Security·4,733 discussions

Tax Money at “Work” :O

Locked

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/07/federal.buildings.security/index.html

Any takers on whether or not this is the only idiot asleep at the desk for a federal (albeit, contracting) job?? Why obscure his face–he’s earned his ‘fame’; let him have it!

Liked the bit about the baby going through the X-Ray, too. Gotta love when your government edges closer to becoming the theme of a Jerry Springer Show.

“Next on Jerry Springer: Baby Momma, X-Ray Drama”

Of course, this speaks nothing of the fact that this is just another chapter in the book called “National Security Theater”.

The midterm elections can’t get here fast enough!

Topic

Oh great!

In reply to Tax Money at “Work” :O

Now we can watch the Feds over-react again and create another TSA-like agency to protect people in Federal buildings.

At least it will help the current Administration decrease unemployment with all of the new hires. 😉

On top of the added $$$…

In reply to Oh great!

…they’d probably end up just hiring these contract buffoons to the positions.

Pay more money, get the same skill level.

I wish Vegas offered prop bets on things like this! 😉

But they need to now

In reply to Oh great!

cause it hit the news, so they gotta spend more on it now. It will start as a plan that will actually take full effect in 2016, and cost 800 Billion per State.

You Get What You Pay For

In reply to Tax Money at “Work” :O

Like most local outsourcing, if you pay for $8/hr security, don’t expect the same results as $20/hr security.

Now, I am sure that the company that supplies the contract security guards gets paid much more than $8/hr for the services of the guards, I would all but bet that most of the guards are being paid little if any more than minimum wage.

There is no incentive for the guard to do a great job. If he does not work out at that building, he can be assigned somewhere else tomorrow.

I don’t see this as a failure of our tax dollars. I see this as a failure from trying to reduce cost by outsourcing a service to the lowest bidder.

Chas

Dunno why,

In reply to Tax Money at “Work” :O

but I’m reminded of a line from [i]Independence Day[/i].
Julius Levinson (Judd Hirsch): “You don’t actually think they spend $20,000.00 on a hammer, $30,000.00 on a toilet seat do you?”

I’m oft reminded of that movie

In reply to Dunno why,

Two things stand out politically:

1). That line about spending is right on target. Honestly, I wouldn’t mind the phantom funding so much if the rest of the money (such as that paid to this security firm) was actually being used somewhat judiciously.

2). How sad is it that the president portrayed in a Roland Emmerich film is much preferable to any we’ve had in quite a while?!?

The Federal Building in Columbia, SC

In reply to Tax Money at “Work” :O

has a sign at the front door that states what items are banned. On that list are the usual suspects: box cutters, flammable liquids, firearms, explosives, etc. Explicitly banned are knives with “blades less than 2.5 inches in length.”

I pointed out that the blade on my multi-tool was longer than that and should be allowed. They said the hand-lettered sign was wrong, they don’t allow blades of any type whatsoever in the building. When I observed that that must make it hard to open boxes and cut packing tape, I was told I was a smart-ass.

That’s what we’re dealing with here.

No different from TSA…

In reply to The Federal Building in Columbia, SC

…just different colored uniforms and different venues.

Sad!

[Author]

Replies