3 ms·

> the risk of using political office for personal gain remains. You're absolutely correct. I think the person you were replying to was being pithy about the

> the risk of using political office for personal gain remains. You're absolutely correct. I think the person you were replying to was being pithy about the fact we have essentially in-the-open legal corruption happening in the US today where politicians can get elected to high office with minimal personal fortunes and be millionaires before they complete their first term simply due to the nature of that corruption (for instance, legalized insider-trading for Congress).

kcatskcolbdi 3y ago
Oh, I may have missed the nuance there, thank you! I very much am against the corruption we witness so blatantly. Personally I thought that if wealthy people were elected to office we may be able to eliminate some of that, but it seems as though if anything they are just better at it.
houseinthesky 3y ago
I believe the insider-trading thing pretty small in real world impact. Paid speeches, book deals, consulting payments and jobs for family members or after holding office are the more significant items. We have a funny system where paying a politician $250k for a one hour speech to your company, trade group, union, political action committee or whatever is treated as a perfectly reasonable speaker fee, and totally different than just handing the politician the money in a briefcase. Or hiring a politician's 22 year old new-grad child at an executive salary.
- bobthepanda 3y ago
  IIRC most congress people do not beat the S&P.
  - djkivi 3y ago
    While some of them beat Warren Buffett.
bobthepanda 3y ago
at the same time, we do want poor people to be able to represent people. It would also be bad if Congress was only out-of-touch rich people. There was a bit of a brouhaha with the last few Congresses where incoming freshmen representatives who had poor backgrounds were having difficulty securing housing due to poor credit history, even though their new salaries put them squarely in upper tax income brackets.

kcatskcolbdi 3y ago

Oh, I may have missed the nuance there, thank you! I very much am against the corruption we witness so blatantly. Personally I thought that if wealthy people were elected to office we may be able to eliminate some of that, but it seems as though if anything they are just better at it.

houseinthesky 3y ago

I believe the insider-trading thing pretty small in real world impact. Paid speeches, book deals, consulting payments and jobs for family members or after holding office are the more significant items. We have a funny system where paying a politician $250k for a one hour speech to your company, trade group, union, political action committee or whatever is treated as a perfectly reasonable speaker fee, and totally different than just handing the politician the money in a briefcase. Or hiring a politician's 22 year old new-grad child at an executive salary.

bobthepanda 3y ago
IIRC most congress people do not beat the S&P.
- djkivi 3y ago
  While some of them beat Warren Buffett.

bobthepanda 3y ago

at the same time, we do want poor people to be able to represent people. It would also be bad if Congress was only out-of-touch rich people. There was a bit of a brouhaha with the last few Congresses where incoming freshmen representatives who had poor backgrounds were having difficulty securing housing due to poor credit history, even though their new salaries put them squarely in upper tax income brackets.