Jump to content

The Ekonomee


Scscsc89

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Jalapeno said:

Very good points there.  Washington DC is an expensive city to live in.  Remember AOC's issues when she started on the job?

The funny thing is that those people can vote on their pay raises but they do the popular thing by declining those raises and making themselves more susceptible to bribery.

Gee, where have we seen that pandering bullshit?

https://apnews.com/0ad1e8be56e040b4ab0e85c3d13c3358

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply
15 hours ago, Mano said:

I would wager the vast majority could pull down more than $175k in the private sector. 

If someone is in congress for the money, it isn't the money they draw from their salary.

Plenty of local politicians in some states are prohibited from working in certain areas of the private sector for a given period of time after serving.  It's common in other countries, too.  Naturally, here there's not law, because too many people are getting rich off of an implicit job offer to, say, an SEC investigator, after they refuse to hold bad actors accountable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They refuse pay increases for two reasons.  1) they don’t really need the money and 2) it looks great politically.  They can spend away on whatever they look and say “but look, I didn’t take a raise!”.  

And people cheer.  

Mano is right, they get rich after serving.  (Generally speaking of course)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, CRBuff said:

They refuse pay increases for two reasons.  1) they don’t really need the money and 2) it looks great politically.  They can spend away on whatever they look and say “but look, I didn’t take a raise!”.  

And people cheer.  

Mano is right, they get rich after serving.  (Generally speaking of course)

I don't have a problem, necessarily, with politicians being paid big money for books, or speaking engagements, but the real issue is politicians going to work for businesses with a huge lobbying presence in DC, or the various state capitals.  That's paying for access, not talent.  That's why people bitching about Obama's net worth are so wrongheaded.  He's made big money through international speaking engagements (the words of which are documented), and probably one of the biggest signing bonuses a human has ever received for his presidential memoir.  That is paying someone for their talent.  It's not a good look for a guy who often preaches about the haves and have-nots, but it's far different than Obama being paid as a K-Street lobbyist for coal or the defense industry.  Halliburton paid $34M to Dick Cheney to be VP.  THAT should incense everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t disagree.  If people want to read about Obama’s time in office fantastic, and he should be paid for it.  Many have a lot of money, so what.  Why was it news Bernie was worth some money?  Good for him.

and they will never stop lobbyists as it is the parachute many use when their time in office is over.....can’t cut off their own funding.  You know, vote for what’s right and all.

we are just so far gone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CRBuff said:

I don’t disagree.  If people want to read about Obama’s time in office fantastic, and he should be paid for it.  Many have a lot of money, so what.  Why was it news Bernie was worth some money?  Good for him.

and they will never stop lobbyists as it is the parachute many use when their time in office is over.....can’t cut off their own funding.  You know, vote for what’s right and all.

we are just so far gone. 

Bernie wrote 4 best-selling books since 2016.  And he's worth a whopping $2.5M, which Fox News loves to scream about.  Meanwhile, Michael McCaul, a Republican from TX is worth some $300M because he married into a Clear Channel CEO family.  The dude wasn't even smart enough to make his own ++++ing money and leaches off his wife.  Does Fox News do an investigation?  Nah.  They need that Clear Channel endorsement!

Tell me, who's a bigger threat to choose their bottom line over public policy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Orange said:

Bernie wrote 4 best-selling books since 2016.  And he's worth a whopping $2.5M, which Fox News loves to scream about.  Meanwhile, Michael McCaul, a Republican from TX is worth some $300M because he married into a Clear Channel CEO family.  The dude wasn't even smart enough to make his own ++++ing money and leaches off his wife.  Does Fox News do an investigation?  Nah.  They need that Clear Channel endorsement!

Tell me, who's a bigger threat to choose their bottom line over public policy?

Truthfully we don’t know....there are some of the really wealthy that do support increasing taxes.  That said, I get the general point.

the Fox News investigation was dumb, and I’d say the same for much of what passes for news these days.  Partisan hacks is all they are.  Shouldn’t conservatives cheer that he’s made some money (not really that much) in our system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

 

On 12/20/2019 at 2:13 PM, Orange said:

Yeah, the fed keeps cutting rates like it's a recession, but there's no reason to have concerns over the economy.  Okay.

This is classic from an Obama supporter considering the multiple QEs and lowest interest rates in history the Fed used to carry Obama and his limp economy across the finish line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...