Then nobody is hurting financially, and no additional money is paid to senators as a group. I think everyone can be happy with that.
Not paying Members of Congress likely won't impact the possibility of a shutdown, or if it does will only harm Members who are not independently wealthy, but we should still do it in order to lower the likelihood of a shutdown that this won't impact?
I'd rather have them pass amendments to the Antideficiency Act than feigned solidarity.
Halting their pay would further enshrine government as a past time for the wealthy
Government is already the pastime of the wealthy. We pay them thus that if they aren't wealthy when they get there they are decidedly wealthy shortly after. Like that's the reason they make $174,000 their first year.
Halting their pay would further enshrine government as a past time for the wealthy
Government is already the pastime of the wealthy. We pay them thus that if they aren't wealthy when they get there they are decidedly wealthy shortly after. Like that's the reason they make $174,000 their first year.
Outside paying them well is a good idea as it means they can do the job without a secondary income. Look at state houses where people make $30,000 a year and work 6 months. I makes for a lot of messy conflicts of interest.
Congress's pay isn't really a good lever though. Now the fact flights home are a mess though will be. They tend to have to fly commercial and the TSA issues do effect them. You can see Senators and Representatives at Reagan and Dulles.
Really the strongest lever will come when the Senators are less scared of Trump than their base. So the more the base hurts, and this hurts a bit. The closer you get to that.
$174k a year is unlikely to be more than enough to make them more than middle class even if they are in Congress for a good period of time.
It's literally double my salary and were i not leveraged to shit by student loans id be functionally rich. Like the only way a solo salary of 174k doesn't make you reliably rich is if you're so leveraged you never could have taken the time to campaign.
Halting their pay would further enshrine government as a past time for the wealthy
Government is already the pastime of the wealthy. We pay them thus that if they aren't wealthy when they get there they are decidedly wealthy shortly after. Like that's the reason they make $174,000 their first year.
First Year Associates at a Big Law firm (AmLaw ~50) earn $190k/year
A kid just past the Bar outearns their Senator.
+3
Dhalphirdon't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered Userregular
$174k a year is unlikely to be more than enough to make them more than middle class even if they are in Congress for a good period of time.
It's literally double my salary and were i not leveraged to shit by student loans id be functionally rich. Like the only way a solo salary of 174k doesn't make you reliably rich is if you're so leveraged you never could have taken the time to campaign.
I don't think you have that great an understanding of what rich and wealthy actually mean, and how much money some people have.
Halting their pay would further enshrine government as a past time for the wealthy
Government is already the pastime of the wealthy. We pay them thus that if they aren't wealthy when they get there they are decidedly wealthy shortly after. Like that's the reason they make $174,000 their first year.
First Year Associates at a Big Law firm (AmLaw ~50) earn $190k/year
A kid just past the Bar outearns their Senator.
Which is hilarious, but doesn't change that a 174k salary makes you fairly wealthy unless you're so leveraged you need to burn like 3 quarters of it to debt. That other's are more wealthy doesn't make you not wealthy.
+15
Dhalphirdon't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered Userregular
Which is hilarious, but doesn't change that a 174k salary makes you fairly wealthy unless you're so leveraged you need to burn like 3 quarters of it to debt. That other's are more wealthy doesn't make you not wealthy.
However at that level of pay you will still be vulnerable to a shutdown if you do not have other finances.
$174k a year is unlikely to be more than enough to make them more than middle class even if they are in Congress for a good period of time.
It's literally double my salary and were i not leveraged to shit by student loans id be functionally rich. Like the only way a solo salary of 174k doesn't make you reliably rich is if you're so leveraged you never could have taken the time to campaign.
As AOC herself has pointed out, she has to pay for two households with that salary (one in her district in NYC, one in DC), not to mention the professional costs of the job like clothing, maintenance of one's appearance, etc.
A Member of Congress is a high level professional, and is paid as such - for what the job entails, $174k is right around "market price". And yes, that makes them "upper class", but not outlandishly so.
dont they have to spend a bunch of their own money in real terms on their staff
Members of Congress are granted a set allotment for personnel and office furniture/computers &c. for both the District and DC office. Anything over they pay out of pocket. It looks like it was ~$1.25m for 115th Congress for the House. The Senate is complicated because it takes population into account.
