It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama freezing pay of top staff; signs ethics rules

page: 3
21
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Yay!
I also really appreciated his statement that "there is too much secrecy in the government."

*rejoice*

It's good that he's cutting the pay of those in his administration who make over $100k a year, because so many people can't even find jobs, it's fair that they have to cut back a little.

I'm curious about what was in the letter that Bush left him on the desk. Perhaps "sorry."




posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Hey, let's not forget GWB was respected as president when his administration began... until 9/11, and then he totally pulled an about face on his policies and campaign promises (and his oath to office).

I will admit, President Obama has made a good first step in the right direction, but for the love of god, he's only been in office for one day! He still has the better part of four years to screw the pooch! let's give him at least a year before we treat him like a saint. He does have a political record prior to the presidency ya know, and not all his choices were good ones (his prior positions on gun control come to mind for a start).

In my book, confidence is earned, not bestowed like some soverign's crown. I'm still recovering from our last president's choices. If he continues making these sort of choices in how he runs the country, great! but I, for one, will be holding my applause for the time being, thanks!



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   
Why argue for the sake of arguing?

Because you want to come across as more intelligent?

Know the difference between good and bad - your life will go much easier.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 


As a part of a house hold that has a 6 figure income...I think this is fine...If you can't live a "normal" life on a 6 figure salary you have some problems. And by "normal" I mean people who don't have 8 kids and have some wild medical issues. If you got a bad weekend habit about riding the "rail" and calling hookers and such then 100K might not stretch far but households with 100k income that don't have un-normal burdens should be able to get the bills payed on time and not complain about much.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Originally posted by ecain
I just watched that on CNN. Lobbying is open bribery, I'm glad there will be a more strict guideline to follow. He's off to a good start so far.


WOW

Being that Obama took more money from Fannie and Freddie than any Senator save Democratic chairman of the committee.

Hummm?

I don't get it.

LOL


And has what to do with the topic? Hmm? Nothing. Let's keep to it please.


The mods seem to arbitrary judgments on these boards. If Obama has been a large recipient of lobbying funds in the past, I would say that is extremely relevant to the thread.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
That doesn't look like a fresh start to me:


Those affected by the freeze include the high-profile jobs of White House chief of staff, national security adviser and press secretary. Other aides who work in relative anonymity also would fit into that cap if Obama follows a structure similar to the one George W. Bush set up


Perhaps not all Bush's idea were rotten "if Obama follows a structure similar to the one George Bush set up."

Something caused a great deal of trouble for the USA, and the causes are known. I give Obama 90-days to address the issue and outline remedies so the word "bailout" would be banned from Capitol Hill. If he doesn't, he will prove himself to be another power seeker who doesn't serve the nation but himself and his ego -- just another rotten honey-I-will-make-you-the-first-lady bastard.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by tsloan
reply to post by silo13
 


As a part of a house hold that has a 6 figure income...I think this is fine...If you can't live a "normal" life on a 6 figure salary you have some problems. And by "normal" I mean people who don't have 8 kids and have some wild medical issues. If you got a bad weekend habit about riding the "rail" and calling hookers and such then 100K might not stretch far but households with 100k income that don't have un-normal burdens should be able to get the bills payed on time and not complain about much.


You're kidding, right? It's not about them struggling, it's about them having too much compared to most people. They probably don't need a six figure income, and if hard-working, educated Americans currently are lacking thousands and thousands of jobs, then they can stand a cutback in pay.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Hm. I am cautiously optimistic...

I wonder if that includes is own salary? POTUS gets $400 000 a year, correct?

[edit on 21-1-2009 by asmeone2]



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   
nice move, but if he REALLY wants to stop lobbying in washington, he needs to make AIPAC register as an agent of a foreign govt. That's where the influence is really strong.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by stander
That doesn't look like a fresh start to me:


Those affected by the freeze include the high-profile jobs of White House chief of staff, national security adviser and press secretary. Other aides who work in relative anonymity also would fit into that cap if Obama follows a structure similar to the one George W. Bush set up


Perhaps not all Bush's idea were rotten "if Obama follows a structure similar to the one George Bush set up."


The mention of Bush's structure is regarding the "aides who work in relative anonymity". They are saying that even if Obama adopts a structure like Bush did (that had "aides who work in relative anonymity"), the caps still apply, so there are no loopholes in that sense.

At least that's the way I'm reading it.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Until he gives us information about Area 51 & Aliens then its hogwash to me. But I doubt it will happen tho



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by asmeone2
 


I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if he cut his own.
POTUS does work 24/7 though. Being woken up in the middle of the night for meetings, and vacation time is one of those things where I bet he'd be interrupted if something happened, and he's probably on the phone/laptop all the time for vacations too.

So if they pay him for 24/7 that's only... about $45.66 an hour.
That's less than most CEOs make. That's for the 400k

Here:



Traditionally, the President is the highest-paid public employee. President Obama currently earns $400,000 per year, along with a $50,000 expense account, a $100,000 nontaxable travel account and $19,000 for entertainment.[11] The most recent raise in salary was approved by Congress and President Bill Clinton in 1999 and went into effect in 2001; prior to the change, the President earned $200,000, plus expense accounts.


en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 1/21/2009 by ravenshadow13]



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by rizla
 


I kinda think you are correct, but I don't/can't argue with mods,



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   
" I must say, I'm mostly just proud that after 8 years I can say without full conviction "I completely agree with this decision. I think the President of the United States has done the right thing." and not have a bad taste in my mouth."

And i can honestly say as a british citizen that i am proud also of our greatest ally finally realising after 8 years, that things were going the wrong way.

Now we Brits need to do the same because our government took alot of tips from old george.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 04:53 PM
link   
reply to post by rizla
 


Name one president in recent history that hasn't taken money from corporations to fund their campaigns. It's not going to happen, because to get elected, you need massive capital. Ask Ron Paul about that.

Want that to change? Support the fairness doctrine. Then media outlets would have to cover all candidates fairly regardless of money.

reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


As you can tell by the responses on this thread, there is still quite a large portion of this country that is in denial. It will probably be at least a few more generations before the liberal movements can overcome the conservative death grip on this country.

[edit on 1/21/2009 by Irish M1ck]



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by questioningall
 


This does nothing to help anyone but Barrys image and all you sheeple are falling for it. Why doesnt he annouce an investigation into Barney Franks gay lover at freddie mac whom set up and gamed the entire housing market?



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
And has what to do with the topic? Hmm? Nothing. Let's keep to it please.


hey, look out kids, the supports for this imposter in the white house might admonish you if you say ill about thier new messiah.

note: text length made so unlike others, this post isn't a one liner.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by stinkhorn
This does nothing to help anyone but Barrys image and all you sheeple are falling for it.


I doubt he is doing this because it will help his image, but even if he was, as long as keeps making good decisions and signing good bills and Executive Orders into law that benefit the people and make the Government more transparent I'm all for it.



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 05:33 PM
link   


cnn video here

[edit on 21-1-2009 by Blundo]



posted on Jan, 21 2009 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
You're kidding, right? It's not about them struggling, it's about them having too much compared to most people. They probably don't need a six figure income, and if hard-working, educated Americans currently are lacking thousands and thousands of jobs, then they can stand a cutback in pay.


yeah, it would be nice though if they're were getting a pay cut, but they're not, they're just getting a freeze. So if they're getting overpaid their worth by oh say, $50,000. then they're sill getting overpaid that much, they just wont get another raise until too many people complain and it gets quietly repealed.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join