Sorry, but I have no sympathy for these guys.

[Audie]

Ala Cheech and Chong?

this is not cheech and chong, but Im pretty sure it is funnier than they are

 

[Revoltingest]

Some Clintons? I meant the Clintons, who do not seem to me to be honourable people.

Oh, them....no, I was thinking of congressmen in general.

 

[Underhill]

Apparently the pay matches the quality of work these people have been doing.

Congressmen are sleeping in their offices to save money: 'I can't afford an apartment'

It is nowhere near that simple. Congressmen aren't expected to spend the year in Washington. They are supposed to maintain contact and housing in their district. So you are talking about people who often have jobs paying much more, taking a pay cut while trying to maintain their housing in their home district, adding a second place in one of the most expensive cities in the world.

In other words a lawyer in San Diego takes a 100k pay cut to become a congressman, has to continue paying for his wife and kids to live in San Diego and rent a new place in DC for him to live in while congress is in session.

Considering all that, it's no wonder they can't afford a place in DC. $175k is a pittance for the level of responsibility they assume.

 

[Underhill]

Bear in mind that they typically have families & homes elsewhere to support.
Ever live in DC & environs? It's spendy spendy spendy.
But I have no sympathy because none is needed.
Their offices are roomier than Mr Van (although certainly not as well appointed).

Some of them are. They range from down right luxurious to so-so...

 

[Revoltingest]

Some of them are. They range from down right luxurious to so-so...

I'm sure that none are as well appointed as Mr Van.
- 2 ton to 60 ton jacks?
- 1/4" to 3/4" drive sockets?
- Not one but two 36" pipe wrenches?
- Supplied with hot chocolate, Madras lentils, sardines in Louisiana hot sauce, etc?
- Grinders, drills, band saw, recip saw, etc?
No...I'm sure that congressmen don't have it as good as do I.

 

[BSM1]

Yeah, I don't think those 2 got it on with each other.

I was kinda thinking in this direction;

 

[Revoltingest]

I was kinda thinking in this direction;

I've always liked that bit.

Anyway, back on topic....
Remember that congressmen are despicable as a group,
but they are individuals, & should be judge thus.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I don't see what honorable has to do with it.
Clinton was talking about the campaign funds. Those were extremely low at that point in time. "Broke" was a bit of an exaggeration. But not much.
Tom

That's a pure insult to people who are really and actually broke.

I suppose it's metaphorically like saying you're starving in the morning before you go and eat your delicious breakfast.

 

[columbus]

hat's a pure insult to people who are really and actually broke.

I think it's more of an insult to the government types saying "What part of broke don't you understand?" when they were giving out corporate welfare and tax breaks to the super rich people.
Tom

 

[tytlyf]

$175k a year should be reduced. Half these people could barely get a job at McDonalds.

 

[Underhill]

$175k a year should be reduced. Half these people could barely get a job at McDonalds.

I feel the opposite. We need the position to be one people aspire to.

You want better teachers, you pay them more.

 

[tytlyf]

I feel the opposite. We need the position to be one people aspire to.

You want better teachers, you pay them more.

It's not a normal job where you interview for the position. The position isn't determined by the manager. The position is determined by votes and how much spin can be applied to get those votes.

 

[Underhill]

It's not a normal job where you interview for the position. The position isn't determined by the manager. The position is determined by votes and how much spin can be applied to get those votes.

Sure, but we still want to attract people. Telling the average qualified candidate that they will probably take a pay cut isn't much of an attraction.

 

[BSM1]

$175k a year should be reduced. Half these people could barely get a job at McDonalds.

Name one, specifically.

It's not a normal job where you interview for the position. The position isn't determined by the manager. The position is determined by votes and how much spin can be applied to get those votes.

Probably the toughest interview a person could face would be to run for public office.

 

[tytlyf]

Name one, specifically.

Blake Farentholt.

Probably the toughest interview a person could face would be to run for public office.

According to who? Republicans don't elect people based on credentials. Just who can tell them what they want to hear. And put a little panic mongering frightening language in the mix and credentials go out the window.

 

[BSM1]

Blake Farentholt.


According to who? Republicans don't elect people based on credentials. Just who can tell them what they want to hear. And put a little panic mongering frightening language in the mix and credentials go out the window.

You don't think that applies to any party?

 

[Revoltingest]

I feel the opposite. We need the position to be one people aspire to.
You want better teachers, you pay them more.

I try to once a year find something on which we agree.
Here it goes for 2018......

Higher pay would make sense.
- Commensurate with the responsibility.
- Creates a larger pool of applicants.
- The temporary (ideally) nature of the job means having 2 homes for most.

 

[Revoltingest]

$175k a year should be reduced. Half these people could barely get a job at McDonalds.

Good idea!
It would ensure that only the independently wealthy will become congressmen.

 

[Underhill]

I try to once a year find something on which we agree.
Here it goes for 2018......

Higher pay would make sense.
- Commensurate with the responsibility.
- Creates a larger pool of applicants.
- The temporary (ideally) nature of the job means having 2 homes for most.

Oh stop. We agree at least once every 6 months.

 

[tytlyf]

You don't think that applies to any party?

No, democrats vote for people qualified for the position. Usually based on intelligence or leadership skills. Think Obama. Republicans vote for people who tell them what they want to hear. They also vote based on looks. $weet $ister $arah Palin is another fine example. Michelle Bachmann too.

Good idea!
It would ensure that only the independently wealthy will become congressmen.

Politics = propaganda/trickery.
People shouldn't vote based on fear and lies.