Do salaries of government reflect US citizens?

[Flopper]

The best and brightest at what exactly? Croney/nepotism -- padding one's earnings, lying, cheating, stealing, hiding the facts. Do you not imagine that big business makes millions by paying off political officials with donations? A stupid person has to be honest or he will be exposed. A slick wolf will be able to hide his intensions until it is too late... Pay the teachers more and do we get better educated students? No, we get well off teachers who live in the best neighborhoods and send their kids to private schools. Pay higher healthcare primiums and do we get better healthcare? No, we get worse healthcare, longer waiting, and no house calls. The love of money is the root of evil.

Of course high pay does not mean we will have more dedicated and honest people. It does mean we will have more people with better skills applying for government jobs and running for office.

IMHO, most people that run for office or accept jobs as leaders in government do so because they really want to make our country better. The problem is Washington, not the people we send there. We continually send people to Washington only to be disappointed. The problem is not with the people, it's the system. We should begin changing the system by changing our election and lobbying laws. Candidates should not have unlimited amounts of money from corporate and special interest groups to conduct their campaigns. Business and special interest groups should have no more influence on our elected officials than you or I. The current laws that allow lobbyists to write our laws and buy votes for those laws have got to be changed or nothing in Washington will ever change.

People are the system.

By system I mean the framework of government, the constitution, laws passed by Congress, and court rulings.

 

[Papageorgio]

What is the salary of a public servant? Are they in it for the money, glory, power, or for the love of their country? Do we really desire career politicians or honorable citizens working for the good of their neighbors.

The only real public servants who are in it for love of their country, and NOT the money, glory, and power are those that serve in the U.S. Military.

Bullshit.

I love and respect our military, but if they stopped paying them, or cut their pay in half, the majority would get out as soon as possible.

And you can't honestly think some peopel dont join the military for the power and thrill of it?

Not to mention...a large segment of our non-combat military has literally turned into a welfare state itself.

I think the same of law enforcement.

 

[Papageorgio]

Congress gets the same Federal Healthcare coverage as any other federal employee and they pay for it

They also get Federal Retirement which is Social Security (yes Congress has been in Social Security since 1984). They also get one percent of their salary for every year they serve. For twenty years in Congress, they receive $34,000 a year pension at the age of 56

Can you share the link with us please. Thanks.

snopes.com: Congressional Pensions

I'm sorry I didn't see anything about health insurance being the same and who pays for it.

 

[ABikerSailor]

What is the salary of a public servant? Are they in it for the money, glory, power, or for the love of their country? Do we really desire career politicians or honorable citizens working for the good of their neighbors.

The only real public servants who are in it for love of their country, and NOT the money, glory, and power are those that serve in the U.S. Military.

Bullshit.

I love and respect our military, but if they stopped paying them, or cut their pay in half, the majority would get out as soon as possible.

And you can't honestly think some peopel dont join the military for the power and thrill of it?

Not to mention...a large segment of our non-combat military has literally turned into a welfare state itself.

Really? "Non-combat military"?

Got news for you, I enlisted in 1982, and served until 2002. During that time, I was a part of operations in Beruit (1983), Desert Storm (both parts I and II), and Kosovo. How do I know I was in a war zone? Because we got hazard pay and non-taxable pay because we were serving in a combat/war zone.

And then, during my last year in the military, 9/11 happened, and we went to war yet again.

Go ahead..............................tell me about the welfare state of the non combat military, especially in light of the fact that many people serving have made multiple tours over in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[rightwinger]

Can you share the link with us please. Thanks.

snopes.com: Congressional Pensions

I'm sorry I didn't see anything about health insurance being the same and who pays for it.

Google it

 

[gwennie]

•Congress members (Representatives and Senators): $174,000
•Senate and House Majority/Minority Leaders: $193,400
•Cabinet members: $199,700
•Speaker of the House: $223,500
•Vice President: $230,700
•President: $400,000

The bottom line is that I feel that our government is totally out of touch with average citizens. The salaries above do not in the least expose all the ADDITIONAL perks these individuals acquire as a result of their power & prestige. They have the best of free healthcare and transportation and protection and luncheons/dinners and insider reports, and pensions. Is it any wonder that they are unable to balance a budget or spend wisely. They even vote for their own raises. They have become an embarrassment to the term capitalism, with their air of royal superiority over the "peasantry." Government of the people has evolved into government in spite of the people. All of these individuals owe their election to the hard work of volunteers and sponging off the general public for donations to their cause (or might we say election). Perhaps the only solution is a general revolt, but I fear that would only establish a far more evil regime. However, this insult to the American public simply cannot continue. Do we need a second American Revolution or another Civil War? What other choice is there --- we have had both Democrats and Republicans in office. Neither has voted in a wage decrease (they feel they are far too important).

