Congress getting richer, again Options

[knucklehead]

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Without much fanfare, the House of Representatives last week voted to give members of Congress yet another pay raise, as it has done almost every year for nearly a decade.

For some reason, our elected officials decided against holding a news conference. Maybe that's because they didn't want to draw attention to the fact that they raise their own salaries almost every year while refusing to raise the pay of our lowest-paid workers.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/06/20/dobbs.june21/index.html


I guess $170,000 a year just isn't enough for the necessities of life... you know... upscale houses, expensive suits, yuppie luncheons, large freezers with which to hold large sums of money, etc.

[woody]

anyone know where i can find figures of how much their pay has gone up every year?

[knucklehead]

I found this.... not sure how accurate it is though. Still trying to find a better list.


http://www.yourcongress.com/viewarticle.asp?article_ID=2027

[BaByLoVe]

Here you go woody

[BaByLoVe]

well he beat me to it lol

[knucklehead]

hahaha you following me?


I'm sure there's a better list, but it's safe to say they've seen an increase of almost $40,000 in the last decade or so while minimum wage has gone up, what, 50 cents?

[chook]

hahaha you following me?


I'm sure there's a better list, but it's safe to say they've seen an increase of almost $40,000 in the last decade or so while minimum wage has gone up, what, 50 cents?

Gas has gone up more percentage wise than bus fare!! Come on, where is your patriotism?

[Psykopath]

I think the minimum wage should be at around $6 an hour now. Working 40 hours a week at that would allow for one person to live decently.

$5.15....total bullshit wage.

This post has been edited by Psykopath: Jun 22 2006, 01:18 AM

[woody]

needs to be at least 6.20-6.25

[Timbo]

pol·i·tics (n.)

1. The art or science of government or governing

A-mer-i-can pol-i-tics (n.)

1. The art or science of elected officials debating unrealistic or unreasonable proposals for the purpose of pandering to their base in order to get re-elected. (See, a. Gay Marriage Amendment)
"Italy's corrupt media-conglomerate-dominated government only serves its people by wasting their tax dollars deciding whether or not public schools programs encourage homosexual tendencies. Nothing ever gets fucking done." "Well, could be worse; could be American politics." --My left and right asscheeks.

Take our money.

Thanks ze.

Timbo

[celebritygooner]

I think the minimum wage should be at around $6 an hour now. Working 40 hours a week at that would allow for one person to live decently.

Every job you want done for $6 and hour in the United States will be done for $.50 an hour in China. I know it's emotionally satisfying, but artificially raising the value of unskilled labor just hurts the economy.

Edit: Cut Congress some slack ... those guys work really hard making sure your interests are protected, and only like 95 percent of them already have personal fortunes with which to feed their families ... with caviar ... that they caught themselves ... from their yacht ... in the Caspian ... where their summer home is.

[Billy]

Every job you want done for $6 and hour in the United States will be done for $.50 an hour in China. I know it's emotionally satisfying, but artificially raising the value of unskilled labor just hurts the economy.

Edit: Cut Congress some slack ... those guys work really hard making sure your interests are protected, and only like 95 percent of them already have personal fortunes with which to feed their families ... with caviar ... that they caught themselves ... from their yacht ... in the Caspian ... where their summer home is.

Actually, it helps the economy. Poor people aren't exactly known for saving. The more money the poor have, the more money that gets spent, the more job creation occurs. Economics 101.

[Psykopath]

Side question: Can anyone here put up a valid arguement for the elimination of a minimum wage?

[woody]

inefficient way of helping poor families

kill min wage raise up the earned income tax credit

[impala454]

Maybe it's just me, but if we had the top 20 people or so in my company get together and vote "should we all get a raise?" I think it's a no brainer as to what the outcome would be.

[schwab]

and how many days of the year do they actually work? instead of lounging around and cricizing each other

[knucklehead]

Maybe it's just me, but if we had the top 20 people or so in my company get together and vote "should we all get a raise?" I think it's a no brainer as to what the outcome would be.

Very true, and I don't think it's a shock that congress consistently votes themselves a healthy pay raise. I just think there should be a system or process that puts this shit in check, other than the possibility of pissing off the voters. That obviously isn't of much concern to them in this situation.

I just think this crap undermines Congress' true role, as servants of the people. They're lining their own pockets when they could be doing more for the people. But again... not a big surprise.

