Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News CEO bonus: Obama spends $13 billion on helicopters for himself

  1. Apr 25, 2009 #1
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/us/politics/26murtha.html?hp=&pagewanted=all
    That's more than the annual science budget of the http://www.nsf.gov/about/congress/111/highlights/cu09_0310.jsp put together.

    To provoke discussion, I'll begin: I think this is vastly excessive spending, I think it is unnecessary and wasteful, and I think it is hypocritical of an administration which sees "excessive" private-sector executive compensation as a political issue.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 25, 2009 #2

    jhae2.718

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    This is another example of the waste in government programs. While the VH-3s need replacing, it's ridiculous that the helicopters would cost $13 billion dollars...per unit that's more than an F-22 in you factor in the R&D costs. Part of the problem is trying to turn the presidential helicopter into Air Force One and NEACP combined...

    If the Presidential Helicopters cost $13 billion, how much are they going to want to spend on the replacements for the VC-25s?

    I have to agree completely with Secretary Gates here. For the price of one VH-71, we could buy the President four A380s...

    Also, I'm not sure how this fits in with the whole corporate aviation=evil concept currently in Washington...
     
  4. Apr 25, 2009 #3

    OmCheeto

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Either I am misunderstanding what you are saying, or you have misunderstood who made the statement. The article really isn't very clear who said it, but from the structure of the paragraph, I believe it was Representative John P. Murtha who wanted to spend $13 Billion on the copters.

    It was probably Obama himself that axed the program.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  5. Apr 25, 2009 #4
  6. Apr 25, 2009 #5


    A few good points are made here. First, how incredibly rediculous is this spending? Government never ceases to amaze me in how it can simply expand and spend without worry of punishment or criticism. Sometimes defense spending can be helpful in pulling an economy up, but in this case the goods/services being purchased simply do not justify the spending. It is sad to see this occur when there are other useful places for this over-the-top spending to be utilized. If you are going to spend tax dollars like play money, at least put it towards a worthwhile cause.

    Last, I cannot help but agree with your assertion that this administration is hypocritical on this occasion. Executives often times draw excessive criticism for much smaller expenditures, while politicians in general can spend freely with hardly the same scrutiny and antagonism that is pointed at the private sector.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 24, 2017
  7. Apr 25, 2009 #6

    OmCheeto

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    And now, for the shortest, most appropriate response to this thread:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/V3FnpaWQJO0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param [Broken] name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/V3FnpaWQJO0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

    :smile:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  8. Apr 25, 2009 #7
    McCain and Obama actually discussed it during a WH "Round Robin"...mutually agreed it was excessive. Obama joked about never having a helicopter before...these seem fine to him.
     
  9. Apr 26, 2009 #8

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    You did the see part where the admin already axed the project and the report was taken out of context, right?

    But just out of curiosity, how would you know if the President needs new helicopters?
     
  10. Apr 26, 2009 #9
    http://www.pcworld.com/article/157907/securing_the_presidential_blackberry.html

    There isn't a price in there unfortunately but I remember hearing that the presidents blackberry was going to cost a pretty penny.
    http://news.cnet.com/obamas-new-blackberry-the-nsas-secure-pda/
    $3350 according to this article. This first article I linked will give you an idea of the specialized security requirements for the phone and why it costs so much.

    At any rate, the point is that anything that is going to be used by the president is likely to cost several times more than the standard issue version and for several good reasons. Even if they didn't axe the choppers because for what ever reason they were actually needed could you really be suprised by the price tag?
     
  11. Apr 26, 2009 #10

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    It appears that the thread title is false and misleading. The proposed helicopter fleet upgrade was an item from the Bush administration.

    Marine One Upgrade Now Looks Less Likely
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/23/AR2009022302574.html
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: CEO bonus: Obama spends $13 billion on helicopters for himself
  1. Billions of stars (Replies: 6)

  2. CEO Heroes (Replies: 7)

  3. Spend or save? (Replies: 8)

Loading...