Sleeping in your office?

[rightwinger]

These are the people we are entrusting to solve the financial problems of our nation.

And they sleep on a couch?

 

[JBeukema]

These are the people we are entrusting to solve the financial problems of our nation.

And they sleep on a couch?

Why pay for another apartment if you don't have to?

Fiscal responsibility: if only they took it to work in the morning

 

[rightwinger]

These are the people we are entrusting to solve the financial problems of our nation.

And they sleep on a couch?

Why pay for another apartment if you don't have to?

Fiscal responsibility: if only they took it to work in the morning

Share an apartment with another congressman. Apartments in DC are not that expensive. Beats living like a deadbeat brother in law

 

[Greenbeard]

Where do their staffs get to sleep to avoid paying rent? I'm glad folks like Paul Ryan have found a way to sleep on public property to avoid stretching their $174,000 base salaries too far, but I'm left wondering if these folks have a similar option.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Where do their staffs get to sleep to avoid paying rent? I'm glad folks like Paul Ryan have found a way to sleep on public property to avoid stretching their $174,000 base salaries too far, but I'm left wondering if these folks have a similar option.

What does that have to do with anything? I'm a political staffer by profession - but I don't see what a staffer's living situation has anything to do with where the Congressman sleeps when he's in DC.

Shades of "Eat your vegetables because children in Africa are starving" in your argument.

 

[Greenbeard]

What does that have to do with anything? I'm a political staffer by profession - but I don't see what a staffer's living situation has anything to do with where the Congressman sleeps when he's in DC.

Shades of "Eat your vegetables because children in Africa are starving" in your argument.

The sentiment seems to be that public employees doing the people's work should be able to sleep on public property to avoid paying rent (I don't know what the cost of living is in D.C. but I assume it's like any other major urban area). I'm curious as to whether this principle extends to everyone working out of a particular office.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What does that have to do with anything? I'm a political staffer by profession - but I don't see what a staffer's living situation has anything to do with where the Congressman sleeps when he's in DC.

Shades of "Eat your vegetables because children in Africa are starving" in your argument.

The sentiment seems to be that public employees doing the people's work should be able to sleep on public property to avoid paying rent (I don't know what the cost of living is in D.C. but I assume it's like any other major urban area). I'm curious as to whether this principle extends to everyone working out of a particular office.

To me, saving the congressmen money has nothing to do with it. I don't think they "deserve" to live rent-free, I just don't see any reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do it. "Fairness" to the staffers has nothing to do with it - life is unfair.

 

[gekaap]

To me, saving the congressmen money has nothing to do with it. I don't think they "deserve" to live rent-free, I just don't see any reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do it. "Fairness" to the staffers has nothing to do with it - life is unfair.

By that same notion, there is no reason staffers should not also be allowed to do it. There's no reason why any of us should not be allowed to live at their place of work. There's no reason why anyone else should not be allowed to sleep anywhere.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

To me, saving the congressmen money has nothing to do with it. I don't think they "deserve" to live rent-free, I just don't see any reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do it. "Fairness" to the staffers has nothing to do with it - life is unfair.

By that same notion, there is no reason staffers should not also be allowed to do it. There's no reason why any of us should not be allowed to live at their place of work. There's no reason why anyone else should not be allowed to sleep anywhere.

Pretty much exactly what I'm saying. If it's YOUR office, then I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to sleep in it if you want.

I know I've lived for months at a time out of campaign offices at various times.

 

[rightwinger]

What does that have to do with anything? I'm a political staffer by profession - but I don't see what a staffer's living situation has anything to do with where the Congressman sleeps when he's in DC.

Shades of "Eat your vegetables because children in Africa are starving" in your argument.

The sentiment seems to be that public employees doing the people's work should be able to sleep on public property to avoid paying rent (I don't know what the cost of living is in D.C. but I assume it's like any other major urban area). I'm curious as to whether this principle extends to everyone working out of a particular office.

To me, saving the congressmen money has nothing to do with it. I don't think they "deserve" to live rent-free, I just don't see any reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do it. "Fairness" to the staffers has nothing to do with it - life is unfair.

