RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise

RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

dragone -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/3/2007 10:10:01 AM)
Hi; If this system is so poorly funded, they are 'underpaid'...then why are these positions sought after, by so many, staying in the position for as loooooong as they can, spend into the millions of dollars to get a job only paying 107 g's; and why would a guy making upwards of 50 million dollars per film, plus residuals, forever; give it all up to take a job paying a mere 107 g's? something does not quite jive here, ya think?

snappykappy -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/3/2007 6:59:46 PM)
u got that right but then what else does he have left to do at least he wasn't president of the screen actor's guild and everytime he was asked a question he gave the dumb look like he couldn't hear what was being said to him hell all of congress does that now

instynctive -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/4/2007 7:00:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: selfbnd411 $170,000 to run a country doesn't sound extravagant at all. Too bad they suck at their jobs... the only running of this country they are doing is running it into the ground. The only other profession that really allows for that degree of inadequacy is meteorologists... There is too much nepotism and cronyism in today's goverment, which is really nothing more than a collaborate of circle-jerking, back-patting, self-righteous money grubbers.

Vendaval -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/4/2007 8:24:35 AM)
Well, at least one member of Congress is saying that the pay raise is not appropriate - Congressional Pay Raise Inappropriate At This Time (Rep. Jim Matheson) June 28th, 2007 "This week I repeated my call for greater transparency and greater accountability in the way Congress deals with raising its pay. I think it makes sense and I know it’s the right thing to do. These are difficult times facing our country. We are fighting terrorism on so many fronts, our economy faces challenges and our future budget deficits are projected to be at massive levels for years. I am not saying we should never receive a salary increase. I am saying that this is not the time for Congress to allow a pay raise to through without even an up-or-down vote. We need to budget and live within our means. At a time when we are trying to convince the public that we are serious about fiscal restraint, providing a pay raise to Members of Congress without an up or down vote does not honor their faith that Congress will provide a new direction. " Posted by Utah Dem. Rep. Jim Matheson http://blog.thehill.com/2007/06/28/congressional-pay-raise-inappropriate-at-this-time-rep-jim-matheson/

snappykappy -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/4/2007 9:39:43 AM)
what i want to kinow if there are any people and i will use that word loosely in congress that do not think a pay raise is good and they do not deserve it then why do they not just opt to use that part towards the national debt or give it to a charity but not take a deduction

Vendaval -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/4/2007 9:43:17 AM)
That is a great idea. You could write to the Rep in the post above or to your own Congress people for your state.

Lordandmaster -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/4/2007 10:28:21 AM)
You know what? I'd vote to quintuple their pay. That's right, you heard me: $850,000 a year. Then we might actually get the best and brightest interested in politics again. Instead we leave it all to hacks and shysters who sell their vote to the richest lobbyist.

dragone -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/4/2007 10:34:44 PM)
I refer you to post #21 A lot are already millionaries or damn close to it, not to worry however, give them some more time, they'll be there, where you want them. Arnuld, is worth upwards of 220 million, and even more now, yet he gets a salary of just over 200 g's (I don't know for sure) he wanted the job, the 50 million he was getting per picture, plus residuls didn't cut it, so he took the govenor job. and he needs that, right. His expense are paid, oh hell, what do I know.

dragone -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/4/2007 10:36:36 PM)
He's a democrate for christ's sake. Evidently you forgot the Clinton era.

Lordandmaster -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/4/2007 10:53:09 PM)
Yeah, all right, maybe I wouldn't QUINTUPLE their salary (if I were king for a day), but I don't think what they make is the least bit outrageous. What you're saying isn't entirely coherent, for that matter. How is Arnold Schwarzenegger's salary relevant? He's a governor, not a congressman. Also, your Post #21 talks about how seats in Congress are "sought after by many," and there are a few problems with the points you're making. First, it's not true across the board. In my district, the party that eventually won the election (the Democratic Party) had a very hard time finding someone to run against the incumbent. Second, you're explaining why seats in Congress are coveted by people who already have a fortune to spend trying to get elected. That's not quite the same thing. I'm talking about attracting intelligent and highly educated people who AREN'T already rich. Most people in that category pursue lucrative careers in law, medicine, and the corporate world. Not politics. quote: ORIGINAL: dragone I refer you to post #21 A lot are already millionaries or damn close to it, not to worry however, give them some more time, they'll be there, where you want them. Arnuld, is worth upwards of 220 million, and even more now, yet he gets a salary of just over 200 g's (I don't know for sure) he wanted the job, the 50 million he was getting per picture, plus residuls didn't cut it, so he took the govenor job. and he needs that, right. His expense are paid, oh hell, what do I know.

