Slashdot Mirror


TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change

Hugh Pickens writes "NBC reports that airport travelers left behind $409,085.56 in loose change at security checkpoints in 2010, providing an additional source of funding for the Transportation Security Administration. 'TSA puts (the leftover money) in a jar at the security checkpoint, at the end of each shift they take it, count it, put it in an envelope and send it to the finance office,' says TSA spokesperson Nico Melendez. 'It is amazing. All that change, it all adds up.' Melendez adds that the money goes into the general operating budget for TSA that is typically used for technology, light bulbs or just overall general expenses. Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Fla.) has introduced legislation that would direct the TSA to transfer unclaimed money recovered at airport security checkpoints to the United Service Organizations (USO), a private nonprofit that operates centers for the military at 41 U.S. airports. The recovered change is not to be confused with the theft that occurs when TSA agents augment their salary by helping themselves to the contents of passengers' luggage as it passes through security checkpoints. For example in 2009, a half dozen TSA agents at Miami International Airport were charged with grand theft after boosting an iPod, bottles of perfume, cameras, a GPS system, a Coach purse, and a Hewlett Packard Mini Notebook from passengers' luggage as travelers at just this one airport reported as many as 1,500 items stolen, the majority of which were never recovered."

289 comments

  1. I suspect there is an additional handling charge by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    at the end of each shift they take it, count it, divide most of it up amongst themselves, and put it in their pockets

    FTFY.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  2. TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Great. The we should decrease their budget by at lease this much for the next fiscal year.

    1. Re:TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by jwest · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We should decrease their budget by n, where n is their 2011 budget.

    2. Re:TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by Cyphase · · Score: 0

      HAHAHAHA!!!!!

      --
      by Cyphase ( 907627 )
    3. Re:TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by isorox · · Score: 4, Informative

      We should decrease their budget by n, where n is their 2011 budget.

      n+$400k surely

    4. Re:TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Minus the value of the stolen goods and damaged goods due to the TSA efforts to stop those 'evul terrerists'.

    5. Re:TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by 14erCleaner · · Score: 4, Funny

      Great. The we should decrease their budget by at lease this much for the next fiscal year.

      So instead of $8,100,000,000, they'll only get $8,099,600,000. That'll show 'em.

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
    6. Re:TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by na1led · · Score: 1

      If the TSA had morals, they would donate that money to charity!

      --
      -- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
    7. Re:TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the TSA had morals, they would donate that money to charity!

      If the TSA had morals they wouldn't break stuff, harass people, molest children, steal property, or frankly exist at all.

    8. Re:TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      Great. The we should decrease their budget by at lease this much for the next fiscal year.

      So instead of $8,100,000,000, they'll only get $8,099,600,000. That'll show 'em.

      Well yes and no. Personally I'd like to see the TSA de-funded and eliminated, but that's probably not going to happen. However having their budget actually decreased would be a nice start. When I say decreased, I don't mean deceases the way government defines it. To congress this means that if they got $8.1 billion this year and were going to get $9 billion next year and instead only get $8.5 billion, it's a decrease of half a billion dollars. I'm sure like most government programs having to get by with the same budget, or slightly less even, this could perhaps serve as some kind of notice.

    9. Re:TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well played, sir

    10. Re:TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by na1led · · Score: 1

      Which is all pointless because you know the TSA won't touch someone wearing a Burqa, or a Turban!

      --
      -- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
    11. Re:TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That isn't how state budgets work. The more money allocated, the more spent and leveraged for future debt.

  3. I believe it by wandazulu · · Score: 3, Informative

    I pick up every coin I find and put it in a large jar. Once it's full I take it to the bank and, though it really upsets the teller to have to deal with it, I end up netting around $300. Granted it takes a few years, but every little bit helps. :\

    1. Re:I believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI Chase bank has free change counters...

    2. Re:I believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't your bank have a coin sorter? At my bank I just dump it in a machine, it spits out a receipt, the teller gives me cash. No upset teller. The cost of the machine is eaten by people using it who don't have an account at the bank(10% of the coins exchanged). It's free for account holders.

    3. Re:I believe it by JobyOne · · Score: 1

      Chase isn't special. Most banks have those. OP must just have an exceptionally crappy one. I'd advise you find a bank that's less evil, BTW.

      --
      Porquoi?
    4. Re:I believe it by Pope · · Score: 1

      I spend my change as I accumulate it, keeping it in the change pocked in my wallet. Very often I'll clear it out completely when I grab a coffee. Beats keeping it in a jar.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    5. Re:I believe it by WillgasM · · Score: 2

      Even better: join a credit union

    6. Re:I believe it by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      You could train the local crows to do it for you...

      Like this guy

      --
      No sig today...
    7. Re:I believe it by eht · · Score: 1

      Never been ripped off by a bank as much as I was when I had an account at a credit union.

    8. Re:I believe it by antdude · · Score: 1

      Also, a man collects gold from New York City (NYC) sidewalks: http://www.google.com/search?q=new+york+sidewalk+gold+collect ... Just tedious work. :)

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    9. Re:I believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1

      Some banks have been crappy, but one of the two credit unions I was a member of cost me more in 2 years then BofA and Citibank have in the last 9.

    10. Re:I believe it by operagost · · Score: 1

      I would love to hear the details on this.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    11. Re:I believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's how small business vs. big/franchise works: way more variability on the former.

      The main draw of a place like Olive Garden, by way of analogy, isn't that their food and service isn't better than every local guinea food joint, it's just that every Olive Garden everywhere gives you a consistent (imho mediocre) experience.

    12. Re:I believe it by boss_hog · · Score: 1

      You could get a bank(or branch) with a coin machine. My bank counts the money for free, and the teller only has to worry about cutting into an old (clean) milk jug to get the change out.

      I start collecting change each January, and use the money to pay for Christmas presents.

    13. Re:I believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They do, but not in my small town. They asked me if I needed the money immediately and since I said no they seal it in a plastic bag send it to a larger city some 60 miles away and it shows up on my bank statement.

    14. Re:I believe it by Undead+Waffle · · Score: 1

      And there's always Coin Star. If you convert it to a gift certificate you don't have to pay the 9% or whatever the fee is. I just convert my change to an Amazon gift card, which I buy from often anyway. And since the nearest Coin Star is at the market I don't have to make a special trip for it.

    15. Re:I believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I keep two buckets for change. One is my "working" change bucket, and money goes in and out of this as it accumulates.

      My second is more of a plastic bag and I put every penny I come across in this bag. Once it's full (takes about three months) I go out on the street and give it to the first homeless person I find. Yes, it's a bag full of pennies, and it's only worth about ten bucks, but it still makes someone happy.

      That's my $0.01 worth.

    16. Re:I believe it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you charge most of your purchases, it's hard to spend the change. I don't want to carry around the change for days until I make my next cash purchase. Even the vending machines on my floor take cards now. OK, that's ID card, not credit card, but same thing really if you keep a balance on your ID.

    17. Re:I believe it by WillgasM · · Score: 1

      In the five years I've had an account at a CU, I haven't paid a single fee. The only money they've made off me was interest on a car loan (which was at 2% points lower than I could finance anywhere else). On my bank account, however, I've had 2 overdrafts that cost be something like $38 each, and for the last 4-5 months I've been paying $5 a month for the same service I had for the prior 10 years.

  4. Office Space 2: The Knocked Up guys by rjejr · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    3 disgruntled about to be let go TSA employees concoct a scheme to steal all of the loose change left behind by passengers to support the pregnant girl of whom one of them is the father They steal Vin Diesel's bag of Mafia money by mistake. Hilarity and ultra-violence ensue.

    1. Re:Office Space 2: The Knocked Up guys by Magada · · Score: 1

      It turns out one of them is an FBI plant, who was after Vin Diesel all along. He gets the girl. And the brat.

      --
      Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
    2. Re:Office Space 2: The Knocked Up guys by Smallpond · · Score: 1

      This movie would be awesome. Vin would be up for another Razzie. Don't forget the big box of confiscated knives, guns, explosives and questionable liquids.

    3. Re:Office Space 2: The Knocked Up guys by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Wait, one of them is the father of the pregnant girl? Shouldn't it be that one of them is the father of the pregnant girl's child?

      Oh, and can one of the passengers go PC Load Letter on the naked porn scanner?

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    4. Re:Office Space 2: The Knocked Up guys by treeves · · Score: 1

      substitute "baby daddy" for "father" and it's OK.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  5. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I, for one, am happy that the TSA is staffed by people who seem to hate their job as much as we do. The alternative, that an arm of totalitarianism is entirely staffed by people who are ideologically committed, would be far worse.

  6. Lost property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surely there is legislation in place that would say this lost property has to be kept for a certain amount of time before being stolen?

    In many places there is legislation that if you find some property (including cash) you must hand it to the police. Then if it is unclaimed after a certain amount of time you can request to keep it.

    Why isn't that the case here?
    OK, the article does say:

    The TSA said it does everything it can to get items back to passengers, but if no one claims the money, it is used to finance operations.

    But I don't the truthfulness of the claim "everything", as they could easily contact travelers asking if they left any money behind...

    1. Re:Lost property by Fallingcow · · Score: 1

      There's usually a minimum value attached to those sorts of laws, so you can pick up a nickel without having to report it. IIRC it's often something like $20.

    2. Re:Lost property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely there is legislation in place that would say this lost property has to be kept for a certain amount of time before being stolen?

      You missed the last 20 years where police departments have started supplementing their budgets with property seized from "drug dealers" (anyone with more than an ounce of pot). The public at large is now fair game.

    3. Re:Lost property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you expect people to come back and say , "I think I lost 78 cents in change when I came through here yesterday" ? Do you expect people to believe them if they did.

      Trying to save loose change for people to reclaim would be a nightmare and for hardly any payoff, very little of it would be reclaimed

    4. Re:Lost property by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      You missed the last 20 years where police departments have started supplementing their budgets with property seized from "drug dealers" (anyone with more than [a few bucks gets framed with] an ounce of pot). The public at large is now fair game.

      FTFY

    5. Re:Lost property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      WRONG.

      The are supplementing their budges with property seized/stolen from EVERYONE.. Including the innocent.
      They don't have to convict to keep the money. The don't even have to CHARGE them with a crime.
      They only have to SAY that is was 'drug' money, and then they keep the cash.
      The charge the PROPERTY with a crime, and then you, the rightful owner, have to sue and PROVE that the property is 'innocent' of any crime to get it back.
      It's called Asset forfeiture and Civil Asset forfeiture.

      http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2010/02/take_the_money_and_run.html
      http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/26/the-forfeiture-racket
      http://www.isil.org/resources/lit/looting-of-america.html
      http://www.fear.org/whatodo-1.html
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asset_forfeiture

      Now, there were changes to the law in 1999 that in theory should stop some of this abuse, but in reality cops are completely ignoring it.

