Obama Stimulus Panel Probes Stimulus Waste at Ritz-Carlton Hotel

Talk about "tone-deaf"...

Washington Examiner reports:

Members of a key panel created by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, better known as the stimulus bill, have scheduled a meeting on November 22 to consider ways to prevent "fraud, waste, and abuse of Recovery Act funds." The meeting will be held at the super-luxe Ritz Carlton Hotel in Phoenix, Arizona.

The group is the Recovery Independent Advisory Panel, a sub-committee of the larger Recovery Accountability and Transparency board (sometimes known as the RAT board). The stimulus bill set up the Recovery Independent Advisory Panel, or RIAP, to make recommendations to identify and prevent waste of the bill's $814 billion in stimulus spending.

...The Ritz-Carlton is located "in the midst of the picturesque Camelback Corridor, the city's premier shopping, dining and financial district," according the hotel's website. Hungry waste-and-abuse hunters can dine in the "casual elegance, relaxed atmosphere and uniquely inviting ambiance of the European-inspired bistro 24." Or they can enjoy Afternoon Tea in the "uniquely warm and inviting" Lobby Lounge. And at any time, waste-and-abuse watchdogs who also enjoy golf will be "just minutes from some of the best courses in the world," including the Tournament Players Club, the Arizona Biltmore, and several others.

It is another fine example of what one of my friends calls the "Pan-Am" syndrome, where everyone working for a dying entity (whether it is an airline like Pan-Am or the US federal government) grabs everything they can while they still can, right before the collapse - a bottle of champaigne and silverware from the aircraft, an extended holiday in Spain, golfing in Arizona while wining and dining at the Ritz. Hell with the worries of the economy, those are just for the small people unaffiliated with anything "federal government".

Tweet

Warren Buffet to Taxpayers: Get Over It!

Huh?

I sincerely, truly hope and pray that the rumor of Buffet becoming the chief of that consumer financial protection bureau within the Federal Reserve was, is, and remains utterly, totally false.

Buffett to taxpayers: Get over your anger (9/24/2010 Omaha.com)

"Taxpayer anger against President Barack Obama and Congress is counterproductive because policy makers took measures including deficit spending to stimulate the economy, billionaire investor Warren Buffett told CNBC.

"“Sentiment has turned very sour in the last three or four or five months,” the chairman and CEO of Omaha-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc. said in an interview broadcast Thursday.

"“I hope we get over it pretty soon, because it’s not productive,’’ Buffett said. “We will come back regardless of how people feel about Washington, but it is not helpful to have people as unhappy as they are about what’s going on in Washington.”

"...“The truth is we’re running a federal deficit that’s 9 percent of gross domestic product,” Buffett said. “That’s stimulative as all get out. It’s more stimulative than any policy we’ve followed since World War II.”

"...Buffett said he uses a common sense standard to evaluate the economy. Buffett gets insight into the health of the economy through the performance of Berkshire’s many subsidiaries." [The whole article at the link above.]

So the federal government running deficit of over 9% of GDP is a good thing, according to Buffett. Deficit spending on useless projects and government union workers is a good thing.

And if that's his common sense, then he really, truly has nothing in common with the rest of us. (His father would be very disappointed in him.)

Tweet

CNBC Sponsors Town Hall Meeting for Obama

Despite the recent unhappiness of Mr. Immelt, CEO of Government Electric aka General Electric toward the administration he serves as economic advisor, his media subsidiary CNBC dutifully set up a town hall meeting for President Obama this morning so that the Prez can promote himself as the epitome of the "American Dream".

Oh that's rich.

Obama Town Hall: Defending His Record on Economy, Jobs
(9/20/2010 CNBC)

"President Obama spoke Monday to a cross-section of Main Street, Wall Street and Washington gathered at a CNBC-sponsored town hall, with the economy at a crossroads and the nation's precarious political structure hanging in the balance.

