Thought this was appropriate as income taxes are due this month http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gsa-manager-wanted-over-the-top-vegas-conference/2012/04/05/gIQAwu3KyS_story.html

4/6/2012 2:19:20 PM

Yeah that is utterly fucking rediculous. Maybe the government should cut spending to these lavish events instead of whining about the needs to cut highway funding, student loan funding, and medicare in lieu of raising taxes.

4/6/2012 3:35:29 PM

that would not make for good gloom and doom talking points tho.

4/6/2012 4:00:47 PM

But but but they're stimulating the economy

4/6/2012 7:40:43 PM

remember, folks, shit like this is why the gov't wouldn't waste money running healthcare!!!


but, seriously, as much money was wasted here, it's only the tip of the iceberg. It's like bitching and moaning about earmarks that only cost a few billion a year when we're blowing trillions in other placesw

4/8/2012 2:38:16 PM

^like fighting that war in iraq for no reason...

4/8/2012 2:56:19 PM

This doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me.

I don't think anyone would argue that it's wrong to do things to boost employee morale, or to compensate employees accordingly.

People are always arguing that the gov. is worse that private industry (which isn't really true), then they complain when gov. agencies do things that private industries would do (like make sure their employees are happy). You can't have it both ways.

Without knowing more details about the purpose for the conference, it would be hard to judge how extravagant it really was.

It is telling that the guy got a bonus when a panel said he didn't deserve one, but from the information i've seen, there's no reason to crucify him yet.

4/8/2012 3:14:38 PM

Quote :

"People are always arguing that the gov. is worse that private industry (which isn't really true), then they complain when gov. agencies do things that private industries would do (like make sure their employees are happy). You can't have it both ways."

Actually, yes I can. I have no problem with a private company blowing its own money on frivolous shit. I have EVERY problem with the government blowing MY money on frivolous shit.

4/8/2012 3:32:30 PM

But the problem in your case is that you presume everything the gov. does is "frivolous."

It doesn't make sense to have people like you, who want the gov. to fail, to then tell the gov. how to run things, because then it WILL fail. You want to arm-chair-quarter back how every agency of gov. should run, then complain when things go wrong due to your hamstringing.

The fact of the matter is that gov. agencies would run better if they were allowed to operate more like private businesses in the sense of allowing management to hire, fire, and compensate employees more easily.

Look at is this way... you're basically hiring the gov. to do a job for you (build roads, schools, infrastructure, etc.) why would you want to hamstring how your contractor runs their business?

A good example of this is NCSU/Google. NCSU recently switched their email system to Google, to eliminate having to run their own email servers, etc.. As state employees, the network admins at NCSU probably get a dungeon-like office, with gray walls, fluorescent lighting, and the cheapest office chairs they could find at Office Depot.

Meanwhile, Google employees, on top of being paid more, have employee daycares, free soda machines, segways, nice offices, dinner parties, etc. It's not hard to see why it would be difficult for a state agency to recruit the best employees when they have to compete with google, when their budget is restricted by legislators from creating a work environment that attracts the best talent. Instead, you'd rather the gov. pay an excessive fee to a private company, who does buy these "frivolous" things, and when this happens you'll complain that the gov. is paying a private contractor too much for service X, when they can just do it themselves.

So you can complain when you see what you feel is something frivolous that the gov. is spending money on, but it means you should really then never complain when private contractors fleece gov. agencies.

Regarding this particular case, it may very well be a misappropriation of money, but not necessarily.

4/8/2012 3:55:12 PM

^^ What about companies that receive tax breaks spending their money on frivolous shit?

4/8/2012 4:38:38 PM

Quote :

"But the problem in your case is that you presume everything the gov. does is "frivolous.""

no, I really don't. And even if I did, surely we can agree that there is a high level of frivolity in this case, can't we? Paying for a fucking psychic?

Quote :

"The fact of the matter is that gov. agencies would run better if they were allowed to operate more like private businesses in the sense of allowing management to hire, fire, and compensate employees more easily. "

This is true. unfortunately, they have no incentive to do any of that, except for compensation, as they have no competition and literally no ability to go bankrupt.

Quote :

"So you can complain when you see what you feel is something frivolous that the gov. is spending money on, but it means you should really then never complain when private contractors fleece gov. agencies."

This does not follow at all. Why should I complain when the gov't wastes money and then not complain when a private contractor charges the gov't wasted money? That makes no sense. If the contractor is blowing their own money, I don't give a fuck. If they are blowing money that they are charging to the gov't, then I do care.

Quote :

"What about companies that receive tax breaks spending their money on frivolous shit?"

Yes. What about companies that are keeping THEIR OWN MONEY. You have this mistaken impression that you have any right to someone else's money.

4/8/2012 5:10:25 PM

keep sucking that corporate cock, little man

4/8/2012 9:03:41 PM

What about contractors that work for the government and hold junkets? Or take their government profits and buy votes to keep funneling them more gov cash?

4/8/2012 11:51:55 PM

contractors aren't supposed to be able to play in federal elections.

supposed to.

im sure there's a way around it.