      All of this stems from ancient common-law dating back to Rome iirc.. The idea being that if a bull were to get loose and go on a rampage and kill someone, the State can kill the animal and not compensate the owner because there was a crime committed by the property.
      The owner would have to prove that it was not his animal that caused the death to get compensation from the State for the loss of the Bull.

      Fair enough.
      But currently in the US people are stopped, cops find cash, even a completely 'normal' amount of cash, and then just fucking take it, say it was GOING to be used to buy drugs, and then tell the person to be on their way.
      No charges, no probable cause, nothing. The just say.. "$500? I bet you were going to buy drugs with this. Thanks, I'm keeping it. Fuck you."
      And you have to get a lawyer and sue to get it back.
      Usually the lawyer costs more than the value of the property stolen by the police, so people just have to bend over and take it.
      Cops know this, their raises and fancy SUV's are funded by the stolen $$, so their incentive is to steal as much $$ and property from as many people as possible.
      They have even taken peoples HOUSES using this.... Even when they found nothing criminal and no charges are filed.

      It's so sick that prior to 1999 you had to post a 'bond' of 10% of the property they stole just to fucking FILE.
      What is even sicker is that many states passed laws where the owner had to be found guilty of a crime and the property must clearly be related to it.
      What happened?
      The police set up 'asset sharing' agreements with the FEDERAL goons.
      Now when they know they can steal something juicy, they just call up the local feds, do a 'joint task force', have the feds file the paperwork, and still steal all the money and property since Feds are not bound by state law, and then get a big cut of the money back from the Feds.

      It is unconstitutional, immoral, and just plain sick. And it happens every day in USSR of America.....

    6. Re:Lost property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worse
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_P._Scott

  7. Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My dad discovered that the hard way when he lost 200UKP from his suitcase between Vegas and the UK, replaced with a nice "The TSA searched your bags." notice.

    1. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      It took that to convince your dad? For your sake I hope naivete is not genetic.

      Never leave anything valuable in your checked bags. Take it as carryon, leave it at home, mail it, or check it with a gun since those bags are inspected in front of you then kept locked and tracked for the whole trip. Choose the option which is most suited to your situation.

    2. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or check it with a gun since those bags are inspected in front of you then kept locked and tracked for the whole trip.

      But if you go the gun route, avoid NYC. Or, at least, doing any touristy things there. They have very strict gun laws. Just in the news recently there have been two or three tourists from out of state, that were arrested for having pistols in their possession.

    3. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by jc42 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Never leave anything valuable in your checked bags. Take it as carryon, leave it at home, mail it, or check it with a gun since those bags are inspected in front of you then kept locked and tracked for the whole trip.

      Or you can do as Bruce Schneier does, and many others have reported: Include a starter pistol in your luggage, and declare it. It seems the TSA's rules include starter pistols as "weapons", and if you have one, they'll inspect your luggage before your eyes, lock it, and store it in a separate part of the airplane. Bruce and others have reported that this not only works; it also reduces the "loss" of luggage (or valuable contents like cameras and computers) to around zero. In effect, for the cost of a starter pistol, you are using the security folks to lock and guard your luggage and guarantee delivery.

      I see that another reply deals with New York's stringent gun laws. Does anyone know whether a starter pistol (or stage pistols that just fire smoke) are considered "weapons" in New York or other states? If so, it might be interesting to push for Federal registration of such pseudo-guns, to avoid the hassle of trying to register them with the bureaucracies of N different states.

      Anyway, if you try this gimmick, you might want to write up your experiences. And you might want to thank the TSA "agents" for their assistance in making the flight safe for you and your belongings. ;-)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    4. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to carry the gun with you all the time, just leave it in the hotel. It's purpose is to get you bag sorted into the other pile not to be toted around while you go sight seeing.

    5. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Don't use a pistol. Too many laws in many towns about that. Use a starter gun, blank gun or bolt action rifle.

    6. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by jc42 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I might add that a number of people have written about another strategy for preventing "loss" of luggage or contents: Sending important/valuable luggage to your destination (typically a hotel) via any of the package delivery services (postal, FedEx, etc). This has become especially common since airlines started charging extra for more than one small piece of luggage. All the package delivery services have faster and more reliable service than the airlines, and it often costs less. They'll deliver it to any address, and it's likely to arrive before you do (so you may want to tell the hotel to be on the lookout for it ;-).

      I know a number of musicians who have sent their instruments this way, after reading all the horror stories of what airlines do to fragile instruments.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    7. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can't leave the airport if you're carrying a pistol in your bag in NYC. Their gun laws are that fucked up. You can and will be charge with a felony if caught. The only possible way you MIGHT be okay is if you travel directly out of state from said airport.

    8. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by Kakari · · Score: 1

      And the smart musicians sing about it. :)

    9. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by Mitreya · · Score: 1
      Include a starter pistol in your luggage, and declare it. It seems the TSA's rules include starter pistols as "weapons", and if you have one, they'll inspect your luggage before your eyes, lock it, and store it in a separate part of the airplane.

      Can't you just keep the laptop in carry-on instead? some of us have a life. Spending extra half-hour waiting for them to accommodate your special screening needs is not in the budget. Also, if the gun-carrying bag is stored separately, wouldn't you have to receive it separately, well after the rest of the passengers?

    10. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Odd. The majority of instrumentalists I know (admittedly the majority are flautists) take it with them on the plane. Those with large instruments (I'm good friends with a professional cellist) often buy the instrument itself a ticket.

    11. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      I might add that a number of people have written about another strategy for preventing "loss" of luggage or contents: Sending important/valuable luggage to your destination (typically a hotel) via any of the package delivery services (postal, FedEx, etc).

      Yeah, they are so much better than baggage handlers:

      http://news.yahoo.com/viral-video-fedex-delivery-man-throws-computer-monitor-050009440.html

    12. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that one got a lot of attention. They did a really good job with it (and the "recycled" melody ;-). I wonder how many other good ones like this are lurking out there? I've seen a few blog comments along the same line, but no song quite as good as this one.

      (I have wondered if they got any actual airline employees to help in that video. There have to be some musicians among the employees, and you just know how they must have felt about all this.)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    13. Re:Never put cash or valuables in your suitcase. by jc42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Buying the instrument a ticket makes a lot of sense for the larger instruments. I've taken a few small instruments in my carry-on bag.

      One of those cases produced a fun anecdote. I had a pennywhistle in my carry-on, and the guy at the X-ray machine was very suspicious. He took it out and asked me what it was. I took it out of his hand, and started playing a nice, lively jig. Everyone around broke out into smiles, and a couple of people started doing Irish jig steps. They waved me through, with smiles on their faces.

      It occurred to me afterward, though, that if you look at a pennywhistle closely, it's a small tube of thin steel (or sometimes brass, or tin-plated other metals). It would make a serviceable stiletto, and you could do a lot of damage to someone if you used it to "take a core sample" (as a forest biologist might say). Of course, you might not want to play it afterward, until you've cleaned it up well. But I didn't mention this to the airline people.

      There have been a few funny stories about people on an airplane realizing that they'd brought along serious weapons without the security folks noticing. One I read a while ago was a physician who used obsidian blades in his scalpels, and had a packet of them in his pocket. These are among the sharpest blades that exist, good for making fast, clean cuts, and a person comfortable with handling them could kill a lot of people very quickly. Of course, he used them professionally, to save people's lives. But they were still a serious violation of the rules, since they're much more dangerous than box cutters l. He also didn't report himself to the airline security people. But he blogged about it, and NPR interviewed him.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  8. That was mine... by tverbeek · · Score: 5, Funny

    That loose change was mine. I'd like to reclaim it.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    1. Re:That was mine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The nice TSA man took $1.37 directly from my rectum. I'm not sure I'd want to reclaim it!

  9. What about "confiscated" items? by AngryDeuce · · Score: 4, Informative

    All the stuff they take from you is auctioned off, as well.

    The TSA is just taking the DEA's lead. They've been funding themselves by taking property from "drug dealers" for decades. For instance, in many states, if you get busted in your car with drugs, the state can take your car, even if it's personal use amounts. Unless, of course, you still owe money on it, than they'll let you keep it so that you are obligated to make those payments, of course.

    This is nothing more than thievery masquerading as a public service, but then again, one could say the same about a lot of facets of our government as of late...

    1. Re:What about "confiscated" items? by sribe · · Score: 2

      Unless, of course, you still owe money on it, than they'll let you keep it so that you are obligated to make those payments, of course.

      Uhm, no. They take it anyway, and you still owe the payments. (Or at least that's how it is in some status for DUI.)

    2. Re:What about "confiscated" items? by Nadaka · · Score: 2

      You don't even have to be convicted. All property involved in a drug arrest can be seized and sold at auction before trial. If you are acquitted,found innocent, or even prove that it was a complete framejob at most you will get a form letter apologizing for the inconvenience.

    3. Re:What about "confiscated" items? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      Bummer I just had a business idea. I'll loan you $100 against your car. you owe me payments of $5/month. The interest is $60/year...
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    4. Re:What about "confiscated" items? by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Having your car seized does not stop you from having to make payments. And before you argue insurance, read your policy especially the part where it says using the vehicle to commit an illegal act voids the policy.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    5. Re:What about "confiscated" items? by vux984 · · Score: 1

      read your policy especially the part where it says using the vehicle to commit an illegal act voids the policy.

      Don't you have to be convicted of actually committing an illegal act though? Otherwise, the police just stole your car.

    6. Re:What about "confiscated" items? by Obfuscant · · Score: 2

      Don't you have to be convicted of actually committing an illegal act though? Otherwise, the police just stole your car.

      Google "civil asset forfeiture". The car is guilty of the act, it is being punished by being confiscated. It's a civil case, so the level of proof is "preponderance of the evidence" only, and the proof lies with the car owner to get it back.

    7. Re:What about "confiscated" items? by c++0xFF · · Score: 1

      IANAL, obviously, so could someone with more knowledge explain the legal reasoning here?

      No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

      So, it seems to me that the government must justly compensate the owner for seizing the private property. Or does Eminent Domain only apply to Real Estate?

    8. Re:What about "confiscated" items? by Nadaka · · Score: 2

      Convicts -> criminals -> suspects -> terrorists -> immigrants -> non party members -> serfs don't have rights. It is the natural progression of an authoritarian state. We are somewhere around 4 and 5 right now. The constitution and the rule of law only matters as long as there are people in power who respect them.

    9. Re:What about "confiscated" items? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is nothing more than thievery masquerading as a public service, but then again, one could say the same about a lot of facets of our government as of late...