Both are on the taxpayers dime. Neither is entitled to squatters rights on public property

 

[gekaap]

Alternatively, if a person cannot manage to maintain housing suitable to reach work, then perhaps they there's no reason for them to remain in that job?

I see it as coming down to the fact that my employer does not pay for me to live on premises. Nor do taxpayers pay for government buildings to house Congressmen and Senators.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The sentiment seems to be that public employees doing the people's work should be able to sleep on public property to avoid paying rent (I don't know what the cost of living is in D.C. but I assume it's like any other major urban area). I'm curious as to whether this principle extends to everyone working out of a particular office.

To me, saving the congressmen money has nothing to do with it. I don't think they "deserve" to live rent-free, I just don't see any reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do it. "Fairness" to the staffers has nothing to do with it - life is unfair.

Both are on the taxpayers dime. Neither is entitled to squatters rights on public property

This is the problem that I have with so many Liberals. It's not about being "entitled" to anything. It's simply this: it hurts NO ONE for a Congressman to sleep in his office. In fact, it helps people.

Laws for the sake of laws, and blind support of such, is what separates me from many Liberals.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Alternatively, if a person cannot manage to maintain housing suitable to reach work, then perhaps they there's no reason for them to remain in that job?

I see it as coming down to the fact that my employer does not pay for me to live on premises. Nor do taxpayers pay for government buildings to house Congressmen and Senators.

It doesn't cost the "taxpayers" any more for a Congressman to sleep in his office.

We still pay for the office, whether or not there is someone sleeping in it at night.

 

[rightwinger]

Having worked for the federal government for over 30 years and being forced to go through annual ethics classes, this is a blatant abuse of government property and would lead to the firing of any other government employee.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Having worked for the federal government for over 30 years and being forced to go through annual ethics classes, this is a blatant abuse of government property and would lead to the firing of any other government employee.

Sure.


Does that make it right, though?

 

[Greenbeard]

It's not about being "entitled" to anything.

I generally find the many alleged examples of public sector employees getting benefits and perks not available to the average American private sector employee to be unconvincing evidence that public employees are somehow living off the government largess.

But folks sleeping on public property and using public facilities to get out of paying rent is probably the example I'd be most sympathetic towards as illustrating that point. So in a sense it is about what public service "entitles" one to, especially when we're talking about the folks at the top of the pyramid making the rules.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

It's not about being "entitled" to anything.

I generally find the many alleged examples of public sector employees getting benefits and perks not available to the average American private sector employee to be unconvincing evidence that public employees are somehow living off the government largess.

But folks sleeping on public property and using public facilities to get out of paying rent is probably the example I'd be most sympathetic towards as illustrating that point. So in a sense it is about what public service "entitles" one to, especially when we're talking about the folks at the top of the pyramid making the rules.

It doesn't cost the taxpayers any more whether they sleep in their office, or get an apartment.

What difference does it make in your life?

 

[gekaap]

It doesn't cost the "taxpayers" any more for a Congressman to sleep in his office.

We still pay for the office, whether or not there is someone sleeping in it at night.

It doesn't cost my employer any more if I sleep in the building at night.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

It doesn't cost the "taxpayers" any more for a Congressman to sleep in his office.

We still pay for the office, whether or not there is someone sleeping in it at night.

It doesn't cost my employer any more if I sleep in the building at night.

Yep.

What's your argument here? Because your boss won't let you sleep in your office, they shouldn't be able to either?

 

[rightwinger]

It's not about being "entitled" to anything.

I generally find the many alleged examples of public sector employees getting benefits and perks not available to the average American private sector employee to be unconvincing evidence that public employees are somehow living off the government largess.

But folks sleeping on public property and using public facilities to get out of paying rent is probably the example I'd be most sympathetic towards as illustrating that point. So in a sense it is about what public service "entitles" one to, especially when we're talking about the folks at the top of the pyramid making the rules.

It doesn't cost the taxpayers any more whether they sleep in their office, or get an apartment.

What difference does it make in your life?

It doesn't cost the taxpayer anything to have a bum sleep in a bus station either