then, what is actually price tag, $190M/day? and if you don't know the actual cost, then how can you refute the $200M/day?
Think about that logic for a minute. If you don't know the number, you can make it up, and the burden of proof is on the other person to say you aren't right. Ridiculous.
The correct answer: we don't know how much it costs. Taking a made-up number and criticizing the President on that basis is bearing false witness.Dude, a false witness is someone who knowingly spreads a falsehood. But unless you can justify giving a more accurate cost estimate of the following, you’re really not in a position to argue the point.
How much does it cost the US taxpayers per day for 34 warships and personnel, including an carrier strike group (CSG)? 34 ships is 12% of Navy’s active fleet. And the 2010 budget for the Navy is $500M/day ($180B FY2010/365 days/year), so assuming all costs averaging the same, that’s $60M/day just in naval costs. And considering the daily cost of a CSG is much much higher than the average cost, that could easily be $100M/day in Navy services.
Obviously, Obama’s trip is NOT costing an ADDITIONAL $200M/day (since most of that money would be spent doing normal operations), but it is not out of the question that the trip’s costs (additional + normal operation) is eating up $200M/day in resources.
---
My Dad's a smart and successful guy (electrical engineer by training, then successful small businessman) who has the character flaw of trusting the Wall St. Journal's editorial page.
It seems that your dad and I have a lot in common, aside from the WSJ and his son.