dragone -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/4/2007 11:18:14 PM)
Please, don't start with the ' CM nit-picking' crap. Arnuld was an example, as you well know, of how the already wealthy, spend millions to acquire a job that pays them ten percent of what they already earn in their field. It was an example, and you damn well know that. The other is this, raise to the rate you suggest, attracting the more intelligent, the scholars, etc; that is bull shit, ...all you do is perpetuate the crooks stay in power, they'll never let go of their positions. Is that coherent enough for you? It will not attract anyone else, that position, paid that kind of bucks, will never be vacanted, by those already there. Attract the intelligent, yeah sure....they'll be making bubble-faces in the window, wanting in. And the power that would give them, geezus....I won't even go there. They get a good salary as it is, for the scamming they do, for making sure their retirements are forever safe; for the deals they cut, remenber the Spiro Agnew fiasco, opps sorry, he was not a congressman, (never mind); for fucking over the subjects they rule over. So, they give themselves a raise...did you vote for it; were you even told before the raise was given, the proposal of a forthcoming raise???? Were you?...no, just done, so cry in your beer fella. And, all in all, "what are you going to to about it"...oh shit, a quote from another non congressman. Don't pull that dried up CM nit-pick specifics shit on me. Coherent enough for you.

Sinergy -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/5/2007 12:25:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dragone I refer you to post #21 A lot are already millionaries or damn close to it, not to worry however, give them some more time, they'll be there, where you want them. Arnuld, is worth upwards of 220 million, and even more now, yet he gets a salary of just over 200 g's (I don't know for sure) he wanted the job, the 50 million he was getting per picture, plus residuls didn't cut it, so he took the govenor job. and he needs that, right. His expense are paid, oh hell, what do I know. Of course, his first act as Governor was to tell the state legislature they did not need to pay him. Sinergy

dragone -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/5/2007 9:15:09 AM)
Really, I didn't know that, thank you for the enlightenment...but, he still gets his pay, am I right? And the deals he cuts, the 'under the table' bucks as it were, He is now aligned with some other guy from New York, another Billionaire, but not as rich as Warren B., so, is he doing it because he wants 'to give something back to the people'. He doesn't need the money, yet it is already appropriated in the taxes, has he donated it to some charity, or to the Wesenthal Foundation? Damn, he is all heart. And to think, he studied at night, government, politics, is a published, synicated author, celebrity world reknown, business enterpenurial successful tycoon, GOD, is there no end to his genius. He is going to be president, one day, if not he, and all goes according to plan, one of his offspring will be; and from a guy who came here, with just a gym bag, he has done pretty damn good. Even marring into the Kennedy clan; I've got to hand it to him, working hard has paid off, he is a shinning example how anyone with determination, hard work, a little forethought, can rise to become a world famous multi millionarie, and be aligned for the presidency of the United States of America, having laws proposed to alter the constitution.....nowhere but in America. I tip my Serratelli to him.

Lordandmaster -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/5/2007 2:07:55 PM)
What a pleasure to have a discussion with you. Go talk to someone else. quote: ORIGINAL: dragone Don't pull that dried up CM nit-pick specifics shit on me. Coherent enough for you.

Griswold -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/5/2007 6:14:06 PM)
A) If any member of Congress (dealing with all the news clippings and press bullshit {and accusations...founded or not} they deal with) can get through one term without being castigated for some horrible treason....I think they should get 10 million bucks in a savings account when they leave for all the crap they'll be painted with....and.... B) With all the benies they get from just doing one term (future lobbyists jobs, lifetime healthcare/pension, keeping everything they don't spend in campaigns, etc.)...they should work for free. (Sue me...I know it didn't make any sense...but to some, I'm sure it made all the sense in the world). Pffffffffffffffft.

