I just want them to tell me what stocks to buy.
I agree on spirit, but in practice this will just make them even easier to be bought.
I think this is overstated. You can’t even run for Congress without being a millionaire, a millionaire’s family, a lawyer, a lobbyist, or a military officer looking to cash out.
You can’t get in the door of Congress without being in hoc to a constellation of private interests. Capping their pay won’t change that.
you got a point. Also I think that they get bought of either way, so why not safe a little on their salary ;)
Because Congress sets its own salary. I don’t. So, I have no say in the matter.
Also because there’s no real “cost savings” in a material sense. Congressional spending has been decoupled from federal taxation since the Great Depression. Pay congressmen $1/term. Pay them $1M/hr. I don’t see any kind of change in my material condition.
Incidentally, the Gingrich Era Contract with America was billed as a legislation package to rein in the capacity for Congresscritters to personally enrich and profiteer off their positions. Similarly, Pelosi’s For The People Act included a number of reforms intended to prevent Congress from double-dealing and insider trading. Despite both Speakers enjoying a bicameral majority and a friendly President during their careers, neither successfully advanced legislation to handcuff members of Congress.
Asking Congress to regulate itself is a fool’s request.
Hey Thanks. I didn’t know any of that.
As if they aren’t already bought. At least you’ll have one of your own elevated and not some already rich asshole trying to get richer.
I honestly believe that AoC’s personal finances are shit.
I guess the idea of paying them well is that they can’t be bought with bribes. Then again, when has any wealthy person ever been satisfied.
I wouldn’t say it’s so that they can’t be bought, so much as so they don’t have to be bought. It’s part of the reason they haven’t voted for a pay raise and so long. Their owners don’t want them to have other options.
Ah, that makes sense.
Lawmakers don’t vote for their pay raises, they don’t need to. The increases were made automatic in 1989. Even with the annual increases, their pay is nothing compared to what they can make from insider information and contributions from anonymous PACs. They can be bought, government salary just can’t compete with dark money.
That isn’t quite accurate. Congress hasn’t gotten a pay raise since 2009. Because they vote against giving themselves one.
Ah, I’d read they didn’t have to vote to get a pay raise. Didn’t see that they had been actively voting against it. But who needs a raise when you know you’ll get waaay more money from corps and special interest groups? Heck, they’ll even write the bills they want passed for you, so you don’t even have to work hard.
If the job didn’t pay a salary, the only people who could do the job would be the rich who don’t need a salary, or those willing to accept bribes.
If you make the salary too low, it will discourage anybody who can make a better living doing something else. And, if the people doing it don’t think they’re being paid what they’re really worth, they’re more likely to take bribes or “donations” to boost their salary back up to what it should be.
Really, the salary should be high. It should be a job that people who are really qualified will want to do. It should be one where you have no need to take a bribe because you’re already doing so well, and you’d be afraid of throwing away such a well compensated job.
Honestly, there’s a load of satisfied wealthy people - you just don’t hear about them because, well, there’s literally nothing to report about them.
They also carry a hell of a lot more responsibility than the average American worker. Is be in favor of a party raise along with restricting other income streams like stock investments.
pretty sure most of them are millionaires, because the billionaire donors are giving them money, in other forms.
Also politicians wouldn’t exactly be less corruptible if they were poorer.
Well then that’s not capitalism.
Tbh idk why people think capitalism is a good thing. It’s just feudalism with corporations.
To be honest, I don’t think most people understand what the definitions of capitalism or communism or socialism are any more.
And it cuts both ways, 99% of Lemmy is like Mirror Universe Fox News, where if they see something bad, it’s capitalism’s fault. Someone crashed their car? Capitalism did it. Someone got sick? Capitalism. Fox viewers blame everything on “socialism” and have no idea what it means, either. For Lemmy it seems to be just any system that exists on Earth that isn’t a utopia.
Case in point: capitalism isn’t actually corporate feudalism. That’s not in any way what defines capitalism as an economic system.
Kids, please - humans are shit to each other under every system ever imagined. And they would be shit to each other under any new system we can imagine in the future. As is evidenced by how people are shit to each other and complain about their lives in every other country on Earth. No where is unique in that no one complains about being there.
I think you need to be a bit open minded why people are thinking instead telling others how they should be thinking your way.
