Making Cuts to the Politicians Paychecks and Retirement

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 03:32 PM
link   
You could charge a politician to take the job and they would still become millionaires in no time. It is not hard to imagine why.




posted on Mar, 2 2013 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hopechest
I think its a fair wage for what they do.

If I worked in a private business, had to travel constantly, work all weird hours and such, I would expect about 100k a year.

Its not about how much money they have invested or earn outside of their job, its about looking at the type of work they do, the education put in to earn that job, and finding a good dollar value as pay for that.

I don't consider them overpaid and actually think that what they do for a living, if in the private sector, would garner them a far higher wage.


I agree with this part. Having been a Major in the Army which makes about 110K in pay and benefits (its public record) know that if I held a similar position of that level of responsibility in the private sector - say Vice President of Operations or VP of Something I'd be paid a lot more...probably in a fortune 500 in the 250K range.

A General Officer in the military makes about 150-160K a year for what is in effect being the CEO of a corporation with 10,000+ employees and billions of dollars in budget and equipment. What would he make in the private sector?

I think 175K is fair for what they do – but there should be term limits no doubt. An officer in the Army in any Command is limited to two years (sometimes 3) – because power corrupts and change is good for any organization.

All that said; however, they need to seriously tighten up their shot group on benefits and ethics. I think they need to stop with the lobbyist crap. As an officer in the military any meal purchased for me by a vendor is limited to like 12.00. There are no “gifts” – I’d go to jail for taking a gift from a contractor at all.
I know these lobbyists are taking these dudes out for$ 500.00 steak dinners and "loaning" them beach houses and jets and other #. If a military officer even hinted at something like that he'd be fired so fast it would make his head spin. We are also prevented from taking a position at a corporation for which we played a role in acquisition or granting of a contract. Say if I arranged to buy some weapon system I could then by law not take a position with that company for I think 3 years after I leave the service.

We don't get entertainment budgets, someone’s spouse gets sick, a kid is born the hat goes round for flowers (we don’t get to use taxpayer money for flowers like congress). We can never pay for alcohol at all with any budget for any even unlike Nancy who ran up like 100K in beverage service on military air. We don’t fly first class – some General’s might have a jet at their disposal but it isn’t serving alcohol and your spouse and kids and civilian friends (cronies) sure as crap are not getting on – ever… Unless you want a trip to jail. They get those things to make their job easier and to effectively manage their time – who wants to pay a guy 150k a year to wait at the airport? It is purely effective use of time. They certainly don’t travel on their military aircraft weekly to go from their duty station to their home to visit their family like congress. That is private and paid out of pocket. They don’t have security on vacation…


Originally posted by Hopechest
As was already pointed out, they don't get rich while they are in office, that comes after they leave the public sector through either jobs, the lecture circuit, teaching, books, all sorts of varying things.


With part of this I agree - they make more when out than in actual pay. However, in some cases like with our Senator from MO. Roy Blunt. I have been watching him on Judicial watch. They track their net worth. He started office with a net worth of like 379K now in one term he is well over one million. I have written to ask for his investment strategy - I haven’t heard anything back.

I think they should be limited to whatever rules they make for the military in terms of benefits. First, I'd rather there be no retirement at all for elected officials but if they are going to have it should not be better than that of the soldiers they order about...

We have to do 20 to get 40% of our base pay. I served 24 years and get a retirement of 40,000.00 a year (and I fall under the old rules of 20=50% +2.5% per year so I get 60% of my base pay as a Major over 24.) Then we get some crap Health care which is about equal to Medicare in quality. General - Private it’s all the same.

Why should they have some gold plated BS?



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 02:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by jcarpenter

Originally posted by bobs_uruncle
...... but where do you banish them to where they can do no more harm, space?



In the 1960's, the SecDef and some pilots knew the Gulf-of-Tonkin was a false flag ..... and several congressmen knew too. But most congressmen back then were simply ignorant. The difference between then and now is that I don't believe anyone could serve in the House or Senate today and not be part of the functioning criminal syndicate that has our country by the balls. Not one of them can claim innocence today.

These people are the flesh-and-blood equivalent of nuclear waste. They damage and destroy everything they touch. Do you really believe banishment would be a punishment fitting the crime?


From a personal perspective, I'd like to see them have as fair a trial as they would give any of us and if/when found guilty of treason, they could be hung by the neck. I am an ecofriendly guy and rope is reusable.

Cheers - Dave





new topics
 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join