There is certainly some truth in what you're saying. However, we do not have the best and brightness leading our country. They're in private business making millions. Paying our leaders less is not going to draw more talented people into government service and will certainly have almost no impact on the countries financial problems.

Your logic of paying less isn't going to bring better people into Congress doens't make sense....it's pure rationalization of insanity. Continuing to pay them their current high wages and very lucrative benefits isn't helping us, either, because we still do not have the best and brightest in Congress. What does that tell you? They have no idea what it's like to live like regular people, which basically means they have no idea how to enact legislation that will benefit regular people......including wages, retirement, healthcare, living within a budget, etc... I'd rather see farmers, nurses, accountants, doctors, social workers, police officers, SAHM, etc...running Congress because these people know what it's like to live "normally". Get huge amounts of money out of Congress.....make Congress salaries no more than $90k/year (they only work about 6 months out of a year!) and their retirement and healthcare are the same as the public's. The lawyers, lobbyists, professional politicians all need to go...NOW. If that happens, corruption will be reduced to minimal levels.

 

[Seawytch]

Can you share the link with us please. Thanks.

snopes.com: Congressional Pensions

I'm sorry I didn't see anything about health insurance being the same and who pays for it.

House and Senate members are allowed to purchase private health insurance offered through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, which covers more than 8 million other federal employees, retirees and their families.

Health Care for Members of Congress?

 

[Si modo]

Hard for me to think of one which would compare to congress. I looked up the average days worked by congress per year and they are working about 180 days a year. Soldier's, firefighters, teachers, police work far harder and is paid a lot less whild putting so much more on the line to include their lives.


2010 vacation schedule:


January 1st-January 12: 1 1/2 weeks
February 15th-February 19th: 1 week
March 29th-April 12th: 2 weeks
May 31st-June 4th: 1 week
July 5th-July 9th: 1 week
August 9th-Sept 12th: 5 weeks.
October 11th-December 31st: 12 weeks.

So that is 23.5 weeks not in session.

That is just the tip of the iceberg. They also have free first class health care that ordinary citizen can only dream of. Ditto with pensions and retirement eligibility.

And of course they the only ones in the country who can set their salary.

It is safe to say that none of them ever wanted to SERVE. They just wanted to get rich.

Congress gets the same Federal Healthcare coverage as any other federal employee and they pay for it

They also get Federal Retirement which is Social Security (yes Congress has been in Social Security since 1984). They also get one percent of their salary for every year they serve. For twenty years in Congress, they receive $34,000 a year pension at the age of 56

They get free coverage at all military hospitals. The only other federal employees who get that are the military.

 

[Seawytch]

That is just the tip of the iceberg. They also have free first class health care that ordinary citizen can only dream of. Ditto with pensions and retirement eligibility.

And of course they the only ones in the country who can set their salary.

It is safe to say that none of them ever wanted to SERVE. They just wanted to get rich.

Congress gets the same Federal Healthcare coverage as any other federal employee and they pay for it

They also get Federal Retirement which is Social Security (yes Congress has been in Social Security since 1984). They also get one percent of their salary for every year they serve. For twenty years in Congress, they receive $34,000 a year pension at the age of 56

They get free coverage at all military hospitals. The only other federal employees who get that are the military.

However they do not receive the same benefits that members of the military receive. Care at military facilities is limited to the serving Congresscritter, their dependents are not included AND they are billed for inpatient care. Additionally, they cannot continue to use the facilities when they are no longer serving.

 

[LittleNipper]

We are still stuck with the following questions: Does the Federal Government really represent the average citizen? Do they have more than a concern for their own re-election? Do they really believe that they can fix anything without God's guidance?

 

[rightwinger]

We are still stuck with the following questions: Does the Federal Government really represent the average citizen? Do they have more than a concern for their own re-election? Do they really believe that they can fix anything without God's guidance?

