. Its just not a risk Im willing to take. And because I doubt the US is spending money just to spend money, than the $200mil, $200bil or whatever it may be is worth it.

 

If I were to bet, I would guess Obama is pulling out all the stops because he is going to deny some requests and make some suggestions. India actually has some extremely protectionist economic policies. Obama will probably address that. India wants more H1b-L1 visas for their outsourcing operations, which Obama is probably going to deny. There was also a big fee increase on a visa (H1b) that they use. They want that fee gone, Obama will probably tell them the fee stays.

 

I don't see why he would spend a lot of money on the trip just to give them good news.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

I dont think anyone believes that India will cut ties with America. But I dont think its a good idea to snub them either. I also dont believe that the US is spending money just to spend money, and that if it is $200mil a day, there is a justifiable reason.

 

What would be the incentive to spend lavishly in India for no reason?

 

And we rely on India too. India will become one of the largest markets in the world. The US will need the Indian markets. Its just not a risk Im willing to take. And because I doubt the US is spending money just to spend money, than the $200mil, $200bil or whatever it may be is worth it.

 

Do the ends always justify the means? Seriously, you'd be ok with spending 200 billion on India? You know that the country is STILL losing jobs right?

[StrangeSox]

Do the ends always justify the means? Seriously, you'd be ok with spending 200 billion on India? You know that the country is STILL losing jobs right?

 

It's beyond my capabilities and knowledge, but you'd have to do some very detailed economic (fuzzy) and political (very fuzzy) analysis. It could very well be worth it to spend $200B now for returns over the next decade.

[Chisoxfn]

Because Mumbai was the site of a recent, large-scale terror attack and they were woefully incapable of responding to it? And it's a lot closer to areas of concern (read: Pakistan) than Britain?

That means larger security. I have a hard time believing that large number is all security. And I'm well aware of what went on in Mumbai, I got back from there a week ago.

[jasonxctf]

Do the ends always justify the means? Seriously, you'd be ok with spending 200 billion on India? You know that the country is STILL losing jobs right?

 

not sure if i'm misreading your comment or not, but each month of 2010 has had private sector job growth.

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

That means larger security. I have a hard time believing that large number is all security. And I'm well aware of what went on in Mumbai, I got back from there a week ago.

Security being 2500 people doesn't even make sense, that would actually make them more vulnerable.

 

I am somewhat skeptical of the 3000 number. If its bloated by business people, and if they aren't paying their own way for the most part, then I think it should be addressed.

 

I outright do not believe the $200M a day number, that's just ridiculous.

 

[StrangeSox]

That means larger security. I have a hard time believing that large number is all security. And I'm well aware of what went on in Mumbai, I got back from there a week ago.

 

Right, that number is pretty vague, and as far as I know, it's from the same source. Obviously we're not going to get a detailed breakdown of personnel, but let's just say I'm skeptical of that as well.

[Jenksismyhero]

not sure if i'm misreading your comment or not, but each month of 2010 has had private sector job growth.

 

20k more jobless claims this last week. I think in October there was a net loss of 95k in both public/private sector. The situation is not getting any better.

 

Edit: oops, sorry, i was reading the october 8, 2010 report for SEPTEMBER job results. Not sure about October, other than the 20k jobless claims that was reported today.

Edited November 4, 2010 by Jenksismybitch

[Soxbadger]

Do the ends always justify the means? Seriously, you'd be ok with spending 200 billion on India? You know that the country is STILL losing jobs right?

 

But it presupposes that spending money in India wont result in jobs for Americans. It also suggests that we can just use the 200bil to create jobs, which I would be absolutely fine with, the problem being that people are seemingly against large govt works projects that would employ people.

 

Would I be fine with the US cutting spending in military and other expenditures and instead creating large govt works projects to create jobs?

 

Of course I am. But that option isnt on the table.

 

In the grand scheme of things, money spent on India (imo) will be invaluable. That means that there is no price that I can put on having the goodwill of India.

 

And I actually wouldnt doubt that the numbers are in the thousands. Even on a small trip where its just Obama a lone you have to expect they are bringing 50-100. I mean I think he brings about that many to Chicago. So Id expect that in a country closer to an active war front with much less security to rely on, the numbers would grow quickly.

[NorthSideSox72]

20k more jobless claims this last week. I think in October there was a net loss of 95k in both public/private sector. The situation is not getting any better.

 

Edit: oops, sorry, i was reading the october 8, 2010 report for SEPTEMBER job results. Not sure about October, other than the 20k jobless claims that was reported today.

October monthly number to be announced tomorrow. Expected to see small net increase.