      Just re-read Rudy Rucker's "Ware" series where the police are always referred to as the Gimmie...

    10. Re:What about "confiscated" items? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      In some cases, there's some absurdist rigamarole about the property being charged with the crime. Once things get that far from reality, logic is irrelevant.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    11. Re:What about "confiscated" items? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends.
      If you go to a bank and tell them you need money for a car, they'll usually give you a contract that says they own your car until it's fully repaid. This makes it much easier for them to repossess it, and much harder for anyone else.

  10. Jeff Miller is stupid by SiMac · · Score: 2

    Why doesn't he just create a bill to give $400,000 of taxpayer money to the USO? It's the same thing financially as redirecting this money that currently goes into the general budget to a private organization, but I guess it sounds better the way he puts it?

    Then again, $400,000 is not that much money in the first place. He and a couple wealthy friends could almost certainly cover it.

    1. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by jmac_the_man · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The point is to discourage the TSA from taking this money. He had to pick some charity, and realistically, nobody is going to object to it being the USO.

    2. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by KPU · · Score: 1

      How about paying off the national debt?

    3. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd be all for a bill redirecting the salaries of Congress to a charity, say, Doctors Without Borders or Mercy Corps... They at least do something with most of the moneys they get.

      But, I'm sure that they'd redirect the money to a charity run these days by the likes of Jack Abrahamoff for lobbyists suffering from the effects of their work.

    4. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pay off the national debt? Ha! Ha, I say!

      It would take 35000 years to pay of the national debt at $400,000 a year. Assuming the debt was frozen at the current level. In the time it takes to read this, the US National Debt goes up by about $400,000.

    5. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      Because, assuming the bill is permanent (instead of a one-off authorization) you have created $400,000 in government debt hoping that you recover that much from the TSA. Any year they recover less, you're in the hole. And of course there would need to be another portion of the bill directing the TSA to return what it does collect to the government at large, since they are currently keeping it in their own coffers.

      Now granted, $400,000 in the scope of the government is a rounding error, but why let a problem exist when the solution is as simple as "however much you collect, donate that?"--which is basically what this bill says.

    6. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell, I'd be for a bill redirecting the salaries of Congress to a charity, say, Doctor Who Fans Without Borders. Of course I'd honestly rather see Puppy Killers of America get that money than the folks in Congress.

    7. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if you include other agencies it might go down to 10000 years! If we invest the money on something smart we might be able to pay it in 8000 years!

    8. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a foreigner, who objects to your imperial wars, I'd like to know how the USO is a charity if it's set up to service military personnel.

    9. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Politburo · · Score: 1

      No, the point is political grandstanding.

      USO was chosen because now if you're against the bill, you're 'against the troops'.

    10. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Politburo · · Score: 1

      You seem to have some mutual exclusion in mind that just doesn't exist. There's nothing stopping charities from helping military personnel. USO is far from the only one.

      Oh, I think I know what you're missing... in the US the government rarely fully does the job (never, when it comes to social services) and therefore we rely on private charities to pick up the slack.

    11. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by jmac_the_man · · Score: 2
      Is there anything that makes this "grandstanding" other than the fact that the Representative in question is a Republican and you're a liberal?

      Because how I see it, this Congressional oversight of an Executive branch agency. The Executive branch agencies are only allowed to spend the money appropriated by Congress. They're not supposed to go out of their way to get money in other ways. Taking the money away from them and giving it to someone else removes their incentive to get money outside the appropriations process. In terms of being non-controversial (outside of this thread, that is), the USO is a decent "someone else" to give it to.

    12. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Obfuscant · · Score: 2

      Oh, I think I know what you're missing... in the US the government rarely fully does the job (never, when it comes to social services) and therefore we rely on private charities to pick up the slack.

      I think what you are missing is that it isn't the government's job to provide "full social services", so the fact that they aren't doing the whole job is a Good Thing. Charities are necessary not because the government is failing, but because the charities and government have different things to do.

      We used to rely on charities to do the job, but too many people started wanting too many things and too many people thought "gee, think of the children" and stuff like that and started expecting the government to become their de-novo parents. If you'd made the kind of comment you did back in 1900, you'd get blank stares and people would cross the street when they saw you coming.

    13. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Politburo · · Score: 0

      Except they're not going out of their way. People are leaving the money at TSA checkpoints. Should they just be throwing it out?

    14. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Politburo · · Score: 1

      "full social services" being in quotes is interesting, seeing how it's a phrase I didn't use.

      The point I was making is that even where US government does provide social services, they are usually not sufficient to actually meet the need.

      In this particular case, we're talking about military morale. It's insane that we rely on a private charity to take care of this (and USO isn't the only one.. cf Operation Bedding, etc).

      The attitudes of 1900 are not relevant in any way.

    15. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      "full social services" being in quotes is interesting, seeing how it's a phrase I didn't use.

      Look up "scare quotes".

      The point I was making is that even where US government does provide social services, they are usually not sufficient to actually meet the need.

      And my point is, so what? They aren't supposed to be doing it, so the fact that they aren't doing it is irrelevant.

      In this particular case, we're talking about military morale. It's insane that we rely on a private charity to take care of this (and USO isn't the only one.. cf Operation Bedding, etc).

      No, it isn't insane that we rely on a charity to do charity work. That's what charities are for. I would rather have the USO doing the job it does than having the military actually pay the going rates for entertainers and their entourages to go visit the troops. It would be insane to have the military renting the space and paying staff to be at every airport when they already have space and staff at the local bases.

      Having the USO do it means everyone wins. The troops get the benefits. The people who volunteer and donate get the benefits. The entertainers get lots of good press and rep points.

      Do YOU want to increase the military budget to provide the USO services? Do you think such increases would survive any stringent budget cuts?

      How about the charity operations that do things like provide Christmas packages and messages from home to troops that are deployed? Should those packages be coming from someone in the military instead? "Dear soldier, thanks for serving, here's a cookie. Signed, Col. Joe Smith, Commander, Military Troop Morale Command Eastern Division. MTMCEDIV -- we care because we're paid to care!"

      The attitudes of 1900 are not relevant in any way.

      They demonstrate the modern abberation that is being accepted as "the way things should be", when they weren't always that way and nobody thought they should be.

    16. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by jmac_the_man · · Score: 1

      No. But they shouldn't be keeping it either. Maybe they should give it to charity.

    17. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh I'm sure there's people out there that would object to the money going to the USO.

    18. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by SiMac · · Score: 1

      But then the TSA just asks for $400,000 more from the federal budget. No less money goes to the TSA, but $400,000 more goes from taxpayers' pockets to the USO.

      If the point is to discourage the TSA from taking the money, why not just make them put it back in the federal budget?

    19. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by jmac_the_man · · Score: 1
      Budgets don't work like that. You can't assume that passengers will leave behind $400,000 because then if they read TFA and are more careful with their change next year and you only make $100,000, you're $300,000 in the hole and need to ask to borrow/tax more. When it comes out that the shortfall comes from "fewer people leaving behind change at TSA checkpoints," you'll look like an ass.

      In NJ a few years back, the Turnpike authority (which at the time had jurisdiction over the two major toll roads in the state) had a budget shortfall in the millions of dollars*. When auditors or the newspapers or somebody asked why, it was because they were calculating that about 10%* of drivers would cheat the tolls and have to pay a fine. They were including the fine money in their budget. When only 2%* of drivers cheated the toll, there was a shortfall. And outrage.

      That's why you can't budget on the money. Your assumption that TSA will just get the money out of the budget anyway assumes that Congress will give them whatever they ask for, which isn't exactly true either. (It's too close to true for my taste, too.) But if they ask for something dumb, Congress CAN tell them to pound sand, which is what Miller is counting on. *The numbers may be off. This was a decade ago, and I never drove on any of the roads in question, so I didn't follow this story too closely.

    20. Re:Jeff Miller is stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Budgets don't work like that.

      So what you're saying is, it's impossible to estimate income or expenses? I think this is a stretch.

  11. Also alcohol by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    At the international arrivals area in Hartsfield-Jackson in Atlanta, you go through security after you pick up your bags, go through customs, and recheck your bags. Many passengers forget to put their duty free alcohol in their bags before they recheck them, and try to carry them through security, where they are told to either check the alcohol or have it confiscated. I worked for an airline back there for several summers and would often have to check the alcohol, but sometimes they would just leave it with us(got a bottle of Absinthe this way). Once I asked a TSA guy what they did with all the alcohol they confiscated. He said that at the end of the day they were packaged up and sent off site for destruction and disposal. But we always figured that the TSA screeners would help themselves to any good stuff before they sent it off.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:Also alcohol by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Only the USA and China make you take your bags through customs at your point of entry. So even ex-Soviet states are more convenient to travel to.

    2. Re:Also alcohol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So is Canada. The custom is after your luggage claim and you have to form a line while carrying all your bags to pass them.

      I was a bit surprised at the Custom in Hong Kong as they are off to one side of the arrival and you aren't even force to go past them to get to the outside.

    3. Re:Also alcohol by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      Only the USA and China make you take your bags through customs at your point of entry

      Canada too.

      Imagine you're flying London -> Los Angeles -> Fresno. When should your bags go through customs? Fresno? Does that mean everyone flying Los Angeles -> Fresno should go through customs? The fact that you connect to an internal domestic flight means this is the only way to make this work.

    4. Re:Also alcohol by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      No, it means just the bags that were checked in London and end up in Fresno.

      So 3 nations do it that way, everyone else does it the right way. I fly to Germany quite a bit and always land in Frankfurt then go to Stuttgart. I do customs in Stuttgart.

    5. Re:Also alcohol by treeves · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but Hong Kong is the airport that found and confiscated a little box-cutter that I had inadvertently left in my carry-on backpack, after having gotten through the SFO airport and onto the plane with it, back in 2006.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    6. Re:Also alcohol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same thing for me. However, the thing is that when I go to germany, I go through customs, and my bags go through customs, but we don't go through customs together. I have no idea why we have to go through immigration, and then hand-carry our luggage a few meters to put it on a conveyor belt. It'd be pretty easy to flag the bags you've already caught and get them at the destination with cooperation with the local law enforcement, or look at the baggage tag and read the name on it and correlate that with the seat to the destination. But what do I know.

      The reason, I believe, that we don't do customs at the destination is that we've got a bunch of shitty little destinations that certainly don't rate customs, and there aren't nearly as many international flights, percentage wise, into many of our middling airports.