At this point, there’s no way you’d have “power” unless you have inherited immense wealth or provided with powerful connections. I am in favour of if I have to work, so as others. And generation that’s below boomers, physically impossible to have a relaxed life if they don’t have the conditions that I’ve wrote. it’s because capitalism is always set to “grow”. You need to profit even more compared to last period so you’d be considered as “successful”.
In this world nothing ever grows indefinitely. When it does either eruptions or cancer happens. It’s not natural. If you wanna take two seats you need to kick someone off the seat to take that seat. So billionaires hold most of the money which turns into power. Look - turns out they’re the biggest capitalists in entire human history. I really couldn’t be bothered if I don’t see Coca Cola in my supermarket. Heck I don’t even need a fucking fresh starfruit available all week. So I don’t care about global gdp or bla bla. I live in one those so called “first world countries” yet I’m afraid I’m going to die in a damp cold house when I’m old because I never had been in the class of selected people. Mind you - I’ve got my own house and savings etc. worked my ass off. Yet still the future is not safe. Bank taking everything off your hand when you’re in a tight position (for example; getting redundant) and hospitals chucking you out in the street when you don’t have enough money. Holding your baby after giving birth is a “charged service” in US. This is capitalism not people being “evil”. And this can fuck off.
Anyway, hope you done read this with as an offence. I think you need to grow the way you think.
Chill. Looking down at people is the most illiterate thing that you can do to yourself.
Ps. Mind you, I’ve never praised any other “-ism” over capitalism.
I appreciate your perspective here, and to be fair, I’m open minded as to what sorts of reforms the West needs to be more sustainable. For a while there seemed to be both a sense of decorum and maybe even morals, plus regulations, that help back unfettered pursuit of wealth for wealth’s sake. Personally, I think that the tech industry and finance broke that down, and with the bar set to “get it all as fast as you can,” the wheels are off the cart for both a system that used to work OK-ish for many people (certainly not all).
At this point,
Like this - at what point did things work well? It wasn’t a long time, historically speaking. I’m guessing based on mention of a damp, cold house you’re from the UK or Ireland, and it’s really just within our life times that things were working mostly OK for some, and now it’s fallen apart. I’m not challenging you on this, I agree. But I’m also wondering if we’re going to look to some point in the past when things did work, when was that? A decade or so? A few years? Was it when we were kids and didn’t understand the bad stuff going on?
My personal gripe is that “capitalism” simply means that someone with a business takes their profits and re-invests them back into the business. Growth isn’t a requirement - it’s what large businesses focus on. That re-investment could be better wages for workers, or better health insurance, or nicer desks and chairs and table tennis in the break room. Growth as the goal is a choice. Also, a lot of people focus entirely on a handful of large businesses doing this. Most businesses in the UK AND the US are small businesses. Literally 99.9 % of American businesses are employ less than 50 people. Almost half of Americans work at small businesses, and they’re more than half out GDP. So when 0.1% of the businesses are predatory and problematic, but also command 40% of our GDP - it seems like a touchy problem, but a solvable one.
To be honest, I don’t think most people understand what the definitions of capitalism or communism or socialism are any more.
It’s all just idpol now. Capitalists are on the “America Good” Team and Socialists/Communists are on the “America Bad” Team. No deeper analysis needed.
People will complain about “capitalism” because they don’t have health care or their in too much debt or their single and lonely or they’re LGBTQ or PoC or obviously poor while getting wailed on by a police officer. And they’ll say “damn this shit sucks, must be the capitalism” when a lot of it just boils down to your neighbors and leaders being bigot pedophile freaks.
Like, you think Communism is so great? Explain Boris Yeltsin. He was a fucking Commie. And look what happened.
humans are shit to each other under every system ever imagined
Humans are a very mixed bag. But Americans are a special breed of narcissistic, consumerist, sociopaths. And not because of some kind of genetics thing, either. The country attracts these freaks like a magnet.
From Ayn Rand to Wernher von Braun to Benjamin Netanyahu to Elon Musk, the world’s worst human beings are drawn to this place. They pilgrimage here and export their awfulness abroad. Or they take root and fester. Either way, America molds them into the worst humans imaginable.
boils down to your neighbors and leaders being bigot
Exactly my comment on being a feudalic system. Burgoise aristocrats defeated monarchy and came up with a new story for peasants to worship for.
Humans are a very mixed bag. But Americans are a special breed of narcissistic, consumerist, sociopaths. And not because of some kind of genetics thing, either. The country attracts these freaks like a magnet.
