LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
You are so out of touch with this, Log.
I walk at work with a guy who's 71. He's been ranting and raving about state workers not getting the same pay raises or benefits as Utah state congressional members ever since I started here ten years ago. I politely correct him every time but he's one of those old guy repeater types, but has apparently been that way for several decades according to other co-workers.
Your rantings about this, like every other mainstream thinking, are exactly opposite and smell of old man think (no offense, I know you aren't there yet and I deplore the day I get there). Congress' pay is a pittance compared to their station and commensurate with their experience, and it's nothing compared to the Founding Father's pay. Go measure Washington's pay that he so humbly refused in comparison to gold. It was somewhere between $18,000,000 and $25,000,000 in equivalent currency, based on the price of gold.
What our current REPRESENTATIVES get paid is a shame. Pay them some more money and support honest and wise men and maybe the lobby issue will go away. Extra long winded addition: Look at Chaffets quiting the daily grind. That was one honest dude IMO, regardless of whether I agreed with anything he said or not. I would vote for him if he ran again, regardless of stance.
I was not talking about local or state politics. I was instead referring to the issue when the economy tanked in 2008 timeframe and federal workers had their pay frozen and jobs eliminated, all very publically, while congress approved raises for themselves. My mother was a federal worker at the end of her career then and took a hit to her retirement over the whole thing. Now again, I am not saying congress shouldn't be paid fairly, but so often they seem to fail to recognize that timing and public perception are key. For several years before that they had actually put off their own raises, and since then there has not been a raise approved (although that is largely a result of infighting and an increase in lobbyist dollars in washington) but then to choose to take the raise when they also passed laws that negatively affected other federal workers shows some bad judgement really.
I do believe that our representatives need to be paid fairly for what they do, especially at state and local levels, but at the highest levels they show again and again how out of touch they are with the populace as a whole.
Overall congressional pay is reasonable imo, and could probably actually go up a bit. But another thing to consider is that there is virtually no one in congress that is not one of the storied "1%". One thing that cannot be quantified accurately is the perks and lobby dollars associated with it. More than a few lawmakers greatly extended their personal wealth after they entered office and virtually none of them were relegated to the "poor house" as a result. It could be argued that any of them could make more in the private sector, but to me that is a straw man argument with no way to prove it one way or the other, as simply comparing "similar position and title" is not a valid comparison as it assumes that each of them would basically be a CEO or a high-powered attorney and that simply isn't true.
Now this whole thing could easily devolve into an argument over fair relative pay for different members of society, like teachers, policemen, firemen, doctors, nurses, professional athletes, and politicians, among many others. Is pay equitable for service performed compared to all others, etc.