    7. Re:Also alcohol by treeves · · Score: 1

      The question is not whether or not the bags should go through customs. They should. The question is whether one should have to carry them themselves through customs. One should not.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    8. Re:Also alcohol by b0bby · · Score: 1

      Does that mean everyone flying Los Angeles -> Fresno should go through customs? The fact that you connect to an internal domestic flight means this is the only way to make this work.

      This is how it does work in Europe, though. I used to fly DC -> London -> Glasgow regularly and when the EU rules kicked in, you had to start going through customs at your final destination. In practice, this meant that everyone in Glasgow walked past a usually unmanned customs post. For the first little while it also meant that you would get to Glasgow, your bag would come on the next flight, and they'd have to pay a taxi to bring it to you. They fixed the transfer problems though.

    9. Re:Also alcohol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      When I was transitting to London (from South America) via Miami, I was supposed to take my checked-luggage through a TSA checkpoint for connecting passengers but I wanted a cigarette so I went outside. When I'd finished I took my luggage to the airline desk, explained that it was already checked through to London and they took it off me no-questions-asked. TSA checkpoint successfully avoided!

    10. Re:Also alcohol by portraitofsanity · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure you have this correct. I've had connecting flights, outside Schengen to inside Schengen to another Schengen destination, quite a few times and have always gone through customs/passport control at initial arrival points. Same thing in multipart departure; you go through customs at your last airport before departing the country/zone. As recently as three weeks ago, I flew Kyiv to Munich to Amsterdam (and HEL -> CPG -> ORD returning a while later), and all immigration stuff was done/ I had to go back through security before being able to get to the Schengen/International terminal. At most airports simply to leave the international terminal to get to the domestic terminals you have to go through passport control & customs. I will admit that it is nicer in Schengen countries compared to USA that you don't have to grab your checked bag and recheck it when doing the transfer (doesn't mean they aren't looking through the bag, I had a card in my luggage saying it had been inspected). For an easy explanation of why, imagine you domestically connect to an airport that is not international and doesn't have customs/passport control.

    11. Re:Also alcohol by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      When flying into Frankfurt they do not return your bags to you if you are heading to another german airport. Why do we have airports that do not have customs/passport control? Clearly the area is then too small to need a public airport.

    12. Re:Also alcohol by will_die · · Score: 1

      Also entering into Schengen travel zone, Middle East and other places.
      There are a few places I have found exception some places don't give you access to your checked bags you have to point them out and they move them from international to domestic or in one place they move it to another cart and then I had to wait in baggage pickup to get my stuff; that one did make me upset.

    13. Re:Also alcohol by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I have often wondered if the businesses in the gate area give kickbacks to the TSA for forcing the passengers to dispose of all of their water, food, toiletries and so forth and then having to rebuy them after the security checkpoint.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    14. Re:Also alcohol by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      The USA and China are not the only places that make you take your bags through customs at your point of entry.

    15. Re:Also alcohol by chrismcb · · Score: 2

      We aren't allowed to take liquids on a plane because they might be explosives. Therefore they should be treated and disposed of as explosives. Of course everyone knows they aren't, so it is ok to toss them into the garbage along with the other suspected explosives. Real smart.

    16. Re:Also alcohol by initialE · · Score: 1

      Next time don't surrender your alcohol, pour it away then.

      --
      Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
  12. never mind the 4th amendment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010/11/20/how-the-tsa-legally-circumvents-the-fourth-amendment/

    Yet, Americans are sheep and will do nothing. According to CNN, 80% of Americans are in favor of the mm wave scanners in spite of the fact that they haven't caught a single terrorist. Ever, and they appear to be no more than 20% effective in catching weapons. And in spite of the fact that the USA is going to die under the burden of excessive debt, yet we spend tens of billions on useless agencies like the TSA. In spite of the fact that the TSA is now trying to move into other areas like buses, trains, and even roadside stops.

    "Papers please"... didn't we used to ridicule the former Soviet Union for that very same thing?

    But as long as people don't care about their civil rights, they will continue to lose them. As long as people continue to be driven by irrational fear, they won't care about their civil rights.

    1. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by dgatwood · · Score: 2

      20% of Egypt was up in arms about it's leadership, too. That's not a small enough percentage of the population to safely marginalize.

      You'd be amazed what 20% of the population can do, voting in a block. With only 60% voter turnout in a typical Presidential election, unless almost every other voter chooses another candidate (and by that, I mean the same other candidate), that's enough to solidly tip the balance to a different politician or party.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    2. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by Woogiemonger · · Score: 1

      The majority of travelers don't complain about the TSA because an airline ticket is usually tied with a very expensive, intricately planned vacation/trip of some sort, and the last thing they need is to be forced to miss their flight and be overly stressed, send everything into disarray, waste possibly thousands of dollars, and disappoint countless loved ones and friends. That's at least from my personal experience... but I am 50% of the time finding myself WANTING to complain for various reasons, usually because the TSA agents are acting fairly condescending.

    3. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      different politician or party

      You don't get it. It's the whole machine that is corrupt. It doesn't matter which color you paint it.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    4. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'd be interesting to find out what percentage of Americans actually ever fly.

    5. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Papers please"... didn't we used to ridicule the former Soviet Union for that very same thing?

      I would have liked to have seen Montana. ...But yeah. Unfortunately, the idiots were right - 9/11 did change everything. This is no longer the country I grew up in.

    6. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I care about my rights but feel powerless to do so.

    7. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Doesn't matter. Just pick a non-politician to run as an independent. If you could get that 20% to vote for such a candidate as a block, you'd shake up the establishment pretty seriously.

      Besides, the only reason running for office is so expensive is that TV advertising plays such a big role. TV viewership is on the decline, though, so in ten to twenty years, it's going to be a whole new ballgame.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    8. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wouldn't be if people would actually vote in GOOD politicians rather than the ones that tug on their heartstrings the most. Our current political state is completely self-inflicted. If people would actually start voting based on worthwhile things rather than voting for the candidate most likely to not disrupt the comfortable status quo, we could make some real progress in this country.

    9. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by schlachter · · Score: 1

      America is going down the tubes due to
      1) irrational fear
      2) irrational belief in god
      3) irrational belief that we need to police the world

      --
      My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    10. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by c++0xFF · · Score: 1

      According to CNN, 80% of Americans are in favor of the mm wave scanners in spite of the fact that they haven't caught a single terrorist.

      Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree with your overall point ... but I wish people would stop using this specific argument. There's no way to know how many terrorists acts the TSA has prevented. It's completely possible (even likely) that this number is a big fat goose egg, or maybe the TSA prevents an incident every month (unlikely but possible) ... but we simply don't know.

      And that's the better argument to make. Why spend billions of dollars on the TSA when fake security cameras might be just as effective? After all, they'll catch just as many terrorists!

    11. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010/11/20/how-the-tsa-legally-circumvents-the-fourth-amendment/

      Yet, Americans are sheep and will do nothing.

      I wouldn't say that I have done precisely nothing... before 9-11, I flew an average of 6 times a year, perhaps once international and 5 domestic.

      Since 9-11, I believe I have flown a total of 5 times, 4 domestic and 1 international, in 11 years.

    12. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      Problem is... ANYONE who can get themselves elected president, by whatever rightious means, has no business doing the job. (paraphrased dna).

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    13. Re:never mind the 4th amendment... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      According to CNN, 80% of Americans are in favor of the mm wave scanners in spite of the fact that they haven't caught a single terrorist.

      One word: Deterrence. It's a valuable part of any physical security system.
       
      Or are you suggesting I should leave my house and car doors unlocked because they've never (to my knowledge) stopped anyone? I've never had a circuit breaker pop either, so I can get rid of it and just use light switches? Etc... etc...

  13. Amazing by Starteck81 · · Score: 1

    That might be the most frugal thing a federal agency has ever done.

    --
    "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed H
    1. Re:Amazing by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      As much as one bashes the inefficiency of government, I've contracted with large companies and have seen a lot of bloat and BS there also. While not quite as bad as typical gov't, it's pretty close. Big organizations are just that way.

  14. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Uh, so then where did the $409,085.56 come from?

  15. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's very true, but them not getting really reprimanded for theft of personal belongings is bull****.

  16. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by arisvega · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Those elements in the TSA are a fucking embarassement to both their agency and their country; that behavior should not be tolerated, and this situation can be easily remedied with heavy penalties that will act as a warning to the rest of the TSA lot that is there to loot while in uniform.

    --
    The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
  17. another job perk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    and the TSA employees never need to buy liquid soap or shampoo...

    1. Re:another job perk by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I remember seeing a box full of confiscated fingernail clippers once. I wonder what they do with all those. I estimate each box is worth at least 3 grand:

      About 3 clippers per cubic inch at $0.20 each[1], and the box takes up about 3 cubic feet:

      (12*12*12) * 3 * $0.2 * 3 = $3110.40

      (cubic foot in inches) * (3 cubic feet) * (retail value of a used clipper) * (3 per cubic inch)

      * Los Angeles Clippers were worth about this much until this year.

    2. Re:another job perk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not that TSA employees have any use for the stuff in the first place.

  18. Just lock your bag by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 0

    I'm constantly told to not lock my bag because otherwise it'll be ripped open by the security staff to search it. I don't lock it to stop the security staff getting in, I lock it to stop the lighter fingered baggage handlers from having a quick rummage.

    Besides, if someone wants to get into your luggage, they'll get into luggage.

    1. Re:Just lock your bag by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      The baggage handlers are not the ones stealing, they don't have the time for that. The security staff do.

    2. Re:Just lock your bag by Garybaldy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You solve that by getting as little as the receiver to a firearm. Put it in your bags. Declare a firearm when you arrive at the airport ticket counter. Your bag is searched in front of you. Then a lock only you have a key to is put on your bags. Rest assured you will receive the bag as is when you reach your destination. Also a great way to assure your bags actually get to your destination. As bags with declared firearms get special treatment.

    3. Re:Just lock your bag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This was one of the problems they were having in miami. The "special treatment" bags were all getting stolen so they could sell the guns illegally. It was a tip to get a starter pistol for 50$ and put in your bag to make sure your expensive camera equipment is safe. Issue is is you are marking your bag as holding at least a 500$ controlled retail item. There have been many issues with gun bags being stolen.

    4. Re:Just lock your bag by Garybaldy · · Score: 1

      When said bags come up missing it is a huge red flag to management that they have a thief employed in the chain. Might be what tipped the authorities off in Miami.

    5. Re:Just lock your bag by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      When said bags come up missing it is a huge red flag to management that they have a thief employed in the chain. Might be what tipped the authorities off in Miami.

      If it is the same Miami I used to live in, it was the corrupt TSA agents "tipping" the authorities with 10% of their take...

  19. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by trum4n · · Score: 1

    It would be suspicious if NO loose change was accounted for. I'd suspect nearly half goes in pockets.