Let us pray

 

[GoneBezerk]

Yeah, I'm not shocked you cleaned toilets at the bottom of a ship then got out as soon you can.

You're a piece of shit, plain and simple.

Shithead, I make over $100,000 and I have a BA, MA and MBA......shut the **** up.

I might believe you, but 1) this is the Internet and you can claim anything; 2) I've read your posts and you are so filled with hate I can't imagine anyone would put up with you; and 3) nothing you post suggests any indication you've learned anything about human nature.

I'm talking about scum like you doing meaningless work in the Department of Education making $60K for no reason.

Thanks for proving #3 above.

I joined the military during college asswipe, I could have made more money as a lawyer or businessman if I went that route over 20 years ago. I am now in the private sector making money with the military benefits while you are mad I have more than you, shithead.

Don't be so sure. I joined the Navy in '67 and upon separation returned to college. I then worked for 32 years as a LEO and retired with full management benefits in one of the higher paying regions of our country. I also use language without needing to resort to vulgarity to make a point.

It's all about personal responsibility. If you had the education and ability you too could have a job in the public sector and earn the 60k in a "cushy job" (a job whose detail you know nothing about). If you had you might not be so green with envy and filled with hate for others. Since you seem to think 60k is lots of money I must infer you work for less, and that's on you not on anyone else.

Work without meaning is having an MBA which in many cases means a job moving other peoples money around and taking a percentage of that persons labor. See, I too can make judgments about people whose job I know little about; the difference between me and you, I know that's unfair and I recognize how petty such self righteousness is.

 

[FA_Q2]

The only real public servants who are in it for love of their country, and NOT the money, glory, and power are those that serve in the U.S. Military.

Bullshit.

I love and respect our military, but if they stopped paying them, or cut their pay in half, the majority would get out as soon as possible.

And you can't honestly think some peopel dont join the military for the power and thrill of it?

Not to mention...a large segment of our non-combat military has literally turned into a welfare state itself.

Really? "Non-combat military"?

Got news for you, I enlisted in 1982, and served until 2002. During that time, I was a part of operations in Beruit (1983), Desert Storm (both parts I and II), and Kosovo. How do I know I was in a war zone? Because we got hazard pay and non-taxable pay because we were serving in a combat/war zone.

And then, during my last year in the military, 9/11 happened, and we went to war yet again.

Go ahead..............................tell me about the welfare state of the non combat military, especially in light of the fact that many people serving have made multiple tours over in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I miss the part where he claimed 'ABikerSailor was non-combat military.' Care to point that out or do you just want to retract your rant as meaningless....


There are SIGNIFICANT forces that never see combat. I personally would not consider myself a troop that has seen combat. I have been in rocket attacks and mortar attacks but that is NOT combat. There is a stark difference in what those of the 'grunt' army and marines deal with that I have been fortunate enough to have not been a part of. I have an entire reserve component in my shop who have NEVER been deployed to a country more hostile than Germany. There are quite a few of those military men and women that are receiving vast benefits that are not in the same category as the people on the ground in the shit.

BTW, non-taxable and hazard pays are meaningless. That does not make it a true combat zone. What makes a true combat zone is getting attacked.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Not everyone in the military has a job that requires leaving the US, but doesn't make their job less worthy or manly.

The DoD computer network guys I've met through the years are defending the US cyber systems from attack. That is probably more important than someone handing out towels at a forward base in the middle east. At the end of the day both are doing their own important job for the military no matter where their duty location is.

I deployed 4 times but that doesn't make me more special than those that never had a job overseas. Also, there are lazy people deployed and not deployed....

 

[Gadawg73]

I work for a lawyer that is also a lawyer for a Federal agency in the Richard Russell Bldg. in downtown Atlanta. He works maybe 30 hours a week there full time for over 125K a year plus 4 weeks vacation plus retirement plus all the benefits. He practices law out of his office in Smyrna the other 20 hours a week and makes another 125K+ doing that.
Need to fire his ass immediately and hire someone that works for $80K with NO benefits other than a high deductible catastrophic health plan ONLY.
Lawyers are a dime a dozen these days.

