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.

 

Solution for our debt,,All government employees including President take a 70% pay cut

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by rtcctr
 


are you nuts? how many employees do the government departments have, if you suggest at 70 % cut in wages, how will they get by, pay their mortgages, pay their taxes, buy their food or by fuel, this will lead to more of a mess and damage to the economy.

What you want to do is fine the fat cats, the high earners, bankers and the nations rich that are avoiding paying the correct taxes, or moving their money to other countries to avoid tax paying all together.

think things through before spouting crap

Wee Mad Mental

p.s. the commies failed remember !!




posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by onequestion
reply to post by rtcctr
 


Why dont they make what the average median income is for whatever area they work in the amount they get paid? That makes way more sense.

[edit on 6-6-2010 by onequestion]


And just who is "they" that you are referring to? Who is the person who
is going to wave a magic wand and this will suddenly all come together?
"They" are not going to change "their" lifestyle. What a laugh !!



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Government employment always meant a stable. yet unspectacular standard of living. It still does. Government employees generally are not overpaid. The reason it seems that way is because most everyone else doesn't get paid enough if they can mange to get paid at all.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by endtimer
 


Its the most plausible answer to government employee income. If they are not going to work to raise the median income then they shouldn't get paid more. If they make what everyone else makes they are inclined to work harder. This could help in so many ways.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by airspoon
 


AirSpoon Apparently your insightful comment is being ignored. Considering you appear to know a great deal more about this issue then the majority of posters, I have a question you may be able to answer. Allegedly there is something, somewhere in Congressional records that states our government can purchase the FRB for 250 million.
I have seen this comment dozens of times and the only ref given is Congressional records. I can only guess, that if this clause / statement exists somewhere it must have been stipulated when the FRB came into being. I have looked for this alleged clause for quite some time with no success. Can you ref it ? If true then all debt owned the FRB could potentially be cancelled . Thanks


[edit on 7-6-2010 by dazbog]



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by dazbog
 


I have not heard anything to that affect, though maybe you can provide some sources? It's important to not that there are allot of myths about the Federal Reserve. One myth being that the Fed Res is a publicly traded corporation, registered in Delaware or that the Fed Res is a for-profit corporation, owned by a group of international bankers.

While some of these myths are rooted in truths, others are just simple misunderstandings. For instance, while the Fed Res itself technically isn't a for-profit banking institution, it sure does profit those who have influential roles in the bank.

As far as the Fed Res being a corporation registered in Delaware, there is an institution named the FEDERAL RESERVE ASSOCIATION that is registered in Delaware but there is nothing connecting the FDB with the FDA, at least that I have seen. The Federal Reserve is owned through stocks, though not publicly traded. Each bank that is affiliated with the Fed, has to own shares of the Fed. The bigger the bank, the more shares they have to own.

These are only but two myths out of many being circulated about the Federal Reserve. I can only assume that there are so many wild theories, ideas and myths about the Fed Res because so much is unknown about the shadowy institution. The dealings of the Fed Res are purposefully kept secret due to the nature of market.

--airspoon



posted on Jun, 8 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by dazbog
 


I have not heard anything to that affect, though maybe you can provide some sources?
--airspoon



I don't want to derail the OPs thread. I am aware of all the issues you mentioned. I've corresponded with the FRB for two decades. More recently with email. I am constantly amazed with their candor. If pressed they will answer most questions, but will on occasion attempt to dodge a pointed question. Especially so, if one focuses on Gold Certificates.
They get a tad testy, but eventually state, their preferred method for collateralization of government debt is Gold Certificates. Which then allows them to take physical possession.
To answer your question I have been unable to locate ANY reference material to support the 250 million buy back claim. I do however believe it does exist. I simply haven't been able to locate it. Thanks for your response. Hope I didn't stray to far for the OP. However the fundamental issue lies with the FRB and not capping salaries or any such silliness.
If anyone is interested this is a prior post indicating PER the Federal Reserve Bank where the problem actually begins.
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by dazbog
reply to post by airspoon
 