Depending on where they live the biggest thing they pay out of pocket for is housing and travel. The Rep from Arlington isn't impacted by airport closures.
moniker on
+1
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited January 2019
The only ones of them that cares about their Senator are people like AOC and, ironically, Donald Trump.
I think the general gist of "Congress shouldn't get paid during a shutdown" isn't "Man, being a congress person is so easy" or "Them Rich Bastards" or whatnot.
Its the fact that, ostensibly, they are effectively immune from the financial costs of a shutdown unlike other federal workers and thus for many it triggers a sense of unfairness that they have the power to essentially cause their fellow government workers to go without pay without having to shoulder that burden themselves.
Congressmembers make a bit more than, like, an upper tier store manager at Target after bonuses. They also make less than my current household income, which in fairness is a dual income household. It’s a decent salary to be sure, but for the 500 people who hold substantial power in government it’s pretty low.
Further, this idea that they shouldn’t be paid in a shutdown sounds a lot to me like the liberal version of “Trump is hurting the wrong people.” Only it doesn’t even make sense given our value system, which is that people should be paid for work and that shutdowns shouldn’t be a thing anyway.
+6
Dhalphirdon't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered Userregular
I think the general gist of "Congress shouldn't get paid during a shutdown" isn't "Man, being a congress person is so easy" or "Them Rich Bastards" or whatnot.
Its the fact that, ostensibly, they are effectively immune from the financial costs of a shutdown unlike other federal workers and thus for many it triggers a sense of unfairness that they have the power to essentially cause their fellow government workers to go without pay without having to shoulder that burden themselves.
The key point being missed by most who are expressing the unfairness is that most of them (but not all) are immune from the financial costs of a shutdown whether they are being paid or not.
Congressmembers make a bit more than, like, an upper tier store manager at Target after bonuses. They also make less than my current household income, which in fairness is a dual income household. It’s a decent salary to be sure, but for the 500 people who hold substantial power in government it’s pretty low.
Further, this idea that they shouldn’t be paid in a shutdown sounds a lot to me like the liberal version of “Trump is hurting the wrong people.” Only it doesn’t even make sense given our value system, which is that people should be paid for work and that shutdowns shouldn’t be a thing anyway.
I think you could make the argument that, as long as Shutdowns are allowed to be a thing that Congressional pay for Reps and Senators should be the same as that of other Essential personnel: show up to work and when the shutdown ends you get your backpay.
That said, as Dhalphir and others noted, that doesn't take into account the issue of independent wealth for an important number of Congresscritters, which breaks down any sense of solidarity with their fellow federal workers and still shields them from the pressure that losing their federal paycheck would induce to end a shutdown.
EDIT: Sorry SiG
Lanz on
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited January 2019
Is this on-topic? Laura Loomer trespassed onto Nancy Pelosi's property by jumping the fence (this is about to become relevant, wait for it) to do a sort of protest / advocacy moment for having a border wall. She bypassed a wall to promote the need of walls like the stupid border thing. Also she tried to open the doors around the house itself, finding none that were unlocked, but shouldn't that be some sort of attempted home invasion crime? Because she's being let off with a warning only.
Edit - Also she failed to provide ID to the police when asked. Also she had two guys with her that she claimed were illegal immigrants, but there wasn't anyway to confirm that since they weren't handing over ID as well. One of the cops remarked that if it were true, she was about to get them into a world of fucking trouble and they don't deserve it.
Henroid on
+1
-Loki-Don't pee in my mouth and tell me it's raining.Registered Userregular
Is this on-topic? Laura Loomer trespassed onto Nancy Pelosi's property by jumping the fence (this is about to become relevant, wait for it) to do a sort of protest / advocacy moment for having a border wall. She bypassed a wall to promote the need of walls like the stupid border thing. Also she tried to open the doors around the house itself, finding none that were unlocked, but shouldn't that be some sort of attempted home invasion crime? Because she's being let off with a warning only.
In relation to discussions from a few days ago, the senate and house have both passed the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act, which guarantees furloughed employees pay and lets excepted/essential employees take leave (before they basically couldn't and would have an awkward furlough situation).
In case you can’t stand his voice, relevant quote:
We have a very big crisis, a humanitarian crisis on the border. Everybody knows it, [congressional Democrats] know it. And many of them are saying, 'We agree with you.' Many of them are calling and many of them are breaking. The Republicans are rock-solid.
Yeah, suuuuuure it’s the Dems that are breaking and telling cameras how “rock-solid” they are.
