the jet is a means of transportation and is not for executive personal use. if the company has done their due diligence and established a need for the jet/hangar/crew/etc then so be it. I doubt most of you complaining would know how to put together a request/analysis of this nature. If the exec uses the jet for personal pleasure he (is supposed to) file in taxes. it is stated as such for company cars according to the IRS. Same with company phones. how many of you abuse this? where's the outrage? jobless people don't get to abuse the personal cell phone use that those with jobs can... oops, maybe I just let the cat out of the bag.

How can they say that no TARP money will be used for this $138 MILLION venture? Any money they spend on these planes and the hanger is money diverted from some other use - for which they will substitute TARP money. Do these business execs really think we are that stupid? Oops! I guess they KNOW that the Congress is that stupid.

I like it Brother Crow. I never hear anyone respond to this. I'm guess because they can't. Even Neal never responds to this. Heeellloo?

After 9/11, there is some stipulation that the Speaker of the House, who is in line for Presidency, is a security risk and should take military flights. HOWEVER, I would love to see her riding in a canvas jump seat....

She's more demanding than the law requires, it's not just "hitching" a ride, they have to be specific planes and she takes her family quite often which I'm pretty sure is NOT part of the original intent. With increased security at airports these days, I'm not sure it's even necessary. Put her on Delta. I'll sit next to her (insert evil grin here).

A lot of "middle-class" people depend on these companies to buy Jets (and Yachts), there are hundreds, perhaps even many thousands of people in the supply chain to companies like Gulfstream. Liberals only see the "fat cat" flying in this jet, but not the people whose livelihoods depend on it.

(speaking in a whiny crybaby voice) "Neal's still not getting it"...."Neal's still not getting it"...you sound like a pathetic diaper wearing moron.

If you didn't need the money, then don't go begging for it. That's it.

If there is so much spare lying about in heaps begging for jets, gold toilet seats and rare antique desks, then there is no need to reach into my pocket for operating expenses.

Why is this so hard to understand?

No bailout should have been given if they can afford this.

It is like asking for food stamps because you can't afford to keep buying the best caviar. Doesn't make sense at any level.

And if this becomes the standard operating procedure for expending money while taking bailouts, then it becomes the standard for people to keep giving additional taxes to fund it.

I don't have wealth envy. I have my own wealth and I worked hard and saved for it. I guess my issue is not with whether or not they buy these jets but with the fact they state unequivocably that no "bailout money will be used for this purpose". How can they ensure that? Once the money gets there, it goes into one bit pot and is spent for whatever. I just want them to be up front about all of this and not try to hide anything. Truth is always the best path for anyone to take. We can forgive someone for being an idiot and for maybe not spending their money like we would have spent ours but we can't forgive them for lying.

Money is like water. Every company has a pitcher, and when you pour bailout money into it, you are just displacing existing water. There is no argument for "no TARP money was spent!"

Either we give them bailout money or we don't. Either we put a government representative on their board of directors or we don't. (I'm in favor of no money/no rep). We can't let Congress be ACTING like they ARE that company's board of directors with Barney Frank as the CEO.

When you are in debt, the first step is to stop digging, and you certainly don't accept someone else's shovel when your breaks!

Watch the interest these folks charge on credit cards carefully if you have one of theirs or an old Washington Mutual card. They are the masters of "bait and switch". I had a Washington Mutual credit card with a relatively low 14% interest rate. When WAMU failed and was acquired by JP Morgan Chase, with the "help" of $25 B in "Taxpayer Appropriated Retirement Pensions" (TARP) funds, JP Morgan Chase announced within the first 30 days that they were raising the interest rate on all former WAMU credit cards to the default rate of 29.99%. This was imposed on all accounts, even those in good standing as mine was. I had always made the monthly payment at least 2 weeks before the due date and, fortunately, never carried a large balance. When the new confiscatory rates took effect, I immediately closed the account and paid what I thought was the full balance. I was so mad after calling to express my displeasure with their rate hike and basically told to "suck eggs", that I also refinanced my mortgage which had been held by Chase and moved it elsewhere. By the way, I went from 7% to 4.5 %, so that was a great move for me.
Anyway, I was unpleasantly surprised when I found out just yesterday that they were charging me additional interest on the paid off credit card balance (at 29.99%) accrued from the beginning of the billing period until the day I paid it off in the middle of the billing cycle. Ironically, just before I found this out, I heard about the new jets and hanger. I have always felt that a corporation's operations are ultimately controlled by its board of directors and the govt. should butt out. I still feel that way, but I had to call to register my anger with the interest rates and jets despite the taking of TARP funds as an incentive to acquire WAMU. The customer service rep immediately responded that JP Morgan Chase had in fact refused to take TARP money to avoid additional govt. interference and had not announced that they were buying new jets and remodeling the hanger. When I told him that he just spouting the official corporate PR lie, he finally confessed and even agreed with me.
The way to handle businesses that get greedy and decide to operate outside the normal parameters of the competitive market is to move your business elsewhere. They will either adjust or go under. The free market takes care of it's own; it's when the govt. gets involved and allows incompetents and idealists (Geithner and Obama) to "dictate from on high" that things really get out of hand.

From what I understand, JPM was forced by Uncle Sam to take the TARP money...Remember, they were able to bail out WaMu first and was Treasury's biggest sugar daddy for a while.

Homeless guy asking for $5 worth of food (a necessity) even though he apparently has enough money to not have sold off his mobile phone (also a necessity, if you ever want a home/job again) for $0.50 (seriously, try selling a last-gen prepaid phone to anyone): Lazy leech on society

Mega-corporation asking for $billions (arguably a necessity) when it still has money left over to buy and build brand new ultra-modern jets and hangars, which are not even related to their actual business: High Achievers

"Pelosi and her use of the air force as her own fleet of private jets"

You mean, as the law REQUIRES her to do? Yeah, let's get right on that.

The point (for those who are a bit slow on the uptake, probably educated in private "schools") is that these companies BEGGED FOR PUBLIC BAILOUT MONEY.

If they have ANYthing left over to pay for luxuries like jets, they should be funneling that money back into paying off the taxpayers who just BAILED THEIR A***ES OUT. Get it?

Your cries of "wealth envy" and "poor little rich, corrupt, incompetent executives" really aren't working, Mr. Boortz. Not when they've still got a hand out, begging for more of our tax dollars to stay afloat.

First let me say that I don't think we should be telling the companies what they should spend the money on. We gave it to them, and now it's up to them.

That said, I think it's kinda silly for any of them to say that "none of the TARP money was spent on this". That's like saying I didn't use my food stamps to buy those rims. Let's say I have $1000 for a month of expenses. I spend $500 for rent, $250 for food, and $250 for utilities and other necessities. Then the government says "We see you are struggling so here's $250 worth of food stamps". Now I have $250 to go buy a cell phone or some nice rims! Who's money was it that I spent? That was MY money, I didn't use ANY of the food stamps to buy my rims...

I do not have a problem with them doing it, but money is fungible. You take the non-TARP money from one account and replace it with TARP money, that way you can say honestly and with a straight face to the government-educated, "No TARP money was used."

This one will be a problem for the libs since the hangar will be using 'green' materials and creating 'green' jobs! Heck, the funny thing would be if some of the stimulus money will go to help build the hangar! Now that'll be LOL funny!