  20. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by VinylRecords · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Exactly. The TSA reported that they collected $409,085.56 in loose change. But how much else went unreported that was left behind? The TSA guy making a low annual salary doesn't pocket half of the money that he finds, or splits it up with the rest of the low level employees? Or how many guys don't even bother to report any left behind change at all?

    The manager doesn't skim a little off of the top before sending in the money to the TSA headquarters? If someone gives him $50 in change he might not pocket a few dollars here and there? The TSA headquarters president doesn't skim a little off of the top before reporting the money? You get $750K in coins and you might skim a thousand dollars worth, right? It's all part of the game.

    This is like when a drug dealer gets pulled over with $15,000. By the time the money makes it to the station it magically becomes $10,000. Then somewhere in between the time the money enters the station and is processed it becomes $5,000. It's just part of the game.

     

  21. It should go to the Treasury. by mbone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When I was in the Government, keeping any money you made "on the side" was a big no-no. You could (in some cases) charge for expenses, but otherwise, if you made any money, it had to go to the Treasury.

    Under our system of government, the Congress sets the budget for government activities. Setting up some branch of government as a money making entity, and thereby evading the oversight and control of Congress, is flat out unconstitutional. Now, I know that this is literally small change, but still...

    1. Re:It should go to the Treasury. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you're assuming the TSA cares about the Constitution to begin with.

      To save wear on my keyboard, I'll omit a few (hundred) examples and assume you know what would normally go here.

  22. Lint by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    They make even more selling pocket lint to coat factories.

  23. TSA: Now Hiring Vikings by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Funny

    They rape and pillage.

  24. And how much did they pay to count it? by gstrickler · · Score: 1

    How much did they pay in salaries to count it and handling to send it to the financial office, where it's undoubtedly counted again, then deposited in a bank. If they're doing that at the end of each shift, in over 100 airports, 2-3 shifts per day. It might be cheaper to just tell the TSOs to put it in their pocket.

    --
    make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    1. Re:And how much did they pay to count it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, it's worse than that. The TSA has screening at 450 airports, according to their site.

      $409,085.56 / 365 = $1120.78 available, per day, to break even paying people to count, ship, and document loose change at 450 airports at the end of each shift.

      There is no fucking way.

    2. Re:And how much did they pay to count it? by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      You're thinking like a bean-counter, not like a manager.

      Bean-counter:
      "We're paying someone $8.50 an hour to spend 5 minutes for 47 cents worth of change?!!1!"

      Management:
      "Before your shift is over, you will count any abandoned money, document the amount, and put it in the inter-departmental mail for Finance."

      The bean-counter paid someone $0.71 to count 47 cents worth of change. The manager had them do it for free.

    3. Re:And how much did they pay to count it? by jdgeorge · · Score: 1

      No, the bean counter understands how much he paid someone to do the job. The manager also paid, but has no idea how much and walks away thinking he got it for free.

    4. Re:And how much did they pay to count it? by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      No, if the employee got just as much other work done as before, and didn't leave any later than before, then the manager did get it for free.

    5. Re:And how much did they pay to count it? by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      It doesn't work that way. If the employee was salaried and exempt, then it might. But you can bet the people doing the counting are hourly, and that the person didn't clock out until it was counted and in an envelope and in the out-box to go to the finance office. So, it did cost extra (and it comes out of that managers department budget), or less work was done. And it cost something for the envelope and to transport/send/mail it to finance. When it gets to the finance office, it has to be counted again, and included on a bank deposit. So, any way you look at it, it cost extra.

      As a previous counter pointed out, it's an average of less than $2.50 per airport per day, which means less than $1.25/shift. It's nearly impossible for it to be a net gain, even if it only take 3-5 minutes to count it, address the envelope, and put the change in it, and send it to the finance office. And that's before counting the costs at the finance office.

      Contrary to the headline, they didn't make $400k, they lost money accounting for $400k is spare change.

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    6. Re:And how much did they pay to count it? by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      can bet the people doing the counting are hourly, and that the person didn't clock out until it was counted and in an envelope and in the out-box to go to the finance office

      If the employee does not accomplish the amount of work the manager wanted done in the shift, the employee gets bad ratings. Full stop. If the employee does, and the manager gives the employee something else to do, the employee will either get the previously-determined amount of work done AND the extra something, or the employee will get bad ratings. Have you never worked with this sort of manager?

      And it cost something for the envelope and to transport/send/mail it to finance. When it gets to the finance office, it has to be counted again, and included on a bank deposit.

      The interdepartment mail was going anyway; the unit cost of an additional envelope is pennies. It doesn't take any longer to grab 5 envelopes instead of 4, and seconds to toss the extra one into the box marked "Finance Dept".

    7. Re:And how much did they pay to count it? by gstrickler · · Score: 1

      If the employee does not accomplish the amount of work the manager wanted done in the shift, the employee gets bad ratings. Full stop. If the employee does, and the manager gives the employee something else to do, the employee will either get the previously-determined amount of work done AND the extra something, or the employee will get bad ratings. Have you never worked with this sort of manager?

      Have you never worked for a government agency or a unionized shop?

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    8. Re:And how much did they pay to count it? by _0xd0ad · · Score: 1

      Yes, as a matter of fact. The bar may be set rather low, but that's the entire point of why adding an extra 5-minute task isn't going to keep anything else from getting done.

  25. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by JobyOne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Their entire agency is already a fucking embarrassment to their country, a few agents "stealing" abandoned pocket change pales in comparison.

    --
    Porquoi?
  26. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to see the full load costs of paying TSA agents to do as described and then ship the change to a central location, suspecting it exceeds the $400k 'made'.

    We'd be cost ahead by letting any non-tax funded organization manage the entire process.

  27. Funds should be redirected to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... the ACLU, EFF, or other like minded organizations. After all, these funds are acquired by means that are contrary to their constitution.

  28. What a dreadfully biased summary by NoSleepDemon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't get me wrong, I'm all for bashing the TSA and their dubious practices in the name of 'security' when it's warranted, but whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? I'm referring to the extremely obvious bias (bordering on the Faux News drooling fanatic level) in the article summary:

    "The recovered change is not to be confused with the theft that occurs when TSA agents augment their salary by helping themselves to the contents of passengers' luggage as it passes through security checkpoints."

    This isn't particularly relevant to the news post, other than to immediately bias readers into thinking that the TSA steals all that change and lines its coffers with it, when in fact it might just be left behind by passengers as the news article implies. What are they supposed to do? Sprint after a group of passengers and ask them if this is their quarter? Hate to say it, but ever since CmdrTaco left, the quality of Slashdot news posts has fallen noticeably.

    1. Re:What a dreadfully biased summary by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      They should try not stealing so much stuff.

    2. Re:What a dreadfully biased summary by NoSleepDemon · · Score: 1

      Well yes what they're doing is a little dodgy, but it's the TSA - I doubt they need any further introduction. Their practices are well documented, and no one liked airport security / baggage handlers in the first place even before the TSA popularized hatred towards them, so in my opinion, the extra poke is unnecessary and brings down the quality of the submission.

    3. Re:What a dreadfully biased summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read that line again. It's distinguishing between theft and recovered change.

    4. Re:What a dreadfully biased summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      “I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you” -Friedrich Nietz

      I'm not upset that the TSA stole from us, I'm upset that from now on I can't trust them.

      Call it dreadful. It's true.

    5. Re:What a dreadfully biased summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree.

      I find this article and its bias utterly fascinating from a sociological perspective. And useful too. The more aware and pissed off we are, the more we delay the arrival of the day when a subtle passing of folded twenties will be required from passengers if they want to pass through inspection to their flight, subway train, or back to their idling car without being frog marched into everlasting detention.

    6. Re:What a dreadfully biased summary by professionalfurryele · · Score: 1

      Until our rights are restored at the border the TSA and everyone associated with them is guilty until proven innocent of every crime I read about, because I have no way of knowing otherwise. You put on the jack boots I assume you are abusing them.

    7. Re:What a dreadfully biased summary by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      It ain't bias if it's fact. People have observed TSA agents taking property from carry-ons and not being able to do anything about it. This recently happened to Neal Boortz. If a major talk-show host can't stop this from happening to his own property, or get recovery once it's happened, we're far into tyranny and unlikely to ever recover. Thanks a lot, big government proponents.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    8. Re:What a dreadfully biased summary by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      This isn't particularly relevant to the news post, other than to immediately bias readers into thinking that the TSA steals all that change and lines its coffers with it, when in fact it might just be left behind by passengers as the news article implies.

      And yet you do the same thing you accuse the summary of doing. "might be?" The summary starts off stating it IS loose change left behind. I also think the summary spent too much time on the thefts. But it is useful to point out that it was $400K in loose change left behind, and not in theft from the luggage. They were trying to stop people from thinking "the TSA steals all that change". Of course other than the fact that they pick the change up and put it into their budget. In reality that money should go to some charity. The USO works.

    9. Re:What a dreadfully biased summary by randyleepublic · · Score: 1

      The only thing I have had stolen from me in the last 20 years was a camera out of my checked bag when I had to change planes at the last minute, and so got flagged for increased security. Bunch of fucking thieves!

      --
      Social Credit would solve everything...
    10. Re:What a dreadfully biased summary by dissy · · Score: 1

      Don't get me wrong, I'm all for bashing the TSA and their dubious practices in the name of 'security' when it's warranted, but whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

      According to the TSA, you are guilty by reasonable suspicion and must prove your innocents in court. It only makes sense we hold them to their own standards.

  29. Fedspeak Translation by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 1

    "Sent off site for destruction and disposal" means "someone takes it home, drinks it, and recycles the bottle".

    --
    0 1 - just my two bits
  30. What is it they say...? by Techmeology · · Score: 1

    Look after the cents and the dollars will look after them selves.

    --
    Excuse for why is your room always messy?
    1. Re:What is it they say...? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Also said, that applies even better to the TSA, is "penny wise, dollar foolish".

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  31. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Rogerborg · · Score: 2

    If you have to keep your employees in line with threats and monitoring, then your primary problem is with the people who gave them the job in the first place.

    Perhaps the TSA shouldn't have just settled for the least-bad applicants who bothered to show up.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  32. Not to the Military by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2

    No, Florida Republican, do not give the loose change to the military service corporation. I know you want to ensure that all money goes to one kind of military subsidy or another. But you created the TSA, with its vast budgets largely wasted on abusing Americans and subsidizing contractors. Its security theater subsidizes the military by pretending to protect us, while militarizing routine travel which of course paves the way for more military and more military subsidies. Making the military further dependent on the TSA's unnecessary operations that generate that loose change further ensures we'll be doing TSA dances forever.

