Congress is overpaid

[scruffy 0]

That's the real issue if you ask me.

Who cares if less than 600 people are making 178k, especially when the many of them have professional degrees and would expect to make that kind of money in the private sector.

The problem is when we have an imperial federal government with 2.15 million (!) employees pulling down paychecks nearly twice the amount of their private sector counter parts (when the ludicrous benefits packages are considered).

There is absolutely no excuse for the money those people make.

Peace, love and hoppiness

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

That perpetuates the myth that the president is responsible for the economy -

Uhhhhh....you assumed that why???

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[skyrider 0]

I'm not so much that they are "over Paid" But the Perks..../ Pay offs...Need to stop.....

You have to pay for quility people.....but when you allow those people to get "favors" shit starts hitting the fan!

Term limits,. Diffenitly!

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I'm not so much that they are "over Paid" But the Perks..../ Pay offs...Need to stop.....

You have to pay for quility people.....but when you allow those people to get "favors" shit starts hitting the fan!

Term limits,. Diffenitly!

The ONLY way to stop the whole thing dead in its tracks is to make the whole idea of "lobbying" exactly what it is.. BRIBERY

It used to be that bribing a government employee in any way was illegal.

Put the lobbyists in prison. and do the same to any politician that takes a bribe.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>I'm with you until the last line. Are you saying 174K isn't enough to make
>them want to switch?

No, sorry, I think $174K is definitely enough. I was replying to rehmwa's suggestion of paying them nothing. (I think he's right in that we'd still get people who would want the job - but I don't think we'd want _them._)

I have always felt a politician's total net income should not exceed that of the average net income of the district or state they represent. The President's and VP's should be limited to the average of the nation. If they are good at their job they will make a small fortune on the talk circuit and in book sales after leaving office.
The only problem is in enforcing it.

So does this mean that the quality of people who run the country should be at the 50th percentile of our society, in terms of skill and education? Sounds ugly, esp with the high school graduation rate in the low 70s.

I would expect corporations to hire a CEO with abilities a bit higher than the average for the company as well.

Let's see....
The job pays <300K and they spend far more than that to get the job.
Do you think lowering the pay scale will chase away the most qualified of those who already seek the position?
The riches come indirectly. Dropping the salaries is a feel-good idea that would have no significant effect on the financial situation of the country.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[billvon 3,121]

>Uhhhhh....you assumed that why?

I'm not assuming it, I am concluding it. You said:

"The President's and VP's should be limited to the average of the nation."

Let's apply that to you. Let's say you started a job as CEO, and your hourly pay was linked to the stock price. Would you see that as an incentive to increase the stock price? Most people would - and thus you'd get CEO's with a very strong incentive to increase the stock price. Indeed, a shareholder might even see that as his job, and thus might well endorse an incentive-based salary plan like that one.

That's a good goal for a corporation. But the US is not a corporation - and thus it's a mistake (IMO) to give the president incentives to increase wages (or increase economic activity, or get the GDP up or whatever.) He's not responsible for them, and we should not perpetuate the idea that he is.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

>The President's and VP's should be limited to the average of the nation.

That perpetuates the myth that the president is responsible for the economy - and that's a very foolish myth to perpetuate.

It is not the job of the government to make sure that people make lots of money. That's the job of the people. The government's only role is to set up a framework of regulation so that companies can compete on an equal footing, employees are not abused or trapped by fraudulent contracts etc. If they do that, they've done their jobs.

Let's assume your approach - that government officials do better if average salaries go up. Best approach for them - spend spend spend! Tons of government contracts. That drives up salaries. Lots of purchasing via US companies. That drives up stock prices, inspires companies to hire new employees, and increase their base pay to retain their workers as others try to hire them away.

And the minimum wage? Increase it to $30 an hour! Immediate and dramatic increase in politician's pay. Sure, it will cause massive problems in the long run - but by that time they'll be long gone with their winnings.

So no, I wouldn't be in favor of rewarding the president for growing the average wage. I _would_ be in favor of paying elected officials a wage that helps ensure they are not unusually vulnerable to financial blackmail, though.

All of what you implied would happen would never happen for one simple reason: It would destroy the economy overnight and the pols, as ignorant as they seem at times, would know it. They know they will retire very wealthy from the indirect benefits of the office and would avoid any such drastic measures for a relatively small and short sighted gain.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[billvon 3,121]

>It would destroy the economy overnight and the pols, as ignorant as
>they seem at times, would know it.

Raising the minimum wage would have some very short-term benefits, and most of the worst results would not kick in for several years - long enough to garner a fat paycheck and retire.

Massively increasing government spending also does not destroy the economy overnight. Heck, we've spent trillions in the past two years - and the economy is recovering, not tanking. It will be a mistake in the long term, but again, these politicians will be long gone by then.

>and would avoid any such drastic measures for a relatively small and
>short sighted gain.

I would like to think that, but time and time again we see examples where that is not the case.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Let's apply that to you. Let's say you started a job as CEO, and your hourly pay was linked to the stock price. Would you see that as an incentive to increase the stock price?

You are comparing apples to donuts. Very few CEO's make millions from book deals and speaking engagements after leaving office.

Regardless of whether you agree with that point, you still assumed something far beyond my intent and beliefs.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[skyrider 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm not so much that they are "over Paid" But the Perks..../ Pay offs...Need to stop.....

You have to pay for quility people.....but when you allow those people to get "favors" shit starts hitting the fan!

Term limits,. Diffenitly!

The ONLY way to stop the whole thing dead in its tracks is to make the whole idea of "lobbying" exactly what it is.. BRIBERY

It used to be that bribing a government employee in any way was illegal.

Put the lobbyists in prison. and do the same to any politician that takes a bribe.

SUMBITCH....Twice in one day I agree...

[billvon 3,121]

>Regardless of whether you agree with that point, you still
>assumed something far beyond my intent and beliefs.

OK. In that case, do you think that the president's salary should be limited to the average salary of the nation? If so, why?

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

$174,000 per year +bennies?

I say that's way too much.

They're horribly underpaid.

Any executive controlling $7,000,000,000 (Congressmen) to $30,000,000,000 (Senators) of revenues each year would be getting tens of millions in the private sector in salary, stock, and other benefits.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

>Regardless of whether you agree with that point, you still
>assumed something far beyond my intent and beliefs.

OK. In that case, do you think that the president's salary should be limited to the average salary of the nation? If so, why?

Yes.
It is a feel-good measure and nothing more. Even at 200K+ the Presidents salary is a token jesture compared to what they make from other sources. Reducing that salary will have extremely little effect on the President but people who think his salary is to high will feel better...myself included.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Quote

>Regardless of whether you agree with that point, you still
>assumed something far beyond my intent and beliefs.

OK. In that case, do you think that the president's salary should be limited to the average salary of the nation? If so, why?

Yes.
It is a feel-good measure and nothing more. Even at 200K+ the Presidents salary is a token jesture compared to what they make from other sources. Reducing that salary will have extremely little effect on the President but people who think his salary is to high will feel better...myself included.

That would make for an interesting study.

Calculate the entire net worth of the newly elected president and see where they are in the financial world at the end of his presidency.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[loumeinhart 0]

Quote

And the minimum wage? Increase it to $30 an hour!

why stop there? $275/hr min wage!

The pizza shop owners are RICH lol