If our GDP were to drop, would you expect the presidency to cost less?
quote:I understand your point. Appearance is important in the political world. I just think there is a difference between maintaining a powerful, wealthy appearance and spending exorbitant amounts of money on frivolous things.
Security costs and questions aside, I think it's a bit unbecoming to suggest that our President should live and present himself like those of the second-rate powers. There's something to be said for prestige when it comes to diplomacy.
I'm sure I'll get a lot of flak in here for that little comment, but it's just how the world works.
Name me one thing Obama has done to show
Romney was most likely going to not take his POTUS 400K salary as POTUS.
Obama would never do the same even if he were a trillionaire.
I am sick to death of people dragging Bush into this.
Obama has no regards whatsoever on cutting down on spending in any way,shape or form. He is an arrogant POS.
Post evidence Obama is not a selfish elitist.
Pat Stryker, an Obama bundler who has donated, according to the Center For Responsive Politics, "$500,000 to Democrats over the last five years including $50,000 to President Obama's inaugural fund and $35,800 to his victory fund in 2008," was an original investor in Abound and visited the White House three times around the time the DOE loan was approved.
Abound subsequently filed for bankruptcy in June, and the government is refusing to release the company's trade secrets for fear they will reveal the Abound's solar panels were not up to par.
Todd Shepherd, an investigative reporter at a Libertarian think tank, told Fox News that former employees have told him the panels had "catastrophic" defects, such as a tendency to catch fire and much lower output than promised.
"Either people at Abound knew they couldn't produce a good product and they misled the DOE," Shepherd said. "Or the DOE knew how bad the product was and they were willing to overlook it simply because the politics of green energy is such a feel good political movement."
Weld County Attorney General Ken Buck is also investigating Abound separately from the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee investigation for potential securities fraud and consumer fraud.
According to a statement from Buck's office:
• Investigators are looking into possible instances of securities fraud based on allegations that Abound officials knew the company was selling defective products but solicited investments without telling investors about the deficiencies.
• A second allegation centers on a bridge loan received by Abound that was used to keep the company afloat until it received federally guaranteed loans. That investigation centers on whether lending institutions were misled when Abound applied for the bridge loan.
• A third allegation centers on possible consumer fraud and whether officials at Abound knowingly sold defective products to consumers.
The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:
Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
Solyndra ($535 million)*
Beacon Power ($43 million)*
Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
SunPower ($1.2 billion)
First Solar ($1.46 billion)
Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
Amonix ($5.9 million)
Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
Abound Solar ($400 million)*
A123 Systems ($279 million)*
Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
Johnson Controls ($299 million)
Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
ECOtality ($126.2 million)
Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
Range Fuels ($80 million)*
Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
Vestas ($50 million)
LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
Navistar ($39 million)
Satcon ($3 million)*
Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)
*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.
The problem begins with the issue of government picking winners and losers in the first place. Venture capitalist firms exist for this very reason, and they choose what to invest in by looking at companies’ business models and deciding if they are worthy. When the government plays venture capitalist, it tends to reward companies that are connected to the policymakers themselves or because it sounds nice to “invest” in green energy.
The 2009 stimulus set aside $80 billion to subsidize politically preferred energy projects. Since that time, 1,900 investigations have been opened to look into stimulus waste, fraud, and abuse (although not all are linked to the green-energy funds), and nearly 600 convictions have been made. Of that $80 billion in clean energy loans, grants, and tax credits, at least 10 percent has gone to companies that have since either gone bankrupt or are circling the drain.
Figures for four companies have been updated: Beacon Power received $43 million from the U.S. government, not $69 million as originally reported. Azure Dynamics received $5.4 million from the federal government, not $120 million as originally reported. Compact Power Inc. received $151 million as part of the stimulus, not $150 million as originally reported. Willard and Kelsey Solar Group received $700,981 in government funding, not $6 million as originally reported.
The following companies have been removed from the original list: AES’s subsidiary Eastern Energy, LSP Energy, Schneider Electric, and Uni-Solar did not receive government-backed loans, based on additional research. The National Renewable Energy Lab did received $200 million in stimulus funding, but it is a government laboratory.
lett's be fair and say American Presidents live better than kings
We were not in dire straits economically under Bush until the tail-end. But Bush still was not allowed to play golf, according to the media.
Lavish golf outings and vacations and spending like listed below are actions for calls for impeachment wouldn't you say?
No presidents took more vacations than those two. We got into these "dire straights" because of unfunded spending with those two.
The deficit tripled under Reagan and doubled under Bush. No presidents took more vacations than those two. We got into these "dire straights" because of unfunded spending with those two.
"Obama lives better than Kings
Democrat congress under Reagan
Pelosi & Reid congress under Bush.
I hate asking this, but were you saying this during Bush?