Sure, but cultures and nationalities do this all the time. If you’ve never experienced being around some Russian on vacation, I promise, Americans aren’t the only annoying people out there. Or the English in any part of Western Europe that’s a cheap flight away from London. For as self-deprecating as the English seem to be today, there’s centuries of colonialism and exploited wealth behind it that can’t be ignored, mostly due to the cultural exports that remain. For centuries, if an English or Spanish ship showed up somewhere, everyone else was going to have a bad time, and both groups happily only assumed they were the best there ever was. Cold War efforts to spread the Gospel of America around the world through Hollywood were profoundly successful, and a lot of people bought in.
Which isn’t to say that every English or Spanish or Russian or American is bad, more so that under either system, and under every system of government so far, including anarchy, some total shitbags rise to the top. Maybe Spaceballs was right. Maybe Evil will always win, because Good is dumb.
If you’ve never experienced being around some Russian on vacation, I promise, Americans aren’t the only annoying people out there.
The Americanization of Russia in the 90s/00s was a deeply tragic moment in the country’s history.
Or the English in any part of Western Europe that’s a cheap flight away from London.
Ye Olde Amerikkkans
Maybe Spaceballs was right. Maybe Evil will always win, because Good is dumb.
The irony of that line was the bad guy being very dumb and losing a few scenes later.
Critical thinking doesn’t exist on this platform. The mainstream narratives on Lemmy are built on shaky foundations and can’t get past basic scrutiny. It’s why the more ideologically zealous have so much censorship. This isn’t a left, right, whatever issue. It’s an education issue, and it’s impact is reflected by every demographic in the nation.
Kids, please - humans are shit to each other under every system ever imagined.
Kids, please listen to the adult in the room.
That’s a defeatist argument, it set’s the goal post wayy too far, and doesn’t propose a solution or at the very least point to an obstruction without a solution. I get it, I’m tired too. It’s easier to say nothing will work and watch the decline than it is try to make a better future. It reads of “Capitalism is the worst form of economy, except for all the other forms we’ve tried.” A dumb quote wrapped up in a lazy joke to make it more palatable if there ever was one.
Not to mention that saying that the only system that’s worth having is one where no one has a complaint is an absurd thing to say. Be real. Nothing is perfect, but don’t let perfect be the enemy of good enough. There are many places in the world where people are happy, usually in the countries with strong support of labor. Most are still capitalist but people live much easier, happier and fulfilling lives. Sure they have complaints but you can’t please everyone.
Look, I’ll admit I didn’t realize I wasn’t in a community I didn’t subscribe to, and accidentally hit it from the front page before I had logged in. That’s on me for throwing an obviously unpopular comment out here. I didn’t mean to show up and stir shit on purpose. For what that’s worth. And, also for what it’s worth, I do support work reform. FFS the minimum wage hasn’t changed for most of my adult life, and things are generally untenable for a lot of people.
With that out of the way, I’m not saying “well, it’s the only system we got! Might as well keep it!” Not at all. What I am saying is to be cautious about a Grass is Greener scenario where you’ve built up an incredibly lofty goal of large-scale economic reforms, as if it’s some panacea. It’s not. Every economic system sucks, and every one is hard work to protect rights and be good to humans. It’s equally possible under pure, unrestrained capitalism to be socially just and rights-respecting as it is under any other system.
For those entirely consumed by the idea that only shifting to full on socialism is the key, and that the only reason things are bad anywhere is due to capitalism, swapping out economic systems will accomplish little more than pain and suffering for the poorest among us during the transition phase. That’s how it always works, and has always worked in the past. We’re not so advanced as to skip that part.
So what? So I’m saying that people’s minds, attitudes, and hearts are the core of the problem. Greed, not limited by governments of any sort, is the problem. Idolizing abusers and sociopaths is a problem. Focus on material wealth is a problem - and one that every single Soviet or socialist government faced as well. A command economy can’t command people to change what their brain stem says.
Again, sorry for showing up here and shitting the bed. I’m just asking people to consider reforms within the system that most people know to see what’s possible. Regardless of what that system is. North Korea should try the same. China did exactly that, and liberalizing their economy is why they’ve seen such success over the last 15-20 years. They adapted within their own system, they didn’t scrap it all, let millions starve, and start from scratch because people alive today remember the last time they did that, and it was miserable.