 

[Flopper]

•Congress members (Representatives and Senators): $174,000
•Senate and House Majority/Minority Leaders: $193,400
•Cabinet members: $199,700
•Speaker of the House: $223,500
•Vice President: $230,700
•President: $400,000

The bottom line is that I feel that our government is totally out of touch with average citizens. The salaries above do not in the least expose all the ADDITIONAL perks these individuals acquire as a result of their power & prestige. They have the best of free healthcare and transportation and protection and luncheons/dinners and insider reports, and pensions. Is it any wonder that they are unable to balance a budget or spend wisely. They even vote for their own raises. They have become an embarrassment to the term capitalism, with their air of royal superiority over the "peasantry." Government of the people has evolved into government in spite of the people. All of these individuals owe their election to the hard work of volunteers and sponging off the general public for donations to their cause (or might we say election). Perhaps the only solution is a general revolt, but I fear that would only establish a far more evil regime. However, this insult to the American public simply cannot continue. Do we need a second American Revolution or another Civil War? What other choice is there --- we have had both Democrats and Republicans in office. Neither has voted in a wage decrease (they feel they are far too important).

There is certainly some truth in what you're saying. However, we do not have the best and brightness leading our country. They're in private business making millions. Paying our leaders less is not going to draw more talented people into government service and will certainly have almost no impact on the countries financial problems.

Your logic of paying less isn't going to bring better people into Congress doens't make sense....it's pure rationalization of insanity. Continuing to pay them their current high wages and very lucrative benefits isn't helping us, either, because we still do not have the best and brightest in Congress. What does that tell you? They have no idea what it's like to live like regular people, which basically means they have no idea how to enact legislation that will benefit regular people......including wages, retirement, healthcare, living within a budget, etc... I'd rather see farmers, nurses, accountants, doctors, social workers, police officers, SAHM, etc...running Congress because these people know what it's like to live "normally". Get huge amounts of money out of Congress.....make Congress salaries no more than $90k/year (they only work about 6 months out of a year!) and their retirement and healthcare are the same as the public's. The lawyers, lobbyists, professional politicians all need to go...NOW. If that happens, corruption will be reduced to minimal levels.

I did not say we should pay our leaders less or more. I said, "Paying our leaders less is not going to draw more talented people into government...." The problem is not who's in congress. If it were, we would have solved the nation's major problems years ago. The problem is the way government and particular congress operates. We send new people to Washington and they don't have a clue how to solve the problems. Worst yet, even if they did, the pressure from the leadership, dealing with the bureaucracy and the congressional seniority system insures the status quo.

And sending Joe the plumber to Congress will only make things worse

 

[Flopper]

I work for a lawyer that is also a lawyer for a Federal agency in the Richard Russell Bldg. in downtown Atlanta. He works maybe 30 hours a week there full time for over 125K a year plus 4 weeks vacation plus retirement plus all the benefits. He practices law out of his office in Smyrna the other 20 hours a week and makes another 125K+ doing that.
Need to fire his ass immediately and hire someone that works for $80K with NO benefits other than a high deductible catastrophic health plan ONLY.
Lawyers are a dime a dozen these days.

$125K sounds about right. A good divorce lawyer will run $200 to $300 a hour. It's not uncommon for good corporate lawyers to charge to charge $300 to $500 a hour.

 

[gwennie]

There is certainly some truth in what you're saying. However, we do not have the best and brightness leading our country. They're in private business making millions. Paying our leaders less is not going to draw more talented people into government service and will certainly have almost no impact on the countries financial problems.

Your logic of paying less isn't going to bring better people into Congress doens't make sense....it's pure rationalization of insanity. Continuing to pay them their current high wages and very lucrative benefits isn't helping us, either, because we still do not have the best and brightest in Congress. What does that tell you? They have no idea what it's like to live like regular people, which basically means they have no idea how to enact legislation that will benefit regular people......including wages, retirement, healthcare, living within a budget, etc... I'd rather see farmers, nurses, accountants, doctors, social workers, police officers, SAHM, etc...running Congress because these people know what it's like to live "normally". Get huge amounts of money out of Congress.....make Congress salaries no more than $90k/year (they only work about 6 months out of a year!) and their retirement and healthcare are the same as the public's. The lawyers, lobbyists, professional politicians all need to go...NOW. If that happens, corruption will be reduced to minimal levels.

I did not say we should pay our leaders less or more. I said, "Paying our leaders less is not going to draw more talented people into government...." The problem is not who's in congress. If it were, we would have solved the nation's major problems years ago. The problem is the way government and particular congress operates. We send new people to Washington and they don't have a clue how to solve the problems. Worst yet, even if they did, the pressure from the leadership, dealing with the bureaucracy and the congressional seniority system insures the status quo.