"Sharing an hour with a largely friendly crowd that gave him hoots of approval and a standing ovation at the end of the "Investing in America" forum, Obama defended his administration's record toward business while simultaneously deriding his critics as being politically motivated and saying he would work "setting a better tone" in Washington.

""I know how frustrated people. I know in some cases how desperate people are," he said, later adding, "I am confident that if we stay on course that gets us back to old-fashioned values of hard work and responsiblity and looking out for one another, that America will thrive."

"The president spoke just as the National Bureau of Economic Research proclaimed an end to the recession. But Obama acknowledged that times are still tough.

""Obviously for the millions of people still out of work, people who have seen their home values decline, people struggling to pay their home bills every day, it's still very real for them," Obama said.

"The audience also includes college students and union leaders, small business owners and retirees.

"...."My life, I'm testimony to the American Dream. Everything I've been doing since I came into office is to make sure that American dream continues for future generations," Obama said. "The challenge now is I'm thinking about the next generation and there are a lot of people out there thinking about the next election."" [The article continues.]

A lot of people thinking about the next election? Like yourself, Mr. President?

He claims he's "testimony to the American Dream" which he wants to make sure continues for future generations. So the American Dream these days is to receive endless subsidies and preferred treatments from the government based on anything from race, ethnicity, gender, union membership, income level, what have you, to breeze through top Ivy-league schools without worrying about paying back student loans for decades, and not to work a single day in the real world.

OK, I'm all for it. Sounds good.

How are you going to pay for that, Mr. President? Out of your own multi-million dollar pocket?

The American Dream as I've understood is more like him - "Up by the bootstraps". I guess I'm too old-fashioned.

Tweet

City Controller of Los Angeles: $111 Million Stimulus Saved 55 Jobs

Wendy Greuel, City Controller of Los Angeles writes for Huffington Post:

Los Angeles Shows $111 Million in ARRA Grants Has Only Created 55 Jobs (Wendy Greuel, 9/16/2010 Huffington Post)

"I released two very disappointing audits today of how the City of Los Angeles has used American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds. The audits looked at the how the two departments that have received the largest amount of ARRA funding so far - the Department of Transportation (LADOT) and the Department of Public Works (DPW) - have used those funds and how many jobs were created. Los Angeles has become the largest City in America to conduct an audit of how ARRA funds have been expended.

"DPW has received $70.65 million and created or retained 45.46 jobs, though they are expected to create 238 jobs overall (the fraction of a job created or retained correlates to the number of actual hours works). LADOT has been awarded $40.8 million and created or retained 9 jobs, though they are expected to create 26 jobs overall. Overall, the Departments have received $111 million in federal stimulus funds out of the $594 million the City has been awarded so far and created or retained 54.46 jobs.

"I'm disappointed that we've only created or retained 55 jobs after receiving $111 million in ARRA funds. With our local unemployment rate over 12% we need to do a better job cutting the red tape and putting Angelenos back to work." [Emphasis is mine. The article continues.]

Even at a liberal/progressive bastion like Huffington Post, the readers' comment section is getting sharper and better than the main article. Here are some of the posts:

See, this just goes to prove that Paul Krugman is right -- if the stimulus had been several trillion dollars, we could easily have created a couple hundred jobs in Los Angeles. Maybe even 250! And then, man, we're on the road to recovery.

Only government can give you value for money like that.

I am not sure what is more astounding - that $111,000,000 only created 55 jobs or that spending $420,000 per job to get the 264 anticipated would have been considered a success.

There's a reason why people go into public service. It's because there's no way in hell they would survive in private enterprise.

they would probably be better off if they just paid 2000+ people 50k for a year to do nothing.

What Ms. Greuel would never admit but is crystal clear to everyone else outside any government: government ISN'T the answer. It never was, it never will be.

(h/t jdgreger)

Tweet

Obama Calls for $50 Billion Infrastructure Stimulus and "Permanent Infrastructure Bank"

Infrastructure bank? Be wary. Very, very wary.