    Keeping the loose change reducing the debt spending you created its budget out of is an efficiency. Leave well enough alone, despite your grabby Florida Republican instinct to make a bad thing even worse, and forever.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Not to the Military by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      You do realize what the USO does, right? Giving this money to the USO would in no stretch of the imagination constitute "military subsidy". For starters, most of the people working for the USO are volunteers. They set up places in airports where soldiers can get food, internet access, and phone cards. They assist with travel and give soldiers a place where they can relax in the airport. They provide shows for the troops by bringing paid acts overseas. The military is in no way dependent on the USO. It just makes life a bit easier for soldiers. Should it go away tomorrow, the military would not be affected in any way. Take off your tinfoil hat, and actually learn about the groups you rail against.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:Not to the Military by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you aware you managed to use the word 'military' four times in a single sentence?

    3. Re:Not to the Military by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Of course I know what the USO does. I'm all for it, which is why I'm OK with spending my tax money on it (directly, and in its tax exemption). It offloads work that the direct Pentagon budget would have to spend on to keep morale in our troops, especially the way we abuse them with lying them into wars, forced retention, cut benefits after the action, etc. That is how the USO subsidizes the military. Take off your blinders on how we spend money on the military every which way.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    4. Re:Not to the Military by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Are you aware that the subject of the sentence is the military in various aspects I'm specifying? Sentences don't have a transitive property by which a word common to various of its clauses can be factored out.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  33. Well finally... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    They have some common cents.

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  34. How is this not theft, again? by Scutter · · Score: 2

    Step 1 - Force people into situations where they're likely to have things fall out of their pockets
    Step 2 - Collect all found things and put them in your own pockets
    Step 3 - Profit!

    Sounds like theft to me. You make it a profit center and the bosses start including incentives to maintain that budget line item. "Hey, you guys didn't shake down enough...'customers'...this week! We're not going to be able to give you a bonus this quarter."

    If they really want me to believe that this isn't theft, they should be donating all proceeds from lost and confiscated items to charity. An ACTUAL charity, I mean, not the TSA Agent's Retirement Collective 501c.

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    1. Re:How is this not theft, again? by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      If they really want me to believe that this isn't theft, they should be donating all proceeds from lost and confiscated items to charity. An ACTUAL charity, I mean, not the TSA Agent's Retirement Collective 501c.

      Um, isn't this kind of what the proposed bill would do?

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    2. Re:How is this not theft, again? by Locutus · · Score: 1

      I agree and it should go back to the air travelers in general IMO.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  35. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anrego · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Low paying crummy jobs tend not to attract the best candidates.

  36. A little gift... by AdamThor · · Score: 1

    Leave them metal slugs, slabs of wooden dowel, low-value foreign currency. Make 'em work for it!

    --
    -- "Oh. This guy again."
  37. Just remember kids... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you leave your change behind, you're funding domestic TERRORISM.

  38. It pays off by na1led · · Score: 1

    All that groaping pays off!

    --
    -- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
    1. Re:It pays off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL "groaping" LOL LOL

      That really made my day. Thanks, bad speller.

  39. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by ravenscar · · Score: 2

    It would be interesting to see how much change is really taken. Perhaps one could determine, on average, the ratio of large denomination coins to small denomination coins carried in travelers' pockets. We could call this ratio A. We could then compare this ratio to that of the money collected and turned in by TSA agents - Ratio B. I think it's safe to assume that TSA agents are more likely to be selective of the coins they keep if, indeed, they keep some. I would suspect that ratio B would differ substantially from ratio A if TSA agents were keeping money for themselves.

    The one other thing to consider - travelers are probably less likely to leave behind large denomination coins. As such, ratio B might differ from ratio A for reasons other than theft. One would probably have to create a representative sample when finding ratio A so as not to taint the results.

  40. No surprises here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems they primarily hire pedos, sadist, weak of mind, and various other miscreants.

    Like to abuse people? Like to sexual molest people of all ages? Want your power-trip to fly along side your poorly sculpted World view where in you hold no personal responsibility and those around you are at fault??
    Find your dream job here.
    http://www.tsa.gov/join/careers/careers_security_jobs_securityinspect.shtm

    Notice the qualifications, I think drugs dogs could apply for these jobs and probably be friendlier.

  41. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I grew up with a guy that didn't have a lot going for him, not a lot of ambition, who finally decided it was time for work, and became a State Trooper. He told me that once when he was searching a crime scene he found a box with almost $300 thousand in it, and none of his fellow officers saw him find it. I asked him if he kept it, because it's the kind of thing I would do: There was plenty of other evidence, the money was not stolen and had no rightful owner to which it could be returned.

    No, he turned it in.

  42. light bulbs? by ionymous · · Score: 2

    I hate how companies tell us where some specific source of income goes. Even if it doesn't just go into a big pool of budget money, then some part of a budget somewhere is changed so that other money is available for other purposes.
    The bottom line... if $300k can be added to the overall budget, then that's $300k more that can go to paying a CEO's bonus.

    It's not like they weren't going to replace light bulbs without this money.

  43. How much money do they make by stealing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is their annual accounting for money they take from peoples' bags? Or, are they less honest with that than they are with the change jars?

  44. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by trout007 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As a teenager I worked at Six Flags Great Adventure on the Great American Scream Machine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_American_Scream_Machine_(Six_Flags_Great_Adventure)

    The way the seats were deep bucket seats and at the end of the night we would look under all of the seat pads and would find about $40 daily in change in the three trains. We would divide it up among the 8 people working the ride and it was enough to buy some drinks and snacks.

    --
    I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
  45. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by rockout · · Score: 5, Funny

    I doubt anyone would care if no loose change was accounted for. The frickin' budget of the TSA is over $8 billion. Who cares about $400,000? That amount (.005%) could be added or dropped from their budget by an intern in Congress.

    --
    I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
  46. boosting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    article says "..boosting an iPod, bottles of perfume, cameras, a GPS system, a Coach purse, and a Hewlett Packard Mini Notebook from passengers'"

    i assume the author meant stealing or taking. I never heard of the word boosting used like this before.

    1. Re:boosting? by treeves · · Score: 2

      "boosting" can mean "stealing", though it is not a common usage.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    2. Re:boosting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Usually boosting specifically means stealing for the purpose of fencing.

      Some of those items might have just been kept for personal use... In that case "boosting" is the wrong term.

    3. Re:boosting? by treeves · · Score: 1

      Ah, thanks. I did not know that distinction....

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  47. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your friend turned in the money, you would have kept it. Well, it looks like your friend at least has honesty going for him, which is more than can be said for you.

  48. Sure they do. by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    If they are stealing laptops and iPhones, why wouldn't they pocket much less traceable loose change?

  49. 4 Full time employees by Bardwick · · Score: 1

    When you put it in that perspective, it's not so much money :). Consider that there are over 50,000 union TSA agents (non-managers)

  50. There is no honor... by drainbramage · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There is no honor among thieves.
    They care not a whit about you or your possessions.
    Whether they Love, like, dislike, revile, or hate your, what you represent, or their own life will not change the fact that they robbed you, and got paid for it, and will still probably get a raise and eventually a retirement.
    The raise and retirement are also probably on your dime.

    --
    No brain, no pain.
    1. Re:There is no honor... by wickedskaman · · Score: 1

      Cool poem, bro.

      --
      Sand's overrated... it's just tiny little rocks.
    2. Re:There is no honor... by HairyNevus · · Score: 1

      Freelance, yes. But in the Thieve's Guild we do have a code..

      --
      You were critically hit for no damage. The bruise will look nice, and maybe the scars will make good party talk.
    3. Re:There is no honor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no honor among thieves.

      You're hanging out with the wrong thieves.

    4. Re:There is no honor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The raise and retirement are also probably on your dime.

      Probably? Certainly. There is almost zero expense by any government that isn't, in one way or another, subsidized by current or future citizens. Outright donations by foreign parties are about the only exception I can think of.

    5. Re:There is no honor... by Golddess · · Score: 1

      Perhaps. But that doesn't really change what GP was saying, which is that if instead of thieves, the TSA was staffed with people doing it "for our own good", it'd be much, much worse.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    6. Re:There is no honor... by Grishnakh · · Score: 0

      The TSA are NOT "thieves". They are merely redistributing wealth, just like Obama promised.

    7. Re:There is no honor... by I(rispee_I(reme · · Score: 1

      You must agree that it is change you can believe in.

    8. Re:There is no honor... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I definitely believe there's been real change with Obama. Back when Bush was President, women and children didn't have to worry much about the TSA molesting them, but now with Obama, they can have plenty of hope that, yes, we can very well be molested!

    9. Re:There is no honor... by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Unless your Rumpelstiltskin your always doing everything on some else's dime until, you, like they, earn it. Unless of course your a leprechaun with your own pot of gold.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    10. Re:There is no honor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TSA stopped stealing my pocket change once I only started leaving Bitcoins behind. Now when I try to stick TSA with them, they throw them back at my head. I'll bet this never happened to Urkel.

      Our Urkel who art in heaven,
      hallowed be thy name.
      Family Matters come.
      Did I do that? be done
      on earth as it is in heaven.

      Got any cheese?

    11. Re:There is no honor... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I see the mindless Obama fans have mod points.

    12. Re:There is no honor... by V.+P.+Winterbuttocks · · Score: 1

      Today I saw a monster-ass truck with a Calvin pissing decal on the back window that read (as the being-pissed-on) "Pres Obama haters".

      Made me want to take a piss on the driver's door, but then I realized it's really not worth being a lifetime sex offender and so I figured it would probably be a better idea to just dump a pitcher of trucker's lemonade (a.k.a. piss) onto the windshield.

      I didn't though. I didn't have to go.

      --
      I'm the real Vorokrytin P. Winterbuttocks.
    13. Re:There is no honor... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      That's really quite surprising. The monster-truck owners and the like still seem to think that Obama is a Marxist, trying to institute communism, despite 3 years of evidence to the contrary.

    14. Re:There is no honor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're probably just confused by his comments about spreading the wealth. Naturally, he didn't actually MEAN that wealth should be confiscated from those who have unjustly earned it and be distributed to those who deserve it.

  51. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Joce640k · · Score: 5, Informative

    You DO know how the TSA recruits people, right...? They put adverts on pizza delivery boxes

    You couldn't make this shit up it you if you hired a whole team of comedy writers...

    --
    No sig today...
  52. More Importantly... by crow_t_robot · · Score: 0

    NBC reports that airport travelers left behind $409,085.56 in loose change at security checkpoints in 2010

    More importantly how much of their dignity was left behind at the checkpoint after they had their asshole fingered by a former Burger King employee?