AirSpoon Apparently your insightful comment is being ignored. Considering you appear to know a great deal more about this issue then the majority of posters, I have a question you may be able to answer. Allegedly there is something, somewhere in Congressional records that states our government can purchase the FRB for 250 million.
I have seen this comment dozens of times and the only ref given is Congressional records. I can only guess, that if this clause / statement exists somewhere it must have been stipulated when the FRB came into being. I have looked for this alleged clause for quite some time with no success. Can you ref it ? If true then all debt owned the FRB could potentially be cancelled . Thanks

[edit on 7-6-2010 by dazbog]



Maybe if
gold was an
American product.

wana know the solution?
(warning: massive ego within)

It's not a question of who spends the money.
It's a question of why the Fed doesn't spend it's profits.
See it's not a case where the system is particularly broken.
It's a case where the Fed just seems to keep profits in perpetuity.
if they spent just 10% of what they made off of us over the last 20 years
they could single handedly wipe out the deficit, and spontaneously rebound the economy.
Quite simply, all we need is someone to purchase an amount of American product equal to the deficit.


David Grouchy



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 01:48 PM
link   
I got a solution for our debt. It works for us every day common folk. Stop spending. What a novel idea. If I can't make bills it's because I have TOO MANY. I cancel cable, cell phone, internet, etc. until I can get myself back in check. That or I get another job. Hey, make the Fed get a second job. Maybe flipping burgers after it get's off printing money and running two wars.

Or we enter bankruptcy protection. Sad but true.

Seriously, let's look at the unneeded pork that gets added, cut the fat. We reduce spending and pay down our debt. We can't spend our way out, people with credit cards can attest to this. Defense. Yes, two wars is costing us heavily right now. End them as promised, I'm sorry if it creates a power vacuum, (we shouldn't have been there in the first place). End our occupation on European soil (our war with the Soviets is not going to happen, and Hitler is not returning from the grave) They can do without us, they are begging for us to leave... let's oblige.
We have an obligation to pay our baby boomers social security, the coffers are slated to be emptied... someone decided to use it as their own personal piggy bank.
Medicaid, another big ticket budget item that we have an obligation to fulfill.

Congressmen have placed little pet projects for their states and those should not be fulfilled. I look at the debt per citizen, and it says I'm responsible for 600k, my children are responsible for the same amount and they don't earn incomes yet . Even if I was working (currently not
) My previous salary would have taken 13 years had I given my full salary. That is unacceptable. Our situation is not acceptable and our course needs to change... DRASTICALLY.

[edit on 2-7-2010 by brutalsun]



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 02:06 PM
link   
I agree they should take a pay cut by medium standards like $60,000 a year is very comfrontable living, specailly if your married.

They don't need $100,000's to live a normal life, they will just have to live like normal people, they won't be rich and won't be poor.

You don't need a mansion or expensive cars why should they our taxes pay for them to live like Kings while we all are barely getting by.

Thats just a joke for them to make the money they do.

And how about bringing our troops home were they belong and we wouldn't even need much for a war spending fund like its water.

Let the rest of the world clean up these other countrys for a while until we need to be thier to help allies.

Our troops should be stationed around our country in case we are invaded not destroying other countries for no reason except get the fuel.

Somebody here at ats should go do what you need to do to become president and turn our country around in the right direction.

The way its going we will be lucky if we even make it until a new president is elected.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 09:09 PM
link   
I agree with this solution partially.
None of us might be sitting here typing on a computer if it wasn't for a free market right?

So to change that now and limit what successful people can achieve is extremely dangerous to the future of our evolution.

Is a millions dollars a year salary too much, sure.. But 100 years ago that 1million was only 250 thousand or however you want to figure inflation.

If you fix that problem at the same time I think you might have somthing.
If back in the day my one dollar was equivalent to a gram of gold, or a kilo of sugar, but at this rate a kilo of sugar will be 250 thousand dollars.

