ARE THEY KIDDING?
- Thread starter ursus
- Start date
Bill Hebert
New member
You're too late dude - they did it last night at 1AM - Passed every congressman and senator a $46-$4800 / year pay raise in the process. So let's see, they get more money to put more restrictions on my rights. is it just me or is there something wrong with this picture?....
There is SOOO much wrong with this picture, it's just downright disgusting. The saddest part is we can, and should fire the whole bunch. But we (the people) won't. Not until we, as a country, can get our heads out of our butts.
The only solution I can offer is to bitch. Not so much to "the chior" here, but to those appathetic, non-voting folks you run across daily. Nothing will change until enough people get pissed off. I fear that it will have to get worse before enough people wake up.
The only solution I can offer is to bitch. Not so much to "the chior" here, but to those appathetic, non-voting folks you run across daily. Nothing will change until enough people get pissed off. I fear that it will have to get worse before enough people wake up.
RepublicThunderbolt
New member
"The saddest part is we can, and should fire the whole bunch."
Hmm...I'll fetch the kindling. Anybody got a light?
Hmm...I'll fetch the kindling. Anybody got a light?
I believe that we should make public office much less attractive. The people in there now are there for the cushy lifestyle, high pay, sex and power. Just like today's high-payed athletes, these people are not doing their job because the love what they do, they are doing it for the perks.
Reduce their pay and lifestyle to the average Americans' and get people in there that are doing it for nothing more than the love of their country.
thaddeus
Reduce their pay and lifestyle to the average Americans' and get people in there that are doing it for nothing more than the love of their country.
thaddeus
Reduce their pay and lifestyle to the average Americans' and get people in there that are doing it for nothing more than the love of their country.
Wasn't that the original intent? "Citizen-statesmen" and all that?
------------------
Ignorance is takin' over,
We gotta take the power back.
--Rage Against The Machine
Wasn't that the original intent? "Citizen-statesmen" and all that?
------------------
Ignorance is takin' over,
We gotta take the power back.
--Rage Against The Machine
Tripemaster
Inactive
I have to completely disagree with the board's collective wisdom on this one. If you really want to attract citizen-statesmen, then you have to be willing to pay market value to get somebody from business or other walks of life. Given the level of person you want and the responsibility, Senators are grossly UNDERpaid right now. As it stands now, what you get are power-junkies and independently wealthy people in politics. People are not going into politics for the salary they will receive (connections made that later leads to monetary rewards on the side is a whole separate subject) but rather for power and celebrity, perceived or real. Personally, I would rather pay more and see qualified business leader types go into for the money.
Bring on the flames!
Bring on the flames!
Tripemaster, I kind of agree with that, and I kinda don't.
The other side would be that only politicians that cared only about thier country would bother to apply.
Then again..the man with the red button should be paid for that amount of resposibility.
Everyone gets an employee that is not worth the money and wrecks the place from time to time (Klingon?).
I just thought I'd show you that I don't have a clue where I stand on this.
Wait... how about we triple all their salaries, but we get to hook up electric shock thingys to their heads that are activated by web TV votes?
Yeah Yeah, now I know where I stand!
------------------
Same Shot, Different day
The other side would be that only politicians that cared only about thier country would bother to apply.
Then again..the man with the red button should be paid for that amount of resposibility.
Everyone gets an employee that is not worth the money and wrecks the place from time to time (Klingon?).
I just thought I'd show you that I don't have a clue where I stand on this.
Wait... how about we triple all their salaries, but we get to hook up electric shock thingys to their heads that are activated by web TV votes?
Yeah Yeah, now I know where I stand!
------------------
Same Shot, Different day
Jeff Thomas
New member
Sorry, but I concur. If many business people ran for Congress or the Senate, they'd take a big pay cut. And, they are not Bill Gates, I assure you. Taxes take an absolutely huge chunk of what most of us make for a living.