    1. Re:More Importantly... by rsd0991 · · Score: 1

      Oh i agree with that. It's a total grope fest. I was grabbing a flight home, from i forget where the hell i was. I had been traveling so much i forgot where i was the week before, but i digress. In front of me there was this knock out blonde. They made her go through the body scanner, and i went through the metal detector. well i went through, and it didn't set it off. She went through the body scanner. and they "found something." The pat down was way overboard. I mean, this TSA agent was all over her (female of course), everyone, just stopped, watched and thought "Damn!" It was almost like one of those lesbian prison movies. There are pat downs, and there is straight up improper. this was the latter.

  53. GET YOUR ASS TO KICKSTARTER! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am intrigued by your ideas and would like to enroll in your screenwriting workshop.

  54. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You called him dishonest after you believed his story, which says a lot about you.

  55. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Informative

    As someone who's administered TSA testing in the past, thus having seen the "tests" first hand, I assure you, they're not looking for people that think for themselves. They want idiot drones that do what they're told, no matter what.

    In a given day I'd have maybe 2 applicants out of 10 that didn't look like straight up gang members (and half of them looked like crystal meth tweakers, I shit you not), and based on what I'm hearing from family members in the service, the military is starting to have it's share of gang-bangers, too. Which makes sense, if you think about it: who's more likely to argue with an order or take a stand based on their principles, someone with an education and respect for human rights, or someone that was raised on the streets in a dog-eat-dog world?

    Plus, now that the TSA is expanding to domestic rail service, highways, and sporting events, it won't be long before these state sponsored criminals are shaking us down at checkpoints all over the place, just like in Mexico or any other third world country.

    So, sing with me, boys and girls: AMERICA! FUCK YEAH!!

  56. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by bfields · · Score: 1

    at the end of each shift they take it, count it, divide most of it up amongst themselves, and put it in their pockets

    FTFY.

    A few ways of looking at that $400k figure:

    - Assuming 50k TSA employees (from wikipedia), that's $8 a year each. So in a good week they find two dimes.
    - The TSA budget is about 8 billion. This is one two-thousandth of a percent of their budget.
    - The 2012 budget is a few trillion. If congress passed a bill like Jeff Miller's every hour of every day that would cover... um, I think I have this right... one tenth of one percent of the budget. Looking to cut government waste? How about electing people who won't waste everyone's time on trivia.

    In short: look, I'm not particularly fond of airport security either, but this is stupid.

  57. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one, am happy that the TSA is staffed by people who seem to hate their job as much as we do. The alternative, that an arm of totalitarianism is entirely staffed by people who are ideologically committed, would be far worse.

    At first blush, that would sound good, but ideology is really only monolithic until it gets alone with itself. In isolation, it tends to splinter into smaller and smaller factions until it's self-destroying.

    Apathy, however, goes on forever.

  58. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by similar_name · · Score: 1

    I believe there are something like 40,000 TSA employees. Assuming they take 90% of it and what they send in represents 10% they are pulling in about $90 per year on average. Quite a racket they got going there.

  59. "TSA Makes $400K Annually In Loose Change" by Thud457 · · Score: 2
    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  60. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by rsborg · · Score: 1

    I grew up with a guy that didn't have a lot going for him, not a lot of ambition, who finally decided it was time for work, and became a State Trooper. He told me that once when he was searching a crime scene he found a box with almost $300 thousand in it, and none of his fellow officers saw him find it. I asked him if he kept it, because it's the kind of thing I would do: There was plenty of other evidence, the money was not stolen and had no rightful owner to which it could be returned.

    No, he turned it in.

    $300K sitting around spells danger. I wouldn't have taken it, as a) it might cost me my job which I like and b) dangerous folks might come looking to reclaim it, surreptitiously.

    No, your friend probably did the right thing for him in the long run: avoid the risk that comes with a large pile of cash sitting around. However, skimming a bit off the top of millions of pockets of change - no risk in that.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  61. Maybe....... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When someone leaves money behind a agent should say "excuse me, you forgot your change" instead of applying the 'finders keepers' rule of money.

    Besides how does all of this lost money get lost? When you walk through the checkpoint you empty your pockets, then you get your stuff out of the basket or whatever and put it back in your pockets. Its not like staying in a hotel where you might leave money behind or falls into your couch cushions.

    And why mail it to the finance office? That would cost more to mail a bag of coins than you could get out of it.

    And dont tell me they spend it on lightbulbs. Thats horseshit. I highly doubt the tsa actually employs people to count change sent in from around the country, make sure its reported and put into a special account for buying lightbulbs.

  62. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by gman003 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Curiously enough, every attempt to staff the TSA with robots has failed. To quote TSA-02134's post-termination interview, "ERROR: CRASH IN LOGIC.C:1338: INPUT 'GOALS' INCOMPATIBLE WITH PROVIDED METHODS".

  63. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by khallow · · Score: 1

    At first blush, that would sound good, but ideology is really only monolithic until it gets alone with itself. In isolation, it tends to splinter into smaller and smaller factions until it's self-destroying.

    Which wouldn't be a problem for an organization specializing in airport security. They'd have a stream of ready victims and potential threats to unite against.

  64. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The alternative, that an arm of totalitarianism is entirely staffed by people who are ideologically committed, would be far worse.

    That would be the DEA.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  65. Money loser by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

    And much did it cost in salary plus overhead to pay TSA employees to count that change by hand? I doubt they broke even on it much less came out ahead. Let's see, 450 airports x 365 work days x 2 shift changes per year x $20/hour loaded labor rate x 0.1 hours (estimated) to count, record, and process the change = $657K / year. So by my estimate the TSA had a net waste of $157K counting this change.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  66. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Skarecrow77 · · Score: 4, Funny

    until you screw up a decimal place and $305,326.13 ends up in your account in just one weekend.

  67. Brilliant! by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    We've solved the deficit problem! Government workers! Get thee to the nearest seat cushions, fountains and vending machine coin returns!

    Or they can get proactive! Department Of Panhandling! We'll have the debt paid off by the time the end of the Mayan calendar rolls around again!

    Extra exclamation points: !!!!!!! (distribute as desired)

  68. Nobby Nobbs by bfandreas · · Score: 1

    Having the TSA around is like paying Nobby Nobbs to fundle your bum and nick all your coin.

    At least that's what the article wants us to believe.

    The TSA is our last line of defense against everything that is against us and we might not even be aware of. These heroic, chisel jawed Nightwatchmen, these brave, well not soldiers, but heroic nonetheless persons of unknown qualification, descent or even species heroicly probe where no probe had dared to probe before.
    ...also fondle, slap, tickle and squeeze.
    These artisans of the prostate, minions of the fearful, these rubber-gloved black-clad connaisseurs of the sphincters shall ever be remembered by a Monument of Massive Proportions made of other people's previous luncheons.
    So they find money while you desperately try to get rid of any metal or lubricants and some of that gets even sent to the main office? Sort of an involuntary tip? Like a mugger, but with a receipt?


    Heroic AND honourable, I say!

    --
    20 minutes into the future
    1. Re:Nobby Nobbs by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Please cease from sullying the name of Terry Pratchett any further with such prose.

      However, I do hope it gives him an idea for a new book :D

  69. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Paracelcus · · Score: 1

    I'm very sorry but I really do have some limited experience supervising very unskilled labor. The people who populate these kind of (hire and go) jobs tend to be resentful and unmotivated, combine that with double digit IQ's and almost no training and you have a recipe for problems! Continual surveillance/monitoring can only do so much. I personally HATE traveling and being searched. Getting pushed thru the airport in a wheelchair, and getting additional screening because of syringes, medications and medical devices just makes matters worse.

    --
    I killed da wabbit -Elmer Fudd
  70. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by harl · · Score: 1

    I hear this big pile of cash argument a lot.

    The premise is invalid though.

    How do people know about this big pile of cash?

    Your whole position is predicated on the ability of the pile to broadcast it's location.

    --
    I find being offended by me offensive.
  71. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 4, Informative

    The TSA guy making a low annual salary doesn't pocket half of the money that he finds, or splits it up with the rest of the low level employees?

    Well, let's run some numbers.

    $409,056.56 divided by about 450 airports is $909 per airport. We're talking about a year, so divide that by 365 and we're talking about an average of $2.49 per day per airport. Figure that an entry level security screen makes a little over $10 per hour and he's basically getting the equivalent of 15 minutes.

    Yup. These guys are makin' bank, I'll tell you.

  72. Police can be just as dirty by witherstaff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Local Police can be just as bad. We had an employee stealing things from work, from simple plumbing fittings to electronic controls. A few thousand worth of gear. His roommate turned hi in, police took everything for evidence. We were told once the evidence was not needed they would let us know. We called a few weeks later since we hadn't heard anything - He pleaded to some charge, no trial, they sold the stuff at auction. We couldn't even get the money they got for selling out things.

    So we were robbed, twice.

    1. Re:Police can be just as dirty by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      police took everything for evidence....they sold the stuff at auction. We couldn't even get the money they got for selling out things.

      Damn! Call the police on them! Oh.....wait

  73. Great! by copious28 · · Score: 1

    We can show up at solyndra with the change in jars to pay executives their retention bonus!

  74. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    we're talking about an average of $2.49 per day per airport.
    And it probably costs $20 every day to send that change to the finance office.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  75. Donate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That money should be donated.

  76. it's not their and they know where it came from - by Locutus · · Score: 1

    so why do they take it and spend it on their own budgets instead of doing something to benefit the passengers at the airports?

    Isn't this a form of theft? If you find a wallet and give it to the Police, efforts are made to return it to the owner and only after a period of time and attempts made does the finder get to keep the money. He/she probably has to claim it as income too.

    How about free wifi for x number of days at all airports or something beneficial to the air travelers?

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  77. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by rsborg · · Score: 1

    I hear this big pile of cash argument a lot.

    The premise is invalid though.

    How do people know about this big pile of cash?

    Your whole position is predicated on the ability of the pile to broadcast it's location.

    The cash broadcasts it's location by it's absence on record.

    The fact is, I'm sure there is someone who was interested in that cash, just not on record by the police. Reclaiming $300K (by physical or legal force) from the police is one thing, getting it back from a corrupt cop is quite another.

    --
    Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  78. Big countries are different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, it means just the bags that were checked in London and end up in Fresno.

    So 3 nations do it that way, everyone else does it the right way. I fly to Germany quite a bit and always land in Frankfurt then go to Stuttgart. I do customs in Stuttgart.

    Germany is tiny; Canada, the USA and China are huge. Bigger countries have large populations traveling domestically by air, so they have terminals and entire airports that handle nothing but domestic flights. There aren't going to be customs checkpoints at every terminal, only the ones that handle international flights. Putting a customs checkpoint at every terminal would be terribly inefficient for the tiny percentage of international flights that need them.