4/9/2012 9:26:24 AM

Quote :

"People are always arguing that the gov. is worse that private industry (which isn't really true), then they complain when gov. agencies do things that private industries would do (like make sure their employees are happy). You can't have it both ways. "

lol what a dumb fucking comment

4/9/2012 9:45:17 AM

The govt is supposed to serve the people. I too saw the leaked footage from the 2010 gsa conference. It is frivolous, excessive, and frankly I am both appalled and disgusted by it.

4/9/2012 8:45:05 PM

^^exactly

Q: What's the difference between a corporation spending money and the government spending money?


A: The government spends unearned money belonging to taxpayers.

4/9/2012 8:57:12 PM

Q: What's the difference between a corporation spending government money and the government spending money?


A: nothing

4/9/2012 11:32:20 PM

this all started under bush:

Quote :

"The Obama administration has not attempted to defend the 2010 conference. Top Obama officials have condemned the expenses and pledged to implement protections to clamp down on wasteful spending. The administration, though, has pointed to rising costs under the George W. Bush administration to suggest that the $820,000 Vegas conference could have been avoided -- if the Bush-era GSA had acted. According to figures obtained by Fox News, the budget for the so-called Western Regions Conference rose from $93,000 in 2004 to $323,855 in 2006. It then jumped to $655,025 in 2008. "

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/10/federal-agency-cancels-new-vegas-conference-amid-scandal-over-its-lavish-2010/#ixzz1rgVkwkIB

4/10/2012 7:51:53 PM

I guess Obama was powerless to do anything about it...

4/11/2012 8:21:03 AM

Can we not just accept the fact that regardless of Republican or Democrat both parties are guilty of cash-sucking the American tax-payers for their extravagent confrences and agendas.

At least on the federal level the Republican claim to be fiscal conservatives is just an empty talking point they use to jack-off their blue collar constituents. Whereas democrat spending if just expected.

4/11/2012 8:38:34 AM

Exactly. Both sides do it. Just Republicans claim not to more often.

4/11/2012 10:17:53 AM

^can't argue with that

4/11/2012 12:16:53 PM

I guess none of you bozos pay income tax. These articles make me furious.

4/11/2012 8:33:17 PM

If you get angry every time the government does something stupid, you must be mad all the time.

4/12/2012 9:39:47 AM

Quote :

"Q: What's the difference between a corporation spending money and the government spending money? A: The government spends unearned money belonging to taxpayers."

No, it is spending other people's money. It is the exact same situation when a public corporation does it. Their profits belong to their shareholders, just as the government's revenue belongs to tax payers. The difference is that the government is more accountable to tax payers than corporations are to their shareholders.

4/12/2012 8:10:46 PM

^ah yes EXACTLY the same. If I see that a company I have invested in is shitting the bed I can sell my shares(cut my loses) or stop buying for that company. So if this pisses you off, you going to stop paying your taxes? Worth going to jail over? Oh yeah, EXACTLY the same thing.

tell me some of you are still in school.

4/12/2012 8:42:05 PM

Equating wasteful government spending to wasteful corporate spending is ridiculous. No one is forced to buy a corporation's product (at least not yet, see Obamacare). However everyone can be required to pay taxes.

4/13/2012 6:39:10 AM

Yea, that is what I meant by, the government is more accountable to tax payers than corporations are to their shareholders [because you don't really get to choose your taxes]. Sorry I wasn't more clear.

That said, simply selling your shares of a company that wasted your money doesn't change the fact that they wasted your money.

4/13/2012 8:24:15 AM

Quote :

"That said, simply selling your shares of a company that wasted your money doesn't change the fact that they wasted your money."

But by buying the shares you announced you were willing to accept the losses from them potentially wasting your money.

The same cannot be said in the political realm for the people that voted for someone other than their current political representatives.

[Edited on April 13, 2012 at 11:22 AM. Reason : .,.]

4/13/2012 11:21:34 AM

Quote :

"the government is more accountable to tax payers than corporations are to their shareholders [because you don't really get to choose your taxes]."

haha, NO. You have NO recourse. This BS group will continue to get its funding, in fact will probably get an increase in funding. The money will continue to flow into govt unless you want to risk going to jail.

Lets make this REALLY simple for you. If you feel you were wronged/ripped off by a company you can choose to not use that company again, ask for your money back, or simply cut your loses and STOP losing money on that shitty company. If govt wastes your money, I know HUGE stretch, then you get to continue funding or go to jail.

4/13/2012 5:07:57 PM

Honestly, I don't see where we are disagreeing.

4/13/2012 6:23:52 PM

Funding the GSA is a drop in the bucket compared to financing two wars and bailing out the big banks.

4/13/2012 6:44:44 PM

Quote :

" simply selling your shares of a company that wasted your money doesn't change the fact that they wasted your money. "

Ok, lets try it a different way. You can at least PREVENT a company from wasting your money by choosing to stop giving it to them. You have no such option with government waste. You said that govt is more accountable to the taxpayers than a private business, I totally disagree. A company has to EARN your money, the govt can just take it.

^You dont like bailing out banks and wars? What is your recourse? Whine and bitch? Im sure they care. They will continue to take your money and if you resist you will go to jail.

4/14/2012 9:02:55 AM