He’s gonna fold like a cheap lawn chair.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Is this on-topic? Laura Loomer trespassed onto Nancy Pelosi's property by jumping the fence (this is about to become relevant, wait for it) to do a sort of protest / advocacy moment for having a border wall. She bypassed a wall to promote the need of walls like the stupid border thing. Also she tried to open the doors around the house itself, finding none that were unlocked, but shouldn't that be some sort of attempted home invasion crime? Because she's being let off with a warning only.
Edit - Also she failed to provide ID to the police when asked. Also she had two guys with her that she claimed were illegal immigrants, but there wasn't anyway to confirm that since they weren't handing over ID as well. One of the cops remarked that if it were true, she was about to get them into a world of fucking trouble and they don't deserve it.
I don't really know who Laura Loomer is or why she's relevant but
Was that "Changed mind in favor of" or "changed mind against" or unclear? Because there have to be people who heard his bullshit and thought, "Nope, this was a bad idea."
Was that "Changed mind in favor of" or "changed mind against" or unclear? Because there have to be people who heard his bullshit and thought, "Nope, this was a bad idea."
Its unspecified but given the total share is 3% I don't think there's much to go on either way.
Is this on-topic? Laura Loomer trespassed onto Nancy Pelosi's property by jumping the fence (this is about to become relevant, wait for it) to do a sort of protest / advocacy moment for having a border wall. She bypassed a wall to promote the need of walls like the stupid border thing. Also she tried to open the doors around the house itself, finding none that were unlocked, but shouldn't that be some sort of attempted home invasion crime? Because she's being let off with a warning only.
Edit - Also she failed to provide ID to the police when asked. Also she had two guys with her that she claimed were illegal immigrants, but there wasn't anyway to confirm that since they weren't handing over ID as well. One of the cops remarked that if it were true, she was about to get them into a world of fucking trouble and they don't deserve it.
I don't really know who Laura Loomer is or why she's relevant but
*chefs kiss*
Right wing loon. Her last publicity stunt was handcuffing herself to Twitter's front door to get unbanned. It didn't work cause their front door was a double door so people could still walk in and out.
Is this on-topic? Laura Loomer trespassed onto Nancy Pelosi's property by jumping the fence (this is about to become relevant, wait for it) to do a sort of protest / advocacy moment for having a border wall. She bypassed a wall to promote the need of walls like the stupid border thing. Also she tried to open the doors around the house itself, finding none that were unlocked, but shouldn't that be some sort of attempted home invasion crime? Because she's being let off with a warning only.
Edit - Also she failed to provide ID to the police when asked. Also she had two guys with her that she claimed were illegal immigrants, but there wasn't anyway to confirm that since they weren't handing over ID as well. One of the cops remarked that if it were true, she was about to get them into a world of fucking trouble and they don't deserve it.
I don't really know who Laura Loomer is or why she's relevant but
*chefs kiss*
Right wing loon. Her last publicity stunt was handcuffing herself to Twitter's front door to get unbanned. It didn't work cause their front door was a double door so people could still walk in and out.
Are we sure it's not just performance art?
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Because of the furlough and the lack if workwrs at the WH, trump paid for Clemson to have food from Wendy's McDonald's BK, and domino's .
I've been DYING to bring that up somewhere on this forum but can you confirm it's because of the furlough? Because this stupid fuck would do that even if the government were operational.
Posts
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Not paying Members of Congress likely won't impact the possibility of a shutdown, or if it does will only harm Members who are not independently wealthy, but we should still do it in order to lower the likelihood of a shutdown that this won't impact?
I'd rather have them pass amendments to the Antideficiency Act than feigned solidarity.
Government is already the pastime of the wealthy. We pay them thus that if they aren't wealthy when they get there they are decidedly wealthy shortly after. Like that's the reason they make $174,000 their first year.
Outside paying them well is a good idea as it means they can do the job without a secondary income. Look at state houses where people make $30,000 a year and work 6 months. I makes for a lot of messy conflicts of interest.
Congress's pay isn't really a good lever though. Now the fact flights home are a mess though will be. They tend to have to fly commercial and the TSA issues do effect them. You can see Senators and Representatives at Reagan and Dulles.
Really the strongest lever will come when the Senators are less scared of Trump than their base. So the more the base hurts, and this hurts a bit. The closer you get to that.