[chook]

Actually, it helps the economy. Poor people aren't exactly known for saving. The more money the poor have, the more money that gets spent, the more job creation occurs. Economics 101.

I believe this, they put money directly into the economy and not in their 401k

[Dogmeat]

$170,000 a year isn't shit comapared to what most of those guys had already made prior to being elected to the senate....

[schwab]

$170,000 a year isn't shit comapared to what most of those guys had already made prior to being elected to the senate....

yeah and if that is the case, why do they need a raise if they already made all that money

and this is a voluntary job, they chose to run for it, if they do not like the income from it then dont fucking try to get that job

[pebkac]

Another thing to keep in mind is that Congressmen are required to have two houses: One in DC and one in their home district. And 170k really doesn't go all that far in DC for a house.

[jonathan83]

Another thing to keep in mind is that Congressmen are required to have two houses: One in DC and one in their home district. And 170k really doesn't go all that far in DC for a house.

then they should build some dorms in DC for them

[Spectatrix]

Side question: Can anyone here put up a valid arguement for the elimination of a minimum wage?

The thing about minimum wage is that it's essentially ineffective. They raise the wage, some lower-end people get laid off initially, prices go up to compensate for the increased labor costs. People are making more but end up paying more too. It also eliminates the possibility of having a training wage. If companies could set their own wages, they could hire some truly unskilled workers (high schoolers in their first job, for instance), train them, and then pay more once they had the skills to be worth more.

That having been said, I do see minimum wage as being necessary in markets where unemployment is high. When it's low or average, workers have more of an opportunity to switch jobs or negotiate raises if they don't feel they're getting paid what they're worth, whereas business most definitely has the upper hand in high-unemployment areas.

[Billy]

Just to dispel a myth about labor:

Here's an income statement from Nike Corporation:

Yahoo Finance

Cost of Goods Sold: $7,624,300,000

Administrative Expenses: $4,221,700,000

This is typical of large coorporations.

WTF. You're telling me the CEO's and managers of these companies need over half the price it costs for the material of the goods and the labor to make it? Bullshit.

So if minimum wage goes up, will there be firings? Yes. Why? Because the American public seems to believe that labor makes up the majority of the expense of a company, and these companies can get away with spouting nonsense. So will they fire because they need to? Absolutely not. They'll fire to make a statement. And they'll be able to justify it with "oh, we can't afford to keep as much labor now, thanks to the minimum wage hike". And people will sadly believe them.

[Spectatrix]

From what I remember working at Papa John's, labor was about 20% of the cost.

[chook]

From what I remember working at Papa John's, labor was about 20% of the cost.

of couse total cost of a pizza (at least at dominos) was around 1.50, everything else was pure profit minus the gas comp to the worker.

[Testm0nkey]

Another thing to keep in mind is that Congressmen are required to have two houses: One in DC and one in their home district. And 170k really doesn't go all that far in DC for a house.

my family was able to live in DC AND own a house and at that time my father made no where near 170k.
it is their decision to own prime real estate and fancy cars

[knucklehead]

$170,000/yr is also just the pay for the average joe in congress. Hastert is probably raking in close to $220,000/yr after this raise.

Personally I like Hastert and I think he did good on his part with the Jobs and Growth Act, but I still think ~$220,000 is a little excessive for any damn government job.

[Psykopath]

plus, no taxes and insane benefits.

[GOB]

ha, and the average salary of american doctors dropped 7% from 95-03

[knucklehead]

plus, no taxes and insane benefits.

Yeah for sure. I was just looking through this site, it's got some interesting information from a few years ago, like the fact that those that retire after a certain number of years of full service get about $52,000 a year in retirement pay. And I'm sure some get a hell of a lot more.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa031200a.htm

[celebritygooner]

Side question: Can anyone here put up a valid arguement for the elimination of a minimum wage?

What you all are saying about people earning more and spending more is all well and good, but it doesn't work in a global economy.

Phil Knight's job isn't to make life good for Americans or to be a hero and make lots of political points, his job is to make a huge profit for shareholders. If you force him to pay an American $6 or $20 or whatever dollars an hour to do a job that a Chinese person can do, and is willing to do, for $2 an hour, why WOULDN'T he hire the Chinese person?

Spectrix make a wonderful point ... remember the labor riots in France a couple months ago? The European social model is basically minimum wage taken to the extreme ... the French (parliament???) tried to pass a law saying employers were free to fire a new (couple months) young worker for no reason, because currently in France it is almost impossible to do it; the reaction was so negative (HOW COULD ANYBODY ... *GASP* LOSE THEIR JOB?!!??!!?