Anyway, just my opinion. Enjoy your angry downvote and banning me from the community.
Who needs to understand definitions? Your actions are self-evident and show who you are within the system. In a world where the powerful are scraping coins off of you for more yachts I try my best to help the people and the land. I can do that without knowing economic theory. Even a child can understand that.
Sausage tin angle float turkey sassafras, monkey ancient refractive judgement velocity steamboat.
Which any kid can understand. You’re right - what good are definitions, mongoose!
Damn! I’m always getting kicked out of the exclusive “smart people” clubs.
Tbh idk why people think capitalism is a good thing.
Marx wrote a whole book on it that you should check out. The primary appeal, as a system, is that it accelerates property and infrastructure development.
Stupid on so many levels
Pay them 5 million per year for all I care so long as they actually represent the people and not private interest groups, are not currupt, and are some of the best people for the job. And that would be an incredibility good deal.
People can be wealthy and not totally out of touch if they make an effort to listen to people
We are long past the point where they represented us.
They never represented “us” in the broad sense.
- Retire at 70 - Yes
- Get paid $60k - No
You don’t want people in power being easy to bribe. It’s bad enough as it is.
They already are. They never stop being greedy. Just look at Trump - he’s in the top seat, and it’s still not even close to satisfying his unquenchable thirst.
Agreed, but you don’t stop it by paying them less. You have to regulate and enforce it.
Yeah, about that enforcement part… Never gonna happen without some major upheaval.
Or just vote for the right people.
When the “right people” rarely are even an option - especially one that enough of the general populace can be convinced to vote for - that’s not getting us anywhere.
Pay them less and the rich people will be an option even more rarely because only people already rich can get in.
It applies to staffers too. A lot of staffers are already making only $60k. In DC, you need 3-4 roommates to afford rent on that salary. Also, these are people with law degrees.
Guess what happens when they get a job offer from a lobbying firm offering $400k? Suddenly their principles are negotiable.
The problem isn’t age, it’s corruption and entrenchment.
We need term limits for Congress.
They only work a few months a year. For example, in USA they are only in session a few days until November, with all of October off.
Have you ever watched them in session? Even when they’re “working” it’s like 90% dead time, moving at a snail’s pace.
What other job pays almost 200K a year, with half of the year off, the very best of health care included, and you can take time off whenever you’d like? Months! …and that job ensures you’ll always be able to out-perform the very best with your “insightful” stock trading?.. and you can appoint your husband as the “ambassador of Bermuda”, and travel to Bermuda on the taxpayer’s dime?
The Democrats are swimming in this shit just like “The Nazis”. Just look at them. Revolting trash, the lot.
I vote, you should vote… but never forget, they are contemptuous vipers who will backstab you and everyone standing with you without a second thought. They won’t even remember your name.
Campaigning to keep that job gets more time than the actual job. They consider it part of what we pay them for, which is utter bullshit.
The whole thing is set up completely wrong in the US. Campaign ads should be prohibited outside of a few weeks before election day. Two year terms are horrible because it means even more campaigning. Revoke citizens united, give both the house and senate 4 year terms and a few other changes to campaign finance laws in particular, and you could have a reasonable congress.
70? They shouldnt be electable after 60!
Make it 70, but they have to live off the same pensions as everyone else after 60 years old.
This seems like it would make a rampant corrupt system even more corrupt. Imagine how cheap you could buy a rep for if they only made 60k on the books.
This is exactly how they got to where they are now. They tell you its to discourage bribing and then take the bribes anyways.
Thats not really a flaw in the above, thats just a separate flaw in the political system that also needs addressing.
Yes this is exactly the reason they should actually make more than they do.
It would also ensure only people who were already wealthy would pursue it.
Do you expect the already wealthy to represent you? To not take bribes and enact laws that benefit them?
I think you misunderstood. A salary of 60k, the original proposal, would cause that.
OP has no idea what health insurance cost these days.
Nor do international members, care to share?
More like $1000+ a month for a policy with a $7000+ annual deductible. If you’re lucky and have a job with subsidized health insurance, it’s much more reasonable. I’m a school bus driver and have excellent health insurance (which is rare for school bus drivers); I pay $129 a month while the district pays the rest and I have essentially no deductible.
$1000 deductible?? i wish
$300/month 😂😭😢😐