    In piddly little countries like Germany, people don't need to fly to travel domestically, so pretty much every incoming flight is international, and there are customs stations everywhere.

    1. Re:Big countries are different by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      the bags that were checked in London end up in Anchorage, Alaska

      Fixed it for ya!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  79. I oppose the very existence of the TSA but... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

    ...this is rather silly. Should they just leave the coins for the janitors? What do you think becomes of coins found around, say, subway stations?

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  80. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by dnahelicase · · Score: 2

    This sounds like a whistleblower series I went to a while back. Some guy from the Army Corps of Engineers stood up and started by saying he went through all he did and eventually lost his job to save 5-7 million. He was exposing a gross amount of money that wasn't being spent correctly, but received very little attention. He said, when the whole budget of the Army Corps of Engineers is less than the rounding error on the national budget, saving a small portion of it didn't amount to much.

  81. TSA is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    full of thugs.

  82. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by harl · · Score: 1

    That's completely nonsensical. You think that due to the fact that something is missing the person looking for it automatically knows where it is.

    I'm not even going to bother to say any more and just right you off as to stupid or too troll to waste any more time on.

    --
    I find being offended by me offensive.
  83. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Ihmhi · · Score: 2

    Yeah, now it counts as seized assets and it becomes part of the operating budget of the police department.

    If there's even a *hint* of drugs in your vehicle, it's seized. Home? Seized. Oh, you have more than $10,000 cash on hand? Why? You're a drug dealed - seized.

    You wanna talk opportunity for corruption...

    I really do try my best to be an honest person, but more and more I'm seeing stuff that makes me think I'm a sucker for playing fair when so many people (especially our government) are stacking the deck in their favor as much as possible. I would have had a very difficult time turning that in to be honest.

  84. give it to the 99% by schlachter · · Score: 1

    Why not compensate those who's items are stolen by TSA (i.e. the 2009 example in Miami and many more) with the $400K that's found each yr? Why does extra money automatically get to go to the military/soldiers? Seems ass backwards.

    Or maybe make the $400K a bonus to the best performing TSA airport staff each yr? Try that for motivation.

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
  85. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by operagost · · Score: 1

    I always mess up some mundane detail.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  86. 200 posts and no Obama joke? by narcc · · Score: 1

    400k annually? That's change you can believe in!

  87. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    True. When I say I don't want to go through the nudity/cancer machines, the TSA officers mutter the same line about it being safe and we both roll our eyes. I spare them a lecture about how I deserve privacy, since it was their bosses' choice to take it away from me.

  88. But what if.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But what if you store your change in your rectum?

  89. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    I think state troopers and other "real" law enforcement types are much more heavily indoctrinated than TSA agents though. They believe they're with a good organization, that it's cop and cop against the bad guys, you can trust other cops and no one else.

    TSA agents though rightly don't give two shits about TSA beyond their paycheck.

    Whether that translates to TSA agents being more willing to turn their fellow co-workers in than cops (who overlook murder if it was one of their own that was the criminal), I don't know, but I'd guess so.

  90. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Funny

    Plus, since it's TSA, there's probably a rule in there about how they can't send more than 3 dollars per envelope...

  91. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    No wonder the pizza smells like fingers that have been.......nevermind.

  92. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Subm · · Score: 1

    You DO know how the TSA recruits people, right...? They put adverts on pizza delivery boxes

    You couldn't make this shit up it you if you hired a whole team of comedy writers...

    You probably could if you hired a team of tragedy writers.

  93. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

    When money goes missing in an arrest, there's a short list of suspects. First, the policemen at the arrest; second, anyone else involved at the arrest; third, policemen on duty when the money gets back to the police station. After that it's on record and less likely to go missing. Even someone as stupid as a drug trafficker can figure that out.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  94. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

    legislation that would direct the TSA to transfer unclaimed money

    You mean: legislation that would disincentivize TSA from collecting the money in the first place.

    (and, instead, the money will wind up as "tips" for the checkpoint agents.)

  95. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by tlhIngan · · Score: 2

    I really do try my best to be an honest person, but more and more I'm seeing stuff that makes me think I'm a sucker for playing fair when so many people (especially our government) are stacking the deck in their favor as much as possible

    In a strictly free market, capitalistic mindset, yes playing fair makes you a sucker - you should lie, cheat and steal in order to get ahead.

    In a more holistic view though, playing fair lets you sleep at night, or to look at your children (or significant other) and admit to no wrongdoing. They won't suddenly discover what you did in order to buy that huge diamond, but that everything is as you said it is and there's no guilt nor trouble.

    The problem is, government and corporations have no such conscience. Maybe if you can get enough shareholders together to instill one, but that's about it. It's why companies pollute (polluting costs nothing - not polluting costs money, and the benefit is so some humans down the road can breathe?) and try to screw over as many people as possible.

  96. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by harl · · Score: 1

    Reread the situation as presented originally. There would be no one to report the cash missing. That was one of the stipulations in the story.

    --
    I find being offended by me offensive.
  97. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by JoeMerchant · · Score: 2

    Those elements in the TSA are a fucking embarassement to both their agency and their country; that behavior should not be tolerated, and this situation can be easily remedied with heavy penalties that will act as a warning to the rest of the TSA lot that is there to loot while in uniform.

    Heavy penalties, like hanging pickpockets?

    http://aler.oxfordjournals.org/content/4/2/295.abstract

    Findings suggest that 76% of active criminals and 89% of the most violent criminals either perceive no risk of apprehension or are incognizant of the likely punishments for their crimes.

  98. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

    $2.49 is what they hand over (from, say, and average of 10 checkpoints, so $0.25 per checkpoint per day.)

    How much do you think is actually being left behind? I'd guess closer to $0.25 every 10 minutes.

  99. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by CCarrot · · Score: 2

    You DO know how the TSA recruits people, right...? They put adverts on pizza delivery boxes

    You couldn't make this shit up it you if you hired a whole team of comedy writers...

    And yet, the best part of all is the come-on at the top

    Really illustrates their target demographic: immature dropouts who fall for those 'x-ray vision' glasses ads...and who love pizza, of course!

    --
    "I love animals! Some are cute, others are tasty, what's not to like?" - Betsy Schroeder, Jeopardy contestant
  100. Priceless!!! by rts008 · · Score: 1

    ...and just right you off as to stupid...

    [emphasis mine]

    Hahahahohohoheeheehee!!!!
    Pot, meet Kettle.....

    I'm not even going to bother to say any more...

    Too late. ;-)

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    1. Re:Priceless!!! by harl · · Score: 1

      So rather than attack any of my points you're going to make a huge deal out of a trivial spelling mistake?

      Thank you. Makes me feel good that's the only thing you can attack.

      --
      I find being offended by me offensive.
  101. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by failedlogic · · Score: 1

    Please provide the name of the pizza company. I have an order to place. Thanks.

  102. Brilliant Observation! by drainbramage · · Score: 1

    Wish I had thought of it.
    Now the government will need to fund the thieves guild to make sure they can continue to provide this valuable service.
    --
    Guess I couldn't see the forest for the thieves.

    --
    No brain, no pain.
  103. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by dbIII · · Score: 1

    or someone that was raised on the streets in a dog-eat-dog world

    Parts of the military are designed to turn people like that into model citizens, or at least that was the case before Rumsfeld made a lot of cuts.

  104. 400K by reboot246 · · Score: 1

    That's peanuts compared to what they steal.

  105. lack of consistency by rsd0991 · · Score: 1

    you really know what borks the hell out of me. Is the lack of consistency between TSA agents. I travel a lot, and working in IT I usually keep a screw driver in my backpack, along with miscellaneous other things that i use in my job, external dvd drive, cables, etc. Now in the past year and a half i have flown in and out of this airport about 120 times. I had a nice electricians screw driver for the longest time. I looked up on the TSA website, and the longest screw driver you can carry on is 7". Now my screw driver was right at the max. I questioned the TSA agent when they told me they were going to take it. She told me it was 7" long, and i was "what's the max length i can carry on?" Their reply, "7 inches." So what's the problem? "It's our policy..." And their supposed to take any liquids that arent in that 1 qt plastic bag, and confiscate them. Can't tell you how many times i've seen people get through security with a bottle of water in their coat pocket or carry-on bag. Enough of me ranting, this article is about money. That senator is right, it should go to the USO or maybe some charity where it can do some good because i think you can throw as much money as you want at the TSA, but you can't fix stupid.

  106. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by EricScott · · Score: 1

    You DO know how the TSA recruits people, right...? They put adverts on pizza delivery boxes

    You couldn't make this shit up it you if you hired a whole team of comedy writers...

    Look closely at that pizza box -- it trumpets...

    A career where XRay vision comes standard!
    A career as a peeping tom. Where you get paid.
    Is this country great or what?

  107. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's as if it came from the movie Idiocracy!

  108. China ftw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm grateful living in China. Easily more free than America, in fact I'd wouldn't visit your shitty country even if you'd buy the tickets, getting my family harrased and fondled by TSA and overly aggressive police men on the streets, well no thanks, you keep it! Keep your niggers also, bye.

  109. Is that all? by qeorqe · · Score: 1

    Isn't that an average of less than a dollar a day per metal detector gate. If only $1 was lost per day at each metal detector gate and there were only 200 airports with an average of only 6 metal detector gates each that would be $1*200*6*365 = $438000. Does the reported amount seem like a very low number?

    Are all the detectors operated by TSA or are many operated by others?

  110. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can be sure of this. I have a close relative whose job is to manage baggage operations at a major US airport. About two months ago I found that almost everything of value, including an Ipad, had been stolen from my bag during a trip from NY to Boston. I accused the baggage handlers and was told that this would have probably been the case ten years ago but now they are watched by cameras so closely that it is next to impossible for them to steal from luggage. The thieves are now the TSA agents, who scan a bag for loot, and when they find something interesting, use their keys to open the bag remove the items they find and relock the bag. Almost always this involves more than one agent as they usually work in pairs. In almost every instance in which the agents are surprise searched after their shift some are found with stolen items.

  111. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    $40 daily in change in the three trains. We would divide it up among the 8 people working the ride and it was enough to buy some drinks and snacks.

    what Six flags are you working at? The ones I've been to that would be enough for barely 1 pizza slice!!

  112. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by trout007 · · Score: 1

    I worked there as a kid which was around 1990. In the employee area the drinks were 25 cents and hamburgers 50 cents. Holy crap I feel old.

    --
    I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
  113. Re:I suspect there is an additional handling charg by digitalsolo · · Score: 1

    I always forget some mundane detail.

    --
    Just another ignorant American.