It's literally double my salary and were i not leveraged to shit by student loans id be functionally rich. Like the only way a solo salary of 174k doesn't make you reliably rich is if you're so leveraged you never could have taken the time to campaign.
First Year Associates at a Big Law firm (AmLaw ~50) earn $190k/year
A kid just past the Bar outearns their Senator.
I don't think you have that great an understanding of what rich and wealthy actually mean, and how much money some people have.
Mitch McConnell has a net worth of $27m.
He earns $193.4k from his Senate pay.
He literally could not care less about his pay.
Which is hilarious, but doesn't change that a 174k salary makes you fairly wealthy unless you're so leveraged you need to burn like 3 quarters of it to debt. That other's are more wealthy doesn't make you not wealthy.
However at that level of pay you will still be vulnerable to a shutdown if you do not have other finances.
As AOC herself has pointed out, she has to pay for two households with that salary (one in her district in NYC, one in DC), not to mention the professional costs of the job like clothing, maintenance of one's appearance, etc.
A Member of Congress is a high level professional, and is paid as such - for what the job entails, $174k is right around "market price". And yes, that makes them "upper class", but not outlandishly so.
Members of Congress are granted a set allotment for personnel and office furniture/computers &c. for both the District and DC office. Anything over they pay out of pocket. It looks like it was ~$1.25m for 115th Congress for the House. The Senate is complicated because it takes population into account.
Depending on where they live the biggest thing they pay out of pocket for is housing and travel. The Rep from Arlington isn't impacted by airport closures.
Its the fact that, ostensibly, they are effectively immune from the financial costs of a shutdown unlike other federal workers and thus for many it triggers a sense of unfairness that they have the power to essentially cause their fellow government workers to go without pay without having to shoulder that burden themselves.
Further, this idea that they shouldn’t be paid in a shutdown sounds a lot to me like the liberal version of “Trump is hurting the wrong people.” Only it doesn’t even make sense given our value system, which is that people should be paid for work and that shutdowns shouldn’t be a thing anyway.
The key point being missed by most who are expressing the unfairness is that most of them (but not all) are immune from the financial costs of a shutdown whether they are being paid or not.
We want that number to go up, not down.
I think you could make the argument that, as long as Shutdowns are allowed to be a thing that Congressional pay for Reps and Senators should be the same as that of other Essential personnel: show up to work and when the shutdown ends you get your backpay.
That said, as Dhalphir and others noted, that doesn't take into account the issue of independent wealth for an important number of Congresscritters, which breaks down any sense of solidarity with their fellow federal workers and still shields them from the pressure that losing their federal paycheck would induce to end a shutdown.
EDIT: Sorry SiG
I dunno why this article says "allegedly" because Loomer wasn't shy about having the damn thing filmed / photographed.
https://www.newsweek.com/right-wing-activist-laura-loomer-nancy-pelosi-house-1291083
Edit - Also she failed to provide ID to the police when asked. Also she had two guys with her that she claimed were illegal immigrants, but there wasn't anyway to confirm that since they weren't handing over ID as well. One of the cops remarked that if it were true, she was about to get them into a world of fucking trouble and they don't deserve it.
I’m going to jump over your wall and trespass to prove to you we need a wall to stop people trespassing.
Delicious.
As for the judiciary, it's supposed focus on constitutional issues and will still address civil and criminal cases. Reuters has an article.https://reuters.com/article/us-usa-fiscal-courts/u-s-federal-courts-to-remain-open-if-government-shuts-down-idUSBRE98T1AB20130930. Available money runs out on the 18th, so they're marginally better off than other departments that have already furloughed a bunch of people.
For those interested, Mueller's investigation is financed by appropriations that are unaffected by the shutdown.
You would have to change campaign finance laws, I think, because it would definitely be abused,
In case you can’t stand his voice, relevant quote:
Yeah, suuuuuure it’s the Dems that are breaking and telling cameras how “rock-solid” they are.
He’s gonna fold like a cheap lawn chair.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
About what I expected really
You could get three percent of a poll to read out yes on if the respondent would like to fornicate with a school of piranhas
I don't really know who Laura Loomer is or why she's relevant but
*chefs kiss*
...
Are they hot?
Its unspecified but given the total share is 3% I don't think there's much to go on either way.
Right wing loon. Her last publicity stunt was handcuffing herself to Twitter's front door to get unbanned. It didn't work cause their front door was a double door so people could still walk in and out.
Are we sure it's not just performance art?