 

September was growth in private sector, but big drop in public sector due (I think) to census or some such thing.

 

[Chisoxfn]

And by the way, if we were spending that much, after being in Mumbai, I'd rather flat out give the people their a billion dollars and not make an apperance. Hows that for relationship building?

 

And I already know someone will say that isn't very repubilcan of you, but If we the billion is something we are going to spend (again if it is a real number), than to me that is a more productive use of it.

[Jenksismyhero]

October monthly number to be announced tomorrow. Expected to see small net increase.

 

September was growth in private sector, but big drop in public sector due (I think) to census or some such thing.

 

Partly. The report also cites "local government" job losses.

 

Even if there's a small net gain in October, we're still talking about a small numbers of jobs. Talk about a drop in the bucket. 50k job increase out of the what, 15 million unemployed?

[StrangeSox]

And by the way, if we were spending that much, after being in Mumbai, I'd rather flat out give the people their a billion dollars and not make an apperance. Hows that for relationship building?

 

And I already know someone will say that isn't very repubilcan of you, but If we the billion is something we are going to spend (again if it is a real number), than to me that is a more productive use of it.

 

At least in 2008, foreign aid to India was $89M.

 

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/US-sl...a-by-35/206710/

[NorthSideSox72]

Partly. The report also cites "local government" job losses.

 

Even if there's a small net gain in October, we're still talking about a small numbers of jobs. Talk about a drop in the bucket. 50k job increase out of the what, 15 million unemployed?

Oh things definitely still suck. I was just providing some color to the discussion of whether it sucks, sucks a lot, or really majorly sucks a lot.

 

[StrangeSox]

Partly. The report also cites "local government" job losses.

 

Even if there's a small net gain in October, we're still talking about a small numbers of jobs. Talk about a drop in the bucket. 50k job increase out of the what, 15 million unemployed?

the economy isn't growing fast enough to make a dent in unemployment, but it is definitely improved from where we were.

[NorthSideSox72]

the economy isn't growing fast enough to make a dent in unemployment, but it is definitely improved from where we were.

Yeah, this. Its been a slow, gradual improvement, which unfortunately means that businesses were hesitant to hire and expand.

 

The most encouraging thing I've seen recently is the fact that small businesses have so heavily ramped up spending and investment the past couple months. If that continues, that could be the first seed in getting more substantial growth. I think the opportunists and long range thinkers see how cheap lending is right now, and all the targeted tax credits out there, and realize that this is probably the ideal time to take a shot at something new.

 

[Balta1701]

October monthly number to be announced tomorrow. Expected to see small net increase.

 

September was growth in private sector, but big drop in public sector due (I think) to census or some such thing.

At this point most of the census layoffs finished over the summer. However, you're going to continue to see substantial public sector job cuts as stimulus aid to the states dries up. That is going to continue for probably at least the next year.

[BigSqwert]

Pardon if this has been posted already.

 

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/11...deo.php?ref=fpa

[StrangeSox]

Pardon if this has been posted already.

 

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/11...deo.php?ref=fpa

 

bulls***->rumor->fact conversion completed. Now we will forever see references to Obama's $200M India trip on conservative blogs and in article comment sections (where brains go to die).

 

A blog references a blog references a blog that referenced an anonymous low-level Indian official, but now we have a sitting Congresswoman criticizing the President on national TV over it as if it were 100% factual. It may as well be in right-wing land now.

 

For those looking for a WH response:

"The numbers reported in this article have no basis in reality. 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," Deputy White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told TPM in an e-mail.

[BigSqwert]

A user comment in the article I linked:

Did anyone ask her if the amount, since it was from an Indian source, wasn't in rupees instead of dollars? Maybe a little too Occam's Razor for the Drudges and Bachmanns of the world, but that was my first thought. And the exchange would put the amount at about $4.5 million a day.

[StrangeSox]

This has been, imo, an excellent of microcosm of how conservative talk radio/Fox News operates. Random, unconfirmed and/or fabricated rumors and speculation quickly turn to fact. Rumors and speculation are used to support other rumors. Claims are given credulity unless disproved.

 

I think this comment is vindicated, given the Bachmann ranting and it appearing on Hannity and Beck.

[BigSqwert]

I think this comment is vindicated, given the Bachmann ranting and it appearing on Hannity and Beck.

Without a doubt.

[NorthSideSox72]

For those looking for a WH response:

 

No doubt about that. I personally think it may not have been even worth responding to, but since the blogosphere has a hold of it, I suppose they had no choice. Should have been obvious it was a ridiculous number.

 

A user comment in the article I linked:

$4.5M sounds about right.