Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1 Wealth in Congress climbed as others saw net worth stay stagnant, reports show 
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    430
    Wealth in Congress climbed as others saw net worth stay stagnant, reports show
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...-reports-show/

    No wonder why people don't like politicians. Where is OccupyWallStreet on this? I blame the government more than Wall Street for this mess we are in.
    Last edited by RedGrouse; 12-27-2011 at 07:39 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    It really makes me sick. They get these great benefits. They get paid waaaaaaaaaaay too much. I can't help but think if their pay got cut and their benefits got caught, it would actually help us economically. Use some of their pay to pay off the deficit. Oh, and why the crap do they get free health care? They can afford to buy it straight out. Give them the same benefits and maybe some of them will decide that congress isn't worth being in. With any hope, people who actually care about the people and not companies/activist groups contributing to their campaign will run. It's so sickening. I'm with Perry on the idea of making them part time. Do something to make them lose. They don't deserve their pay and benefits.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Lanie View Post
    It really makes me sick. They get these great benefits. They get paid waaaaaaaaaaay too much. I can't help but think if their pay got cut and their benefits got caught, it would actually help us economically. Use some of their pay to pay off the deficit. Oh, and why the crap do they get free health care? They can afford to buy it straight out. Give them the same benefits and maybe some of them will decide that congress isn't worth being in. With any hope, people who actually care about the people and not companies/activist groups contributing to their campaign will run. It's so sickening. I'm with Perry on the idea of making them part time. Do something to make them lose. They don't deserve their pay and benefits.
    They're paid $174,000. I don't think that's too much. Most of them have academic records that would command that much anywhere they go. House and Senate leaders make more.

    And they don't get free health care; they buy it. It's pretty damn good, but they buy it.

    They pay social security just like you do. They're vested into their retirement plan after 5 years, which is pretty unusual, and can retire after age 50, but only if they have 20 years service. They contribute 1.3% of their salary into the retirement plan.

    Read about it:
    http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscong...ongresspay.htm

    Also, you have to understand what the article is saying and doing:
    From 2004 to 2010, the median net worth of members of Congress jumped 15 percent, the New York Times reports.
    15% in 6 years? That's pitiful. Mine jumped damn near that much last year, and I'm retired!

    What you're seeing is the news media creating a story where none exists. Not to say that there are no legislators who are greedy and are exploiting the system, but in this case the media is using the current unpopularity of the legislative branch to sell news. :)Worked, didn't it?:)
    Last edited by Starbuck; 12-28-2011 at 10:05 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    16,658
    ABC News did a story on this last night and it seems as though there are more Democrat millionaires than Republican. Nancy Pelosi spent Christmas at a $10K a night resort and John Kerry did basically the same. Let them eat cake I suppose.

    Another thing they said last night and this one is disturbing. Members of congress are allowed to use information they get when it comes to investments. In other words, they can rely on insider trading legally.
    Last edited by NJCardFan; 12-28-2011 at 10:50 AM.
    The Obama Administration: Deny. Deflect. Blame.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,269
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    ABC News did a story on this last night and it seems as though there are more Democrat millionaires than Republican. Nancy Pelosi spent Christmas at a $10K a night resort and John Kerry did basically the same. Let them eat cake I suppose.

    Another thing they said last night and this one is disturbing. Members of congress are allowed to use information they get when it comes to investments. In other words, they can rely on insider trading legally.
    Yeah. IMO, members of congress should be required to place their investments in a blind trust the way The President and VP do.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member Tecate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    566
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    ABC News did a story on this last night and it seems as though there are more Democrat millionaires than Republican. Nancy Pelosi spent Christmas at a $10K a night resort and John Kerry did basically the same. Let them eat cake I suppose.

    Another thing they said last night and this one is disturbing. Members of congress are allowed to use information they get when it comes to investments. In other words, they can rely on insider trading legally.
    They openly brag about doing what you and I would go to jail for.

    And don't forget the cronyism... Ever notice how someone's brother-in-law or other family member always gets in on the taxpayer funded sweetheart deals? What a coincidence.

    This is not our legitimate government. Our government has been hi-jacked by lobbyists and special interest groups whose job is nothing more than to supply more rent to the rent-seekers at the expense of the taxpaying public. This type of activity can collapse an empire as the parasite eventually kills the host.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuck View Post
    They're paid $174,000. I don't think that's too much. Most of them have academic records that would command that much anywhere they go. House and Senate leaders make more.

    And they don't get free health care; they buy it. It's pretty damn good, but they buy it.

    They pay social security just like you do. They're vested into their retirement plan after 5 years, which is pretty unusual, and can retire after age 50, but only if they have 20 years service. They contribute 1.3% of their salary into the retirement plan.

    Read about it:
    http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscong...ongresspay.htm

    Also, you have to understand what the article is saying and doing:
    From 2004 to 2010, the median net worth of members of Congress jumped 15 percent, the New York Times reports.
    15% in 6 years? That's pitiful. Mine jumped damn near that much last year, and I'm retired!

    What you're seeing is the news media creating a story where none exists. Not to say that there are no legislators who are greedy and are exploiting the system, but in this case the media is using the current unpopularity of the legislative branch to sell news. :)Worked, didn't it?:)
    My argument isn't that they're greedy. My argument is that their job performance is poor. I expect legislators to be able to work together to find viable solutions to problems in this country. I do not expect them to risk government default or other catastrophe so they can try to have all of their way in the end. They're not performing to my expectations, so I want them to get a pay cut. Actually, I'd like to fire most of them, but I'd like to replace them with qualified professionals who can perform better.

    Their college education doesn't mean thiat much to me. Their job performance is poor. They don't deserve the pay and the benefits that they get. They just don't.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,269
    Lanie
    Quote Originally Posted by Lanie View Post
    My argument isn't that they're greedy. My argument is that their job performance is poor. I expect legislators to be able to work together to find viable solutions to problems in this country.
    The House of Representatives worked quite nicely. They packaged up what they wanted on behalf of their constituents and sent it to the Senate. The Senate refused it, modified it, sent it back, and went home. If you think YOUR senator behaved badly then I guess you should vote against him. I thought MY representative and Senators did very well. But don't tell me I have to get rid of MINE because he voted in a different direction from YOURS.
    Fact is, The President isn't getting much of what he wants so he's telling YOU - and you're believing him - that the Legislature is behaving badly.


    I do not expect them to risk government default or other catastrophe so they can try to have all of their way in the end.
    There has been no default. That's being used as a scare tactic by first one side and then the other to make you believe that YOUR representative is behaving badly......Seems to be working in your case, too:)
    They're not performing to my expectations, so I want them to get a pay cut.
    But you can't do that, can you? So the next best thing is to campaign against the representative who let you down.

    Actually, I'd like to fire most of them, but I'd like to replace them with qualified professionals who can perform better.

    Their college education doesn't mean thiat much to me. Their job performance is poor. They don't deserve the pay and the benefits that they get. They just don't.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •