It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Vice President Biden charging Secret Service Rent

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   

The U.S. Secret Service does more than protect Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. — the agency also pays him rent. Since April, Mr. Biden has collected more than $13,000 from the agency charged with protecting him and his family, for use of a rental cottage adjacent to the waterfront home he owns in a Wilmington, Del., neighborhood. Mr. Biden, listed not as vice president in federal purchasing documents but as “vendor,” is eligible for up to $66,000 by the time the government contract expires in the fall of 2013, the records show. Officials say the arrangement came about when a previous tenant moved out of the cottage and the Secret Service moved in.


And this is my favorite snippet from the story:


Mr. Sepp also had a thought on what Mr. Biden could do with the rent money he collects from the Secret Service: “Every elected official can do the same thing average Americans can, which is to write a check to the Bureau of the Public Debt to bring down the national debt.”



So here we have the Secret Service, charged with protecting the man 24/7 and he is charging them money to live on his property. I suppose they would have to pay money to live somewhere anyway, but I wonder if the rent is competitive for the area. If I were in Biden's position, I would not be charging rent as it costs the taxpayers 66k a year. It just seems like a common courtesy to provide those charged with protecting your life with free board. It bothers me that the Vice President is also a government contractor. At least that what the article asserts. Your thoughts my friends? Reasonable or wrong?

Link
edit on 31-7-2011 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)



edit on 31-7-2011 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:33 PM
link   
who pays for the SS? the ppl who use them should not the tax payers, if that's not the way it already works.

lol picture
edit on 31-7-2011 by vjr1113 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
How Republican of him.

I bet Cheney is bummed out that he didn't think of it.



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by vjr1113
 


Taxpayers pay for the SS. I don't have a problem with that really, our higher ups should be protected. It just really irks me that Biden can't offer them housing on his own damn property.



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


lol how cheap of him...

yea that would mean that we pay his SS rent.



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by LazyGuy
 


I would just say how govt. official of him personally.



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Well, it really isn't any different then the SS paying another land or homeowner to rent another location. So it really makes no difference. You wouldn't be saving any money as a tax payer. (Unless it is overpriced).

And there is no reason for Biden to give that money back, because if it wasn't the SS renting it, he could be renting it to someone else. He is entitled to earn money from his property if he has tenants. Rental units do incur expenses such as taxes and upkeep.

And you also can't complain that the SS is payed to protect your VP. What kind of country would the US be if there were no protection? Third world dictators could have no power grid, but they always have security!



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   
Someone make it stop!!!! Every day it's something worse than the day before



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by vjr1113
 


Taxpayers pay for the SS. I don't have a problem with that really, our higher ups should be protected. It just really irks me that Biden can't offer them housing on his own damn property.


Should he offer to feed them too?

It makes no sense. Who pays the taxes, insurance, hydro and water bills for his rental property if he lets them stay for free?
edit on 31-7-2011 by boncho because: remembered that insurance costs money too!



Not only that, but should the loss of income from not renting the property out become tax deductible?
edit on 31-7-2011 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


You make a good point and that's why I was wondering if the rent was reasonable for the area. $2300 a month rents a lot more than a cottage where I live. Also, as I understood it the cottage is connected to his property. I guess to me it seems as if he is charging rent for someone staying in the spare bedroom. I suppose it may be beneficial to everyone.



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by vjr1113
reply to post by Domo1
 


lol how cheap of him...

yea that would mean that we pay his SS rent.

Inall fairness (i.e. holding my nose) If he didn't own the building we'd be paying the "landlord" anyway, it just stinks he gets to set the rent.
It stinks but it is probablya perfectly legal "perk". Suppose it'd be cheaper to move him and his family to a military base visiting officers quarters ( "billeting" or temporary lodging) on a military base near d.c.



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 05:59 PM
link   
i wouldnt be a very good secret service agent if he was charging me

and if there came a time that a bullet was headed his way id would stop and go hey joe this is going to cost you and depending on his answer wed go from there.

i do find this hilarious the most extravagent spenders of washington are cheaping out like that.

ps i can guarantee you you joe doesnt pay property taxes on that
edit on 31-7-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 06:04 PM
link   

is eligible for up to $66,000 by the time the government contract expires in the fall of 2013,


The 66k is not for just one year so the rent is not 2400 a month..

Still, I guess I can see both sides of this debate..

Morally I wouldn't charge rent and it may even make a good campaign point..



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96


i wouldnt be a very good secret service agent if he was charging me

 


I suppose your career would be short lived wouldn't it? Besides, he's not charging the individual protecting him. I'm sure the bill goes to the agency.




and if there came a time that a bullet was headed his way id would stop and go hey joe this is going to cost you and depending on his answer wed go from there.


Don't quit your dayjob.



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


yeah i am sure those secret service agents when jfk and reagan were shot ever lost their jobs.


easy man it was a joke



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by boncho
 


You make a good point and that's why I was wondering if the rent was reasonable for the area. $2300 a month rents a lot more than a cottage where I live. Also, as I understood it the cottage is connected to his property. I guess to me it seems as if he is charging rent for someone staying in the spare bedroom. I suppose it may be beneficial to everyone.


High profile cottages in my area go up around $5000 a month. The same area where the g8 was held. (Muskoka). We know well that they (public officials) aren't going to be staying in some small one or two bedroom log cabin, so $2400 to me doesn't seem like that much really.

What I think this article smells like, *whiff whiff*, yep, partisan flogging.



Really a non issue. If you could prove somehow that he was charging the last tenants 50% less, or something along those lines, than it would be a story.



posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by boncho
 


yeah i am sure those secret service agents when jfk and reagan were shot ever lost their jobs.




I don't think they won any medals...







easy man it was a joke




What, I can't have fun too?




posted on Jul, 31 2011 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 




too true and its a free party here
edit on 31-7-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join