- Joined
- Sep 13, 2007
- Messages
- 79,903
- Reaction score
- 20,981
- Location
- I love your hate.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
2 million people attending huh? I wonder how much money is that going to bring in for DC and neighboring states? Fast food joints alone are going to make a killing. I can't even think of how much money souvenir vendors will make.
You're kidding right? Take a look at the economy when Bush took office and take a look at it now. Big difference.
Sorry spending $100 million on this is foolish.
Very little..... Just ask yankee stadium.
:roll:
Didn't they(the Yankees) just build a bigger and better one that cost like 1.8 billion?
yup, not sure how much but ticket prices are double and no one in the surrounding area can afford to go... :2wave:
People going to obama are going to see obama, a few may do well that day but after that, dc as usual....
what can one make, an extra grand? if that? please, your argument that the inaguration will be good for dc is dumb and short sighted.
Depends. The inauguration doesn't take into consideration pover 2-3 days including events, balls, outdoor events etc etc? Add to that the number of people who'll go see the sights, eat out, stay at hotels/motels etc etc. The presidential inauguration is a once in 4 year event. People can go see a Yankees game pretty much all season long.
Some would tend to think that this is a coronation - Not an inauguration. Government loves to spend our tax dollars royally, and send us the bill, which we can't afford.
If I were to spend too much money on credit, I would lose everything I have . If government does it, then it gets to spend even more. It just prints more money. Of course, if I were to do the same, it is called counterfeiting.
More pretzel logic from Washington.
this is true which bolsters my point. this is a one time event costing how much?
How you see the city making a profit on it is beyond me.
The general consumer sales tax in the District of Columbia is 5.75 percent.
However, Washington, D.C., actually levies a sales tax with five different rates. This rate structure is utilized, in part, to take advantage of the district's special status as a tourist center and to increase the contribution of nonresidents working in the city. The current sales tax rates are:
* 5.75 percent for tangible personal property.
* 9 percent for alcohol sold for off-premises consumption.
* 10 percent for restaurant meals, take-out food, rental cars and telephone calling cards.
* 12 percent for commercial parking .
* 14.5 percent for hotel and motel rooms.
America is sooooo happy to see Bush replaced with a man of honor. :applaud :applaud
What exactly makes Bush dishonorable? Your democracynow formulated opinion that he sent people to get tortured? Because if that's all it takes I think you're dishonorable by using a democracynow formulated opinion piece to throw cheap shots at the president.
"Cheap shots"? Believe me, there has been NOTHING CHEAP about this presidency! Bush has spent our money like a drunken sailor. Maybe you haven't been keeping up with the news? :roll:
"dishonorable" is your word. But, since you bring it up...
America is sooooo happy to see Bush replaced with a man of honor.
In my world, lying is not a trait of an honorable person.
A liar is dishonorable.
Bush is a proven liar hence, he is dishonorable.
Period.
Case closed.
Bush has lied to us on any number of issues. Take your pick.
There is no doubt on the torture issue.
You can begin your name calling charade now. That's how cowards act when exposed as wrong. That behavior says so much more about you than me. :2wave:
Name calling does not change what our president is... a liar, a traitor, a dishonorable man!
America's proud history will forever be stained with the actions of Bush.
Washington, D.C. -- District of Columbia -- state taxes
Not sure about you. But say only 1,000,000 stay for more then a day. That alone is easily a few shinny pennies in fast food, hotel rooms, alcohol consumption etc etc.
What exactly makes Bush dishonorable? Your democracynow formulated opinion that he sent people to get tortured? Because if that's all it takes I think you're dishonorable by using a democracynow formulated opinion piece to throw cheap shots at the president.
America electing the first black president deserves a big bash. It's historic. It's history.
Just "how" can you do such an inauguration on the cheap?
Keep it low key and just a small affair. An inaguration does not need to be such a lavish affair, especially in these times. As someone already mentioned something about televising it and doing a small ball instead of an extremely lavish one. Will people even remember this twenty years from now? Maybe us, the middle class people, who will be footing the bill from all this Washington "we don't give a damn" spending right now.
America electing the first black president deserves a big bash. It's historic. It's history. Most of the cost is probably due to security due to the huge number of people expected to attend becauuuuuuuuse... America is sooooo happy to see Bush replaced with a man of honor. :applaud :applaud
For you neo-cons to now cry about how much something costs, after defending Bush's spending spree his 1st 6 years in office taking us from the biggest surplus to the biggest deficit in U.S. history, rings a little hollow, like a bunch of cry babies who can't stand the idea of being totally without any power for the next 8 years. :lol:. I don't remember seeing any of this faux outrage over all the wasted millions we gave to Cheney's Hallibuton. :roll:
Link to "State of Emergency"? :mrgreen:
One has to wonder why this was not done when Bush was sworn in .. twice.. Since Republicans are suppose to be fiscally responsible.. oh wait, Reagan had a big one too.. same with Bush Sr.... After all the US was in recession when Bush came to office.... same with Reagan.....
So now because its a black man that is getting put in the highest office and the US is in an economic downturn, then all of a sudden it has to be barebones swearing in?
One has to wonder why this was not done when Bush was sworn in .. twice.. Since Republicans are suppose to be fiscally responsible.. oh wait, Reagan had a big one too.. same with Bush Sr.... After all the US was in recession when Bush came to office.... same with Reagan.....
So now because its a black man that is getting put in the highest office and the US is in an economic downturn, then all of a sudden it has to be barebones swearing in?
So now because its a black man that is getting put in the highest office and the US is in an economic downturn, then all of a sudden it has to be barebones swearing in?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?