Do taxes pay for the President's meals?
@flowerchilde (12529)
United States
8 responses
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
15 Feb 11
Yeah, like above me, it's all technically taxpayers' money.
I remember a discussion started here a few months ago, about Obama spending X amount of dollars to travel. Someone came in defending the money, citing that it was "in his budget."
Well, that "argument" doesn't fly with me. They set their own budgets, their own salaries, and spend whatever they want at our expense.
I won't go on the warpath over food. The guy and his family have to eat. But our taxes pay for everything these politicians do, so someone should be there every step of the way to hold them accountable.
I can understand our President living a little higher than the average man. We don't need him eating at McDonald's or buying suits from the 5 and dime. But go down the list - EVERY schmuck politician out there, no matter how useless, lives it up and passes us the bill.
1 person likes this
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
15 Feb 11
"They" meant politicians in general. President specifically would have been "he."
And, yes, sure - his "salary."
My point was that it's still provided by the taxpayer, as government is a pure parasite.
They ALL earn salaries. Does that mean I have to like it? Well, I don't. I am absolutely disgusted by the fact that the public sector pays way more than most of the average jobs you'll find in the private sector.
And it's certainly not that people are holding back pay in the real world. It's that politicians make sure they never need to struggle paying bills like the everyman.
A pet peeve of mine, among many - feel free to quibble.
1 person likes this
@TheMetallion (1834)
• United States
15 Feb 11
No, actually, once the taxpayers pay the President his salary it's not the taxpayer's money anymore. That's what salary means.
Nor does the President set his own salary: It is set by the Constitution, and only changeable by Congress for whichever President sits in the next term.
1 person likes this


@matersfish (6306)
• United States
16 Feb 11
Oh, but wait...
We all know a president's party is important, because
Give me a minute.
Okay. Got it.
Yeah, these parties are crucial, because
I can't think of a single reason that partytime for any president is important.
Entertaining other leaders? That's the best I can come up with.
"Hello, Mr. Prime Minister. Let's speak about how to aid these poor people while we eat $200/lb beef."
"Can they have some cake, Mr. President?"
"F&c$ no!"
Give me a minute.
Okay. Got it.
Yeah, these parties are crucial, because
I can't think of a single reason that partytime for any president is important.
Entertaining other leaders? That's the best I can come up with.
"Hello, Mr. Prime Minister. Let's speak about how to aid these poor people while we eat $200/lb beef."
"Can they have some cake, Mr. President?"
"F&c$ no!"2 people like this

@speakeasy (4171)
• United States
14 Feb 11
Actually, Obama receives a bill each month for the food he, his family, and any personal guests eat at the White House.
Of course, if he pays the bill with the salary he is paid for being President; since the taxpayers pay his salary they are also paying for his food.
1 person likes this
@flowerchilde (12529)
• United States
15 Feb 11
Yes, but that would be ok, as presidents would still be paying for their own meals. Thanks!

@celticeagle (189957)
• Boise, Idaho
15 Feb 11
I once got a list of governmental perks in email form at work. I was astounded at the things they had paid for them. I rather doubt any of that has changed. The president pays for the groceries but state functions are paid by taxes. I was astounded to learn that the legistlators give themselves bonuses and raises and such. This was ten years ago. I hope things have changed since then.
1 person likes this
@flowerchilde (12529)
• United States
15 Feb 11
I highly doubt it! What got me to wondering, besides it being tax time and we added all our taxes, state, federal, sales and property! yeow, was the whitehouse superbowl foods, got to wondering who paid for it! (Note: we had to pay for our own!)
1 person likes this
@celticeagle (189957)
• Boise, Idaho
15 Feb 11
Ya, but what do the aids say: 'Uh, President did you buy that?'
1 person likes this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
16 Feb 11
Such interesting responses to your question flowerchilde. Regardless of who sits behind the desk in the Oval Office, the President is on duty 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 12 months out of the year. He does not have the option of calling in sick or taking a vacation where he has the luxury of turning off his *work* cell like many of the rest of us do. He also does not have the luxury of leaving his *job site* and going *home* in the evening. Since he and his family are required to live where he works, I find it fairly petty to be concerned about who foots the bill for feeding them.
In addition, as part of is responsibilities as the Head of State, he's required to entertain visiting dignitaries from around the world and that more often than not, includes feeding them. I'm sorry if this offends some but the United States is *supposed* to be the most powerful country in the world so beans and weenies sends the wrong message.

@flowerchilde (12529)
• United States
16 Feb 11
It was the superbowl foods/party that got me to wondering, as at this great tax time of year after so many long hours of working all year, we couldn't afford much for superbowl foods and I was wondering if we paid for the Whitehouse superbowl party food and I see no reason why the people should, for this administration or any other. U.S. Presidents are not kings. Seems to me Pres Washington had to be quite frugal with money. Are you saying heads of state should be privileged and recession (and in some countries the people's poverty) should not require any cutting back on their perks and luxuries? I'm not sure wining and dining should be involved with affairs of state. That has high potential as an abyss of abuse if you ask me.
@laglen (19759)
• United States
16 Feb 11
so beans and weenies sends the wrong message.
like the message that our government would be good stewards of our money? That maybe they cant be bought?
Spall, I understand the need to entertain atleast decently. What I take exception to is the astronomical food bill for weekly parties.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
16 Feb 11
Laglen, other than the Super Bowl party, I haven't heard much about those "weekly" parties lately. Have you?
@liuyh0619 (108)
• China
16 Feb 11
If you have any doubt, they will assure you that even the president take the food, he still consider the affairs of state.




well said. I understand why they have to entertain other leaders but I really do not think the extravagance is necessary.



