Potential Fallacy - 50 Million Wasted On Repeal Effort

[Sun Devil 92]

I know the right does the same garbage.

If anyone spots and example, please post a link.

This really pisses me off.

 

[Arianrhod]

So, about those 89 days. What I'm seeing in this thread seems to be an attitude of "Who cares? It's not as if this particular Congress was going to accomplish anything else during that time anyway." I look forward to a clear, rational explanation for why I'm mistaken, preferably with examples.

Or the usual name-calling.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What a crack up.

89 days ???

It was "at least 80 hours".

What we are seeing is that you and others can't produce what the article won't produce....credible information that backs up the claim.

There is nothing that says that if congress had not used those hours...we would have saved a dime. The article says it costs X amount to run congress.....to what....?

Pay them ? They'll still get paid.
Heat the building....? Still gonna get heated ?
Security ? They don't just lock the door.
Maintenance ? Still happens.
etc.
etc.
etc.

It's not on us to prove they are wrong. It's on us to say, you don't make much of a case at all.

 

[Arianrhod]

So in other words you expect Congress to do nothing and you don't care if they do nothing so you have no interest in this conversation but you posted anyway.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

How Americans Could Have Benefited From The $50 Million Republicans Spent Trying To Repeal Obamacare

CBS’ Nancy Cordes reported Wednesday that Republicans’ many fruitless attempts at repealing the Affordable Care Act have taken up at least 80 hours of time on the House floor since 2010, amounting to two full work weeks. As the House, according to the Congressional Research Service, costs taxpayers $24 million a week to operate, those two weeks amounted to a total cost of approximately $48 million.

*****************

You'll never see me giving Republicans at the federal level credit for being smart. They only do this to keep themselves elected. They certainly have no collective guts.

However, this article is either sloppy or a downright lie.

The article essentially assumes that the House would not have met and that all costs are variable.

In other words, shut off the heat, shut off the water....we are not paying for any of it while not in service. Which isn't true. Everyone knows you still get a water bill even if you don't use any. There is always a baseline cost.

What about salaries. Are those included ? If so, we quit paying those ?

What about security and maintenance ? Is all that included.

It's not that I want the GOP wasting it's time doing lip service to something they have no courage over.

But this article is yet another example of the kinds of bullcrap we get for "information".

Oh my bleeding heart..........

Just another example of how easy it is for the media to dupe some Americans. The stinking pols waste BILLIONS annually, but the media spins out this story and amazingly it works on some.

It plays to prejudiced thinking...which is just what it was intended to do.

What gets me is that something that calls itself "Think........" would print such a pathetic article.

The media publishes articles like this one often. Then know they can dupe millions of Americans with their propaganda. It is much too easy.

Think Progress is more like hope they don't think when they read our crap.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

what else they be doing? killing history? taking down Confederate Flags? They already in DC for some of their 90 total "work" days. Cost is built in salary.

Yes...they get paid one way or the other. That is what makes this sooooooooooooooooo stupid.

Sloppy article at best....major lie at worst.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Now here was an interesting article from 2010.

A bit dated, but still tells a story on what potentially goes into the figure that StinkRegress printed.....

Here’s what it costs to run the House of Representatives for a year: $30 million for Members and staff to travel around the country, $48 million for outside consultants, $26 million to rent district offices, $600,000 for stenographers, $4 million for office temps, $25 million for franked mail, $400,000 for bottled water and $3 million for buffet lunches, doughnuts and pizza.

Roll Call reported earlier this year that Congress spent about $15 million in 2009 on foreign travel and domestic Congressional delegations, but that money comes from a separate account and is not included in these reports.

Don't know how much of this gets built into that figure...but if it's there....then there is little savings.

The point of my article.

Which could potentially be a big fat lie.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

We got no link in the article to the congressional research service....so how do we evaluate.

Sloppy propaganda piece at best.

 

[Arianrhod]

Again, the assumption is that this particular Congress would have been doing anything other than sitting around with its collective thumbs up its ass doing ANYTHING (the floods in South Carolina spring to mind) if it hadn't been working so very hard to balk the PPACA, and that's not an assumption I'd have made.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

How much do Congressional pay and benefits cost taxpayers?

In 2010 and 2011, the average pay is $174,000. Leadership positions pay higher, with the Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader making over $210,000 a year. These salary figures come out to $95.8 million dollars for all 541 members of Congress.

There are six members of Congress who hold committee positions and can debate on the floor, but who do not have voting power. So for a Congress that doesn’t work, we’re paying out $95.8 million in salaries, and that’s before we get into benefits, perks and retirement wages.

*****************************

We’ve all heard about the Congressional Health Care plan, not to mention their travel plans, security details and personal spending accounts. How much do these benefits and perks cost taxpayers in addition to the above salaries?

In Fiscal Year 2010 (Oct 1 through Sept 30 of the following year), these programs accounted for $4.66 Billion in taxpayer funds. Compared to the national budget, the total of $4.74 Billion is a drop in the bucket, but even so when someone sees these salaries they begin to wonder why members of Congress are paid so much for doing so little to help the people who pay their salaries.

These figures don’t count the retirement plans or salaries paid to former members of Congress. If a member of Congress serves for at least five years, be it in the Senate or the House of Representatives, they receive full pay and health benefits for life. The figures for this type of pay are not easily accessible, as they are muddled in with private insurance and other pay wages.

The estimates for these benefits were between $500 million and $1.2 billion. That’s a wide range, but there are people receiving pay that are not former legislatures. The wives of prominent Senators Robert Byrd and Ted Kennedy receive a reduced rate of pay under the “survivor benefit” plan. They can still access the health benefits, but receive between 50 and 75 percent of their late husbands salaries.

*****************************

Again, you have to wonder if StinkRegress took any of this into consideration when they posted their little POS article. They certainly didn't tell us. Because if that is part of the 1MM/Hr, then you know that isn't not going to get paid.

So when the article says that money could be used for "other things", you have to wonder just what retard editor let that slip by.

Stupid article.