Obama calling for more infrastructure spending
(Julie Pace, 9/6/2010 AP via My Way News)

"WASHINGTON (AP) - Vowing to find new ways to stimulate the sputtering economy, President Barack Obama will call for long-term investments in the nation's roads, railways and runways that would cost at least $50 billion.

"The infrastructure investments are one part of a package of targeted proposals the White House is expected to announce in hopes of jump-starting the economy ahead of the November election. Obama will outline the infrastructure proposal Monday at a Labor Day event in Milwaukee.

"While the proposal calls for investments over six years, the White House said spending would be front-loaded with an initial $50 billion to help create jobs in the near future.

"The goals of the infrastructure plan include: rebuilding 150,000 miles of roads; constructing and maintaining 4,000 miles of railways, enough to go coast-to-coast; and rehabilitating or reconstructing 150 miles of airport runways, while also installing a new air navigation system designed to reduce travel times and delays.

"Obama will also call for the creation of a permanent infrastructure bank that would focus on funding national and regional infrastructure projects.

"Administration officials wouldn't say what the total cost of the infrastructure investments would be, but did say the initial $50 billion represents a significant percentage. Officials said the White House would consider closing a number of special tax breaks for oil and gas companies to pay for the proposal." [Emphasis is mine. The article continues.]

Hahahahahahahahahaha.....

So they don't even tell us how much the total cost would be, other than this initial $50 billion which "represents a significant percentage". What is a significant percentage for this administration? 5%? 10%?

And he wants to do it by penalizing the particular industry that he probably believes the sheeple of the United States will be happy to see penalized - the oil industry, because of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill (I'm guessing).

But I find the mention of "a permanent infrastructure bank" very peculiar. Maybe I'm paranoid, but I suspect the whole point of this "stimulus" exercise is to set up this bank, and I don't like the smell of it.

The White House fact sheet says this:

Infrastructure Bank. The President proposes to fund a permanent infrastructure bank. This bank would leverage private and state and local capital to invest in projects that are most critical to our economic progress. This marks an important departure from the federal government’s traditional way of spending on infrastructure through earmarks and formula-based grants that are allocated more by geography and politics than demonstrated value. Instead, the Bank will base its investment decisions on clear analytical measures of performance, competing projects against each other to determine which will produce the greatest return for American taxpayers.

Hmmmm. My questions:

1. So, instead of giving money to the states outright, is this bank going to make loans, with the infrastructure to be built as collateral?

2. Who's going to run the bank? Bernanke? Geithner? Goldman Sachs? Pimco? All of them? (Oh sorry, Morgan Stanley, too, now that the Chinese have more stake in the firm..)

3. Who's going to decide the loan terms and "clear analytical measures of performance"? Bernanke? Geithner? Goldman Sachs? Pimco? Obama? Congress? All of them?

(How are they going to measure the performance of asphalt pavement?)

4. Who's going to decide what is "most critical to our economic progress"? How is "critical" defined, and by whom? How is "progress" defined, and by whom?

5. "Leverage"? How? Will it be like Geithner's PPIP (remember that one?), where the taxpayers pay for 90% of the loan and 10% by the private investors, and the private investors take the upside? Will the investors set to collect fees, tolls etc. from the funded projects in exchange for the "risk" they take in participating? Or worse, if a state defaults on the loan, the taxpayer-funded portion of the loan will be non-recourse, and the private investors will get the collateral (infrastructure)? Is this bank a clever ploy to transfer public assets into private hands selected by the government?

6. Is this bank going to securitize the loans and/or create more leveraged instruments like CDOs to sell to investors? Will the initial $50 billion be leveraged 5 times? 10 times? 20 times? 50 times? Who will be responsible when the leverage blows up? (Answer: hapless US taxpayers.)

(I can see a whole set of leveraged instruments out of this bank - CDOs, CDS, interest rate swaps, the usual suspects. Except this time, it will not be Wall Street banks creating and selling them; it will be the US government in cahoots with private investors who will probably include Wall Street banks but not limited to them.)