The pay they currently offer in local, state and national offices is actually at such a level that it does discourage many people from running for office. Usually only the independently wealthy or quasi-lobbyists (working for large companies) can run. These offices also attract people who couldn't make it in private industry or other jobs. In other words, I think the system is currently operated in such a way that we discourage many, many sharp people from even considering public office. Should they make the financial sacrifice in order to serve? Some do, but for many, they decide giving their kids a good home, good education and building a decent retirement are tough to ignore.
Don't get me wrong - I worked my way through college, and I've done everything from clean bathrooms to sell encyclopedias - I have respect for people at every income level, as long as they are honest, take responsibility and believe in freedom. And, there are certainly some very good people in political office as well.
Unfortunately, so many of us are so disgusted with the job most of these folks do, it sticks in our collective craw to pay them one more dime. In turn, that perspective damn near guarantees we keep attracting the same types of bozo's.
If the debate is about paying this much for Congressmen and Senators, I would respectfully ask you to look through the want ads and see what they pay various business managers in your town. You may be surprised.
[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited July 17, 1999).]
The pay they currently offer in local, state and national offices is actually at such a level that it does discourage many people from running for office. Usually only the independently wealthy or quasi-lobbyists (working for large companies) can run. These offices also attract people who couldn't make it in private industry or other jobs. In other words, I think the system is currently operated in such a way that we discourage many, many sharp people from even considering public office. Should they make the financial sacrifice in order to serve? Some do, but for many, they decide giving their kids a good home, good education and building a decent retirement are tough to ignore.
Don't get me wrong - I worked my way through college, and I've done everything from clean bathrooms to sell encyclopedias - I have respect for people at every income level, as long as they are honest, take responsibility and believe in freedom. And, there are certainly some very good people in political office as well.
Unfortunately, so many of us are so disgusted with the job most of these folks do, it sticks in our collective craw to pay them one more dime. In turn, that perspective damn near guarantees we keep attracting the same types of bozo's.
If the debate is about paying this much for Congressmen and Senators, I would respectfully ask you to look through the want ads and see what they pay various business managers in your town. You may be surprised.
[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited July 17, 1999).]
Bill Hebert
New member
Heard that part of this legislative "package" is that the president's salary will increase from $200,000 to (I hope you are all sitting down) $400,000/year. If I follow the logic of some of the earlier posts, then the next president should be twice better than Clinton. Guess what - we still don't have___________ and are paying twice as much for it! Boy I love being an American...
[This message has been edited by Bill Hebert (edited July 16, 1999).]
[This message has been edited by Bill Hebert (edited July 16, 1999).]
Gunslinger
Moderator
These same senators voted the last three years to raise social security benefits 1.2%. Try telling someone trying to live on under $10K a year that these bastards deserve a pay raise.
------------------
Gunslinger
We live in a time in which attitudes and deeds once respected as courageous and honorable are now scorned as being antiquated and subversive.
------------------
Gunslinger
We live in a time in which attitudes and deeds once respected as courageous and honorable are now scorned as being antiquated and subversive.
If there were some way to insure that Congress only passed laws that were 100% in line with the Constitution, the problem would be solved. The fedgov only has the power to oversee interstate commerce and provide for the common defense, as per the Constitution. If these were the only laws Congress could pass, there would be very little for them to do, and very little power. Also, we should go back to the original model-Senators appointed by state legislatures. This keeps the Senator directly beholden to his state, and keeps the balance of legislative power with the states.
It's time to redo the Constituion, and make it clearer and more absolute. Start it with a preamble that defines, in language with no wiggle or interpretation room, what constitutes a right, the nature of rights, and why all people have them by virtue of being alive and not at the discretion of any government.
Democracy is mob rule-I want back a democratic republican form of govrenment with extremely limited powers. Heck, under a properly run system, very few people would have a desire to run for office. There would be so little to do, the salary wouldn't be more than $25K. Presidential salary could remain the same, that job's worth $200K, but not much more.
We need more citizen-legislators, not professional politicians. And I don't agree with having businessmen running the gov't-a business exists for the purpose of making a profit, and a gov't doesn't. Certainly we need people in office who understand business & how it operates, but I don't want a gov't run like a business, especially a bad one, & that's what we've got now. Are we happy with that?
------------------
Shoot straight regards, Richard
The Shottist's Center forums.delphi.com/m/main.asp?sigdir=45acp45lc
It's time to redo the Constituion, and make it clearer and more absolute. Start it with a preamble that defines, in language with no wiggle or interpretation room, what constitutes a right, the nature of rights, and why all people have them by virtue of being alive and not at the discretion of any government.
Democracy is mob rule-I want back a democratic republican form of govrenment with extremely limited powers. Heck, under a properly run system, very few people would have a desire to run for office. There would be so little to do, the salary wouldn't be more than $25K. Presidential salary could remain the same, that job's worth $200K, but not much more.
We need more citizen-legislators, not professional politicians. And I don't agree with having businessmen running the gov't-a business exists for the purpose of making a profit, and a gov't doesn't. Certainly we need people in office who understand business & how it operates, but I don't want a gov't run like a business, especially a bad one, & that's what we've got now. Are we happy with that?
------------------
Shoot straight regards, Richard
The Shottist's Center forums.delphi.com/m/main.asp?sigdir=45acp45lc
Jeff Thomas
New member
45King, you make a good point. It would be a much better course of action to trim the duties and responsibilities of these folks - drop the time commitment and powers down to meet the pay. I think DC made the point elsewhere with a comment by Gephardt regarding the Congress keeping score of their progress / work by looking at how much legislation they've passed. These bozo's actually think we want them to pass more and more laws.
Regarding having a business person in there, the benefit of that is that business managers do two things - they try to provide what the market wants at a good price, and they control expenses to get there at a profit. They also tend to be most sensitive about government intrusion because they see it all the time.
No, you don't want government run at a profit. But, I suspect you want less government, and what you do have you want run as efficiently as possible. Folks without any business experience have a tougher time doing this because they've never managed that kind of operation. Liberals especially seem to think the money just comes out of thin air.
Regarding having a business person in there, the benefit of that is that business managers do two things - they try to provide what the market wants at a good price, and they control expenses to get there at a profit. They also tend to be most sensitive about government intrusion because they see it all the time.
No, you don't want government run at a profit. But, I suspect you want less government, and what you do have you want run as efficiently as possible. Folks without any business experience have a tougher time doing this because they've never managed that kind of operation. Liberals especially seem to think the money just comes out of thin air.
Gunslinger,
You made a good point about people living on less than $10K/yr.
My 87 y/o Mom receives $562/month to socially ensure her security. Her prescribed medications (heart, osteoporosis, etc.) cost more than $200/month.
She was a big fan of F.D. Roosevelt and the power of the federal government, "to get things done" until she had to live with "the things they did"!
So there is at least ONE "shanty-Irish" or "black-Irish", Catholic, Yellow-Dog Democrat who has been rehabilitated!
After watching the news the other day, she even said of our federal government, "If they keep on doing things like this they'll have to fight the American people!"
My Mom - the radical!
[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited July 18, 1999).]
You made a good point about people living on less than $10K/yr.
My 87 y/o Mom receives $562/month to socially ensure her security. Her prescribed medications (heart, osteoporosis, etc.) cost more than $200/month.
She was a big fan of F.D. Roosevelt and the power of the federal government, "to get things done" until she had to live with "the things they did"!
So there is at least ONE "shanty-Irish" or "black-Irish", Catholic, Yellow-Dog Democrat who has been rehabilitated!
After watching the news the other day, she even said of our federal government, "If they keep on doing things like this they'll have to fight the American people!"
My Mom - the radical!
[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited July 18, 1999).]