January 19, 2005

If It Had Been Kerry, His Wife Could Have Picked Up the Check

Amy Ridenour has the first, last and middle wordon the Inaugural Costs.

Though I am oversimplifying in the service of brevity, there is more truth than fiction in the notion that money spent on inaugural festivities represents a transfer of wealth from big corporations and individuals of decent income to men and women who work for caterers, restaurants, hotels, the D.C. convention center, security firms, limousine services and printers, or who are taxi drivers or police officers on overtime.

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Posted by Vanderleun at January 19, 2005 10:45 AM | TrackBack
Save to del.icio.us

Comments:

AMERICAN DIGEST HOME
"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper N.B.: Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately. Comments that exceed the obscenity or stupidity limits will be either edited or expunged.

Perfectly put. But the "bluebanders" are incapable of seeing it like this. Perhaps some day they might see with clarity. Of course, not that I wish any harm to anyone, but it would be very satisfying if the next terrorist event within our shores happens in front of the homes of Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and Barbara Boxer. Not while they are home, of couse, because I want the satisfaction of seeing them change their tune regarding the whole terrorist thing.

Posted by: MarkH at January 20, 2005 3:02 PM

Can't think of a better use for the money. Only downside is that if Kerry had won, the inaug would probably have raised $50 million for those hardworking folks. Repubs just can't compete with dems when it comes to raising money to worship their heroes.

Posted by: Ed Poinsett at January 22, 2005 5:29 AM

Of course, that argument can be used to justify virtually any conspicuous consumption by the wealthy, from the construction and operation of yachts to Dennis Koszlowski's birthday party, since virtually all such activities ultimately pump money into the wages of the workers. It may well be that conscpicuous consumption requires no justification, but the fact that money from such consumption benefits working stiffs does not add anything to the discussion.

So I guess I disagree. The inaugural festivities are either appropriate or not, regardless of their impact on the distribution of wealth.

Posted by: Jack at January 22, 2005 7:35 AM
Post a comment:

"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper N.B.: Comments are moderated to combat spam and may not appear immediately. Comments that exceed the obscenity or stupidity limits will be either edited or expunged.










Remember personal info?