But if you knew you were required to pay somebody more than they were worth and that you had no legal means to fire them if they were idiots, why would anybody hire anybody ever?

Europe has tried this and failed miserably at it, they tried it in the 1940's and 50's, that's the reason the United States enjoyed, basically, 50 years of uninterrupted prosperity -- Europe had no manufacturing sector (war damage) and they had the idea that everybody deserved free money from the government just for being them ... Americans worked harder, had more and better infrastructure, and thus we were the production and export capital of the world. We aren't anymore. Minimum wage and social welfare and compassion and OSHA and pensions make it too expensive to produce goods, so we don't. China does. Have you checked the trade defecit? I wonder who's next in line for world supremacy ...

Followup question: Can you name anything France manufactures and exports? If you can't, you now know why their economy is a disaster, and you've just seen America circa 2060.

[Spectatrix]

Followup question: Can you name anything France manufactures and exports?

Evian and Perrier bottled water.

[Divergent Realit...]

wine

[Billy]

It's also cheaper to live in China than it is in America. Just like in Mexico. There are laws currently being made about exploiting this fact. A dollar is worth a lot more in China than it is in America. But guess what, once our two economies level, that'll change. And then where do the manufacturer's go to next? Yeah, who ever has the weakest economy at the time. And that's why laws need to be made. Capitalism fails on a global level, unless countries create laws to protect their working class.

But this whole argument is moot. Companies CAN afford a minimum wage hike. Labor doesn't tend to be much of the expense of a company. The people who work so hard and give up so much of their lives to keep this country productive NEED to be protected. And an increase in minimum wage does just that. A minimum wage increase won't increase prices to the consumer in a competitive economy, if companies can afford it. And they can.

[pebkac]

What you all are saying about people earning more and spending more is all well and good, but it doesn't work in a global economy.

Phil Knight's job isn't to make life good for Americans or to be a hero and make lots of political points, his job is to make a huge profit for shareholders. If you force him to pay an American $6 or $20 or whatever dollars an hour to do a job that a Chinese person can do, and is willing to do, for $2 an hour, why WOULDN'T he hire the Chinese person?

Spectrix make a wonderful point ... remember the labor riots in France a couple months ago? The European social model is basically minimum wage taken to the extreme ... the French (parliament???) tried to pass a law saying employers were free to fire a new (couple months) young worker for no reason, because currently in France it is almost impossible to do it; the reaction was so negative (HOW COULD ANYBODY ... *GASP* LOSE THEIR JOB?!!??!!?

But if you knew you were required to pay somebody more than they were worth and that you had no legal means to fire them if they were idiots, why would anybody hire anybody ever?

Europe has tried this and failed miserably at it, they tried it in the 1940's and 50's, that's the reason the United States enjoyed, basically, 50 years of uninterrupted prosperity -- Europe had no manufacturing sector (war damage) and they had the idea that everybody deserved free money from the government just for being them ... Americans worked harder, had more and better infrastructure, and thus we were the production and export capital of the world. We aren't anymore. Minimum wage and social welfare and compassion and OSHA and pensions make it too expensive to produce goods, so we don't. China does. Have you checked the trade defecit? I wonder who's next in line for world supremacy ...

Followup question: Can you name anything France manufactures and exports? If you can't, you now know why their economy is a disaster, and you've just seen America circa 2060.

I agree with you 100%. It would be best for the economy if everyone got paid $2 an hour just like they do in China.

BTW, have you seen the living conditions in China?

[woody]

170K...plus money from the running for office...plus "gifts"...plus expensise accts...

[celebritygooner]

I agree with you 100%. It would be best for the economy if everyone got paid $2 an hour just like they do in China.

BTW, have you seen the living conditions in China?

I didn't say you had to like it, but that's the way it is. If you artificially inflate the cost of American labor, Chinese (the comptuer I'm typing on), Taiwanese (the TV i'm watching), Brazilian (the banana i'm eating), Mexican (the futon i'm sitting on), Indian (the t-shirt i'm wearing), Pakistani (the shorts i'm wearing) and Bangladeshi (the sandals i'm wearing) labor will happily take up the slack.

It's easy to take a sharp verbal jab at someone about the standard of living in China ... it's hard to have a functioning economy without any discernable labor class.