And further, the corporation reduces its profits by Y so that it can save the tax rate x Y ??

Costs go up, net income, and thus taxes, go down. No?

Sure. That's a different thing than the taxpayers paying for it, though, which is what I thought you were implying.

Businesses have a limited ability to write off entertainment and training expenses against income, just as they do with other legitimate costs of running the business.

I thought that's what I said. We can quibble over the scope, if you like. But the fact remains, businesses can deduct a training expense from gross income as a cost, no? Costs go up, net income, and thus taxes, go down. No?

Are you all from Canada or something?

If a corporation does it, it's written off as a legimate business expense, and some other taxpayers pick up the burden.

Uh, no. Businesses have a limited ability to write off entertainment and training expenses against income, just as they do with other legitimate costs of running the business. The pay taxes on their profits.

I will never forget the conversation I had with someone in the California university system. He told me that they were getting Aeron chairs for department secretaries. I said "WTF?" He said "industry does it." I said "only overblown dot-coms do it for secretaries.

I think in the high flying days (especially) people in government felt they were entitled to "equal perks" with industry. When the drew their examples from the worst in industry, it was that much worse.

I really hope now that our new frugality, our new normal, will be reflected back into government just as excess was then. It's just tragic that government didn't stay the old-old normal and frugal all along.

If the corporation does it the stockholders have a right to complain.

Get real, Steve. If a corporation does it, it's written off as a legimate business expense, and some other taxpayers pick up the burden.

I agree retreats and the like are more likely veiled rewards and morale builders than productive use of resources.

I agree they could be veiled rewards, but are morale builders not productive? Of course they are, but the question is really whether the (probably temporary) productivity boost is worth the money.

Plus in my line of work working with people around the globe, communication seems to be improved when you occasionally sit down face-to-face with them.

Considering that said figure includes transportation, meals, entertainment, and whatnot, it is indeed quite the bargain.

Indeed, I spent about that much on recent trips to L.A. and Tennessee, and I was pinching every penny. Transportation and lodging alone can easily reach $1000 per person.

What sort of “organizational training” do Social Security Administration managers need that involves dancing, skits, and casino gambling?

I presume that there wasn't a "gambling allotment" given to those attending, that rather they gambled with their own money.

I’m just generally dubious of retreats, conventions, and the like as productive enterprises.

It all depends on who's in attendance and why. My recent trips were for conventions, and the contacts and conversations I had during them were well worth the expense.

How are these people going to fix social security with the kind of table limits imposed at a phony Arizona casino? They need to be able to bet billions to have even a chance at getting well. Even then we're talking thousands of hours at the craps table.

If not Vegas the only other plan is the Republican plan to bet it all in the stock market.

I agree retreats and the like are more likely veiled rewards and morale builders than productive use of resources. In the public sector they seem more of a way to have fun on the taxpayers dime while claiming it's necessary.