7. Do you smell a new financial bubble? Is it all nice and dandy if your government does the blowing?

The Third Reich's leaders would be proud.

Tweet

Oval Office Makeover by Celebrity Interior Decorator Michael Smith

the same guy who did the makeover for the living quarters of the White House for Michelle Obama, the same guy who did the office makeover for John Thain, who was then the CEO of Merrill Lynch, with the infamous $87,000 area rug.

But the taxpayers' money wasn't used, and the budget was $100,000, they say. You hire a guy who specs $87,000 for an area rug and $1,400 for a wastebasket and the budget is $100,000. Yeah right...

I don't quite care for this Oval Office Obama version - drab and boring like a hotel lobby. If that's what he likes, fine. I don't quite see why he had to hire a celebrity decorator though, to achieve this boring effect. I certainly, positively do not care for wallpaper.

The new rug features a quote from Theodore Parker, and NOT Martin Luther King Jr., according to Washington Post. Ooops. History rewritten ever so subtly.

You can view the Oval Office under different presidents, here. I like the smart color use of George W. Bush Oval Office.

Tweet

3rd Largest Single-Day Debt Increase - Let's Blame Bush

"White House officials said that big a jump is not the norm and that Mr. Obama has worked with the hand he was dealt by Mr. Bush." (from the Washington Times article linked below.)

The rhetoric is getting really tired. (If Obama didn't like to inherit what was there, he didn't have to run for presidency.)

U.S. marks 3rd-largest, single-day debt increase
(Stephen Dinan, 7/8/2010 Washington Times)

"The nation's debt leapt $166 billion in a single day last week, the third-largest increase in U.S. history, and it comes at a time when Congress is balking over higher spending and debt has become a key policy battleground.

"The one-day increase for June 30 totaled $165,931,038,264.30 - bigger than the entire annual deficit for fiscal year 2007 and larger than the $140 billion in savings the new health care bill will produce over its first 10 years. The figure works out to nearly $1,500 for every U.S. household, or more than 10 times the median daily household income.

"Daily debt calculations jump and fall, and big shifts are common. But all three of the biggest one-day debt increases have occurred under the tenure of President Obama, and all of the top six have been in the past two years - an indication of just how quickly the pace of deficit spending has risen under Mr. Obama and President George W. Bush.

""What matters is the overall trend line, and the overall trend line is shooting up," said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a bipartisan deficit watchdog group, who said it is one more reason for a fiscal wake-up call." [Emphasis is mine.. The article continues.]

$166 billion, by the way, is about 29% of the entire public debt of Greece.

In case you haven't noticed, there are an increasing number of pundits (analysts, court-economists) these days who basically call this aversion to government spending by the tax-paying middle class as "austerity hysteria" or "deficit hysteria" that would stifle the economic "growth" at best, and would plunge the entire world into deflationary depression at worst.

Tax-paying middle class (or what's left of it) wanting the government to stop wasting their money is "hysteria" in this new age of Obamanomics, Newspeak and Crimestop.

By the way, to avoid this "hysteria", Congressional Democrats have gone stealth. The article duly notes later:

"Fears over red ink have stalled key parts of Mr. Obama's agenda in Congress in recent weeks, including his push for another round of stimulus spending. Just last week, House Democrats had to use a tricky parliamentary tactic to pass an emergency war-spending bill, aid for teachers and new spending caps."

Yup. The Supplemental Appropriation Bill of 2010 included $25 billion to be given to the public union workers - teachers, firefighters, and policemen, who enjoy much securer job prospect in this worst recession since the GD and higher average pay than the private sector workers, and many of whom will retire as "millionaires" (as their pensions will be worth $millions, to be paid by the taxpayers as their pension funds are almost all underfunded).

May I recommend reading this article by Lew Rockwell for a start, on how to beat back Obamanomics which is the result from almost willful ignorance of economics?

Tweet