Vendaval -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/6/2007 1:11:10 AM)
Yes, I remember that. And when we had an earthquake in this area a few years ago, the Governator boarded a helicoptor and flew down to survey the damage for himself and declared the area eligible for disaster relief. (Thread highjack over) quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy Of course, his first act as Governor was to tell the state legislature they did not need to pay him. Sinergy

OwnerSeeking -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/7/2007 4:10:00 AM)
Technically they didn't vote themselves a pay raise, they chose to not have a vote to prevent the pay raise. That fun little law was passed by congress back in 1989. Personally I find it a much sneaker method to get a raise, since the only reason for it, is so that they could get a pay increase and try to have it come in under the radar. So instead of looking greedy, they just look sneaky. Another fun thing to keep in mind, is that not only did they get the pay raise, but the 109th congress only had about 103 days in session. So I defy anyone to find a job that you get to work 103 days for ,and make more than $165K a year. Lets see, if we do the math, that means for each day they spent in session last year, they earned $1,602, and they are now saying that isn't enough? Hell if I earned 1000 a day, I would only work a 100 or so days as well. Now compare that to the original pay in 1800 of a $6 a day for each day they were in session. Taking into account inflation, and lets be a little generous, and double that number you would have them earning $120/day they were in session. But then I don't even want that, I am a softy for these guys, I would propose this method, let each member of congress earn the average of what an American worker earns, while only being required to be in session 200 days. Here is how to figure the pay up... Take the total of what each person who filed earned after taxes last year, and the divide it by the number of people who filed. The IRS has all that information, so it should be easy as 3.1415. The argument that one needs to keep their pay as high as it is, in order to keep the rich from being the only ones who can run for office just doesn't work out if you think about it. They are the rich, and because of how the system is set up, to run for office you need to be rich, you need to go out and either grease the palms to get the money, or use your own money. All the money we save in paying them, can easily go into campaign finance reform. Doing the math, if the average worker earns $50k a year, we would be saving over a $100k for each member, and when you look at all the members of congress that comes to over $50,000,000 / year. Oh well, it's late, I am finished with my rant.

dragone -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/7/2007 7:18:36 AM)
Hi Vendaval; I lived in CA, for quite a number of years; This Govenator of yours did no great feat with his declaration. In CA, the property values are tremendously high dollar value. Once the ocean decided to reclaim a portion of it's beach, something like 40 houses were swept away, the rains claimed another bunch of cliffside homes, 10 or twelve maybe less. The then gov. petitioned for federal disaster relief and CA recieved it. Later, in Michigan, Detroit, and the southern portion of the state, was hit with devasting storms, which resulting in weeks of power outages, destroyed homes in the hundreds, the gov. petitioned the Feds for Disaster relief, and was denied. You two, will have to do better than that. Now, com'on with the insults.

Sinergy -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/7/2007 1:57:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: instynctive There is too much nepotism and cronyism in today's goverment, which is really nothing more than a collaborate of circle-jerking, back-patting, self-righteous money grubbers. Dont hold back. Say what you feel. Sinergy

Sinergy -> RE: US House votes to give themselves a $4,400 pay raise (7/7/2007 2:06:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dragone You two, will have to do better than that. Now, com'on with the insults. I have very mixed feelings about the Governator, dragone. On the one hand, one of his first acts was to try to do the Karl Rove bit to wipe out unions in California, forcing a ridiculously expensive special election, and got his ass handed to him by the generally liberal nitwits who live in this state. We have one of the weakest state governors in the United States, and one of the most viciously partisan legislatures. Add all this up, we have a hugely popular ex-actor unable to actually get anything accomplished on a state level. I did not vote to put him back in, largely because I am a union guy and "An injury to one is an injury to all." I think the plan all along was to get Congress to add an amendment to the Constitution allowing a non-native born person to be President to set the state for the Presidenator. Then the Republicans lost control of both houses of Congress, and lost most of their popularity in the states. So Arnold's future as President is probably not worth the paper it is printed on, despite his retaining his popularity. Sinergy p.s. In terms of the disaster stuff you commented on, I think the rich nitwits who build their houses on cliffs or in parts of the state subject to wildfires should be forced to get insurance to pay for it when it collapses into the ocean or becomes a bonfire. As the insurance policies (read: In order to save costs) are written, the homeowner has to apply for Federal and State Aid and the insurance company makes up the difference. Im still puzzled why my taxes are being used to rebuild their mansion. In the case of the Trump golf course on Palos Verdes, El Nino washed 3 of the holes into the ocean, so Trump sued the state to recoup his losses. His suit lost, if I remember correctly. Want to build in a stupid place, suck it up and accept the outcomes if it goes wrong.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.173828E-02