And sending Joe the plumber to Congress will only make things worse

Aside from the monetary corruption, it has everything to do with who we send to Congress. Sending Joe the Plumber to Congress would likely be a lot better than what we have going right now. Are you suggesting that we keep sending lawyers and bankers and corporate idiots and the like into Congress.....because that's worked great for us so far? No. The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and expecting different results......and that's what's been happening for years. People complain all the time, yet they keep electing the same assholes back into Congress or they elect people who have a ton of money, have political connections to thoroughly corrupt individuals, and/or are part of the Wall Street crowd. Well guess what...they've had their turn trying to run things and all they've....conservatives and liberals alike....done is wreck the country, financially and socially. It has nothing to do with how Congress operates......Congress is dependent on people to run it; if it's fucked up, that's because of the people in it.

 

[Flopper]

Your logic of paying less isn't going to bring better people into Congress doens't make sense....it's pure rationalization of insanity. Continuing to pay them their current high wages and very lucrative benefits isn't helping us, either, because we still do not have the best and brightest in Congress. What does that tell you? They have no idea what it's like to live like regular people, which basically means they have no idea how to enact legislation that will benefit regular people......including wages, retirement, healthcare, living within a budget, etc... I'd rather see farmers, nurses, accountants, doctors, social workers, police officers, SAHM, etc...running Congress because these people know what it's like to live "normally". Get huge amounts of money out of Congress.....make Congress salaries no more than $90k/year (they only work about 6 months out of a year!) and their retirement and healthcare are the same as the public's. The lawyers, lobbyists, professional politicians all need to go...NOW. If that happens, corruption will be reduced to minimal levels.

I did not say we should pay our leaders less or more. I said, "Paying our leaders less is not going to draw more talented people into government...." The problem is not who's in congress. If it were, we would have solved the nation's major problems years ago. The problem is the way government and particular congress operates. We send new people to Washington and they don't have a clue how to solve the problems. Worst yet, even if they did, the pressure from the leadership, dealing with the bureaucracy and the congressional seniority system insures the status quo.

And sending Joe the plumber to Congress will only make things worse

Aside from the monetary corruption, it has everything to do with who we send to Congress. Sending Joe the Plumber to Congress would likely be a lot better than what we have going right now. Are you suggesting that we keep sending lawyers and bankers and corporate idiots and the like into Congress.....because that's worked great for us so far? No. The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and expecting different results......and that's what's been happening for years. People complain all the time, yet they keep electing the same assholes back into Congress or they elect people who have a ton of money, have political connections to thoroughly corrupt individuals, and/or are part of the Wall Street crowd. Well guess what...they've had their turn trying to run things and all they've....conservatives and liberals alike....done is wreck the country, financially and socially. It has nothing to do with how Congress operates......Congress is dependent on people to run it; if it's fucked up, that's because of the people in it.

It only makes sense to send people to Congress that understand the law and how to write laws. After all that is their job. People without political knowledge, civic engagement, knowledge of the law, and how government functions would be lost.

Just because people with years of experience in government, law, and business are unable to solve America's problems, is no reason to send people to Washington who don't know what their doing. "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" may be a good movie, but in the real world, Washington politics will make mincemeat out of them.

Working class Americans without the skills and experience needed to survive the political minefields in Washington are almost sure to become puppets for Washington power brokers and lobbyists.

 

[Clementine]

What would you say the comparable private sector jobs are for congress and the president?

What private sector jobs pay people for not reading anything, voting blindly, not obeying the law and presenting a budget and spending like fools?

All we owe our public servants is housing and food while they serve us. We should house them the way we do military members. Have large apartment buildings with security and a food allowance. Their medical should also be similar to what military members have, as should their pay and retirement. That would be mighty generous for congress considering their jobs are not nearly as difficult or dangerous as our troops.

Serving one's country was never meant to be a lucrative career and congress certainly does't earn their wages. They vote themselves more and more perks, exempt themselves from the stupid rules they impose on us and they are allowed to bend or break laws without consequence. Insider trading is a great example. Private citizens go to prison, congress makes money for doing that. They are out of control and the people let it happen by ignoring what they were doing for decades.