Joel Kupferman, who has done great work on the World Trade cleanup scandal, just sent me this. The last line gives a deep insight into the mindset of people with authority in the U.S. today.
WTC insurance funds used for food, drinks
Published: Nov. 11, 2007
NEW YORK, Nov. 11 (UPI) -- Records show officials tied to the $1 billion World Trade Center insurance fund have been using that money for dinners and cocktails in New York.
Designated for Ground Zero cleanup and potential liability claims against the city, the insurance fund has been used by fund lawyers and executives to pay for a series of drinks and dinners in local establishments, the New York Post said Sunday.
Those expenditures have been criticized by U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., who said the money should be focused on aiding the victims of Sept. 11.
"The captive fund was never meant to serve as an open-ended expense account for well-paid lawyers," Nadler said. "Every dime wasted is money that could, and should, have gone to those who continue to suffer because of their exposure at Ground Zero."
The Post reported that Caroline Gentile, a spokeswoman for the fund, has defended the expenditures. She said the dinner and beverage costs were legitimate business expenses and added that the fund has grown by $15 million since its inception due to interest.
I apologize for using michael's comment space for this, but for the second time now I have been bumped from the list of posters by the system because my "invitation has expired."
ReplyDeleteI wanted to post on how Obama sank lower into Ghousbeeishness for his emphasis on his plans to "fix" social security at the JJ dinner in Iowa, at which he appears to have come out "the winner," with Hillary now saying she will "consider" the changes he proposes, while not quite ready to sign on.
In the meantime, our friend Dean Baker, while continuing to criticize proposed policy changes, has been eating Establishment Cookies in the form of DBO projections of "bankruptcy" in 2046, for which he says Obama does not need to worry. But Obama is pitching to ignorant youth who think that "bankruptcy in 2046" means they will get zero social security checks. Dean needs to stand with the later Robert Eisner to argue that the fund will probably never even run a deficit, much less go to a "bankruptcy" that would have recipients receiving a mere 120% of what current ones receive in real terms.
Again, I apologize for hijacking the comments column here.
Barkley