Theres only one place that causes this phenomenon called inflation. I m not even going to say the name. The gold backed dollar hasn't degraded for some unknown mysterious reason.
milk still comes from a cows utter. Its not getting more expensive for any special reason.

Stop letting a mysterious organization control the flow of the US currency.

To agree with the OP I feel all elected officials should have an identical base salary of no more than 30k-50k a year. If you were a lawyer making 100k maybe you should stay in that business. Plenty of honest law abiding people would be happy to govern a country for such a humble wage.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 09:21 PM
link   
How about this: instead of the "higher ups" taking a pay cut, how about we just stop paying those who no longer serve. Do you realize how much is spent on security for former presidents? Do you know that congressmen and senators continue to get their salaries after their terms of service are up? Not to mention health care at no cost, etc, etc. The real problem is these people control their own pay and not the public. Pay raises, benefits etc should be voted on at a national election NOT in a closed session of the house.....



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 09:23 PM
link   
Make Congress only work for minimum wage. That might give them some perspective.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Congress works for a REASONABLE wage and gets no automatic raises each year.
Black Budget is cut 100% or Disclose and Declassified 100%



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
or better yet, put them back on a per diem pay base. that will put an end to excessive vacationing.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by killuminati2012
I agree with raz. People elected into office don't make very much money to begin with. I would say that for many, their major income derives from other sources so cutting their pay would be little incentive to them.

There are two monetary black holes that I see in this country. Raz already named the CEO's and other corporate money grubbers. The other black hole is the military. I'm not against the military, but after serving in the Air Force I saw first hand the ridiculous amounts of money being spent. Just take 10% of that money and we could fund so many projects here in the States.


I spent a couple of decades in the Corps. There is so much fraud, waste and abuse that its almost comical. The supply chain is the most egregious. How many times did you guys order stuff twice just to have a spare. Unfortunately, when we do that we end up with hundreds of spares.

I bet spare parts in the military is in the billions of dollars. I'm talking 50-100 billion dollars sitting on shelves.

The amount of silly contracts the military has is pretty odd also. We had multiple contracts just for boots. At one point, we had two contracts for the new digital cammies.

I know you guys don't want to hear this but there is blatant theft in the military. That probably eats up a few million a year. Me being airwing pilots routinely flew aircraft cross country under the auspice of training. I always thought it was odd to do 1v0 training near their home town. Gas for a cross country trip runs in the thousands. Now multiply that by 20 times a week.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by rtcctr
 


You really think that 450k is too much for the requirements to be president? You have the capabilities to be voted into an office that 350 million people couldn't?
Most Presidents have an extensive education and experience that would get them millions in the private sector. As well as the other higher ups.

People rarely work for the government on any level for the pay. And the money you save would just be pennies compared to what the deficit is.

everyone is like lone sharks in a pool with no food. Your just turning on others to attack since you don't have anything else to chew on.

Do you really want the leader of the FAA to be have an associates degree?Because with little pay, people with skills are going elsewhere.

The solution is simple. Reduce military spending. We could reduce military spending by half and we still pay more then double the next country, which is China for heaven's sake.



posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 08:12 AM
link   
Have you noticed, like the big corporations, our government, even though the economy is very bad, still votes themselves pay raises. Yeaaa, they sure deserve pay raises don`t they? The rest of the country is going down the dumps money wise, but there sure is enough for their pay raises.



posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by eNumbra
 

Reasonable by whose definition? (Link) Not bad for part time temporary work, which is what their "jobs" were supposed to be.

And let's not forget that the perqs and housing allowances and medical and dental plans and other "benefits" far exceed their stated salaries and are far superior than the average citizens'. I'm not buying the reasonable part.


[edit on 3-7-2010 by ~Lucidity]



posted on Jul, 3 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
how about the nba/nfl/nhl/mlb/and all actors also take a pay cut and news ppl like glenn beck $50 million a year man.......a rod $30 million this year.......outrageous.....



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join