4 ms·

> Pay peanuts, get monkeys As opposed to now with all the highly qualified congresspersons.

by sumeno 1y ago

lesuorac 1y ago
Name 1 company that makes over $1 Billion in annual revenue where somebody 2 links below the top makes less than a congressional salary. Congress critters are paid peanuts and also rent in an above-median cost of living area as well as their own district. ~150k sounds like a big salary but when you're very much in charge of trillions of annual revenue it's not.
- sumeno 1y ago
  This is like the CEOs who "only get paid $1" Salary is not where congresspeople make their money and if you don't think that being in congress is a good way to make lots of money right now I don't know what to tell you
  - lesuorac 1y ago
    > This is like the CEOs who "only get paid $1" We're so obviously talking about total compensation. CEOs making $1 while getting billions in stock appreciation or literally hundreds of millions in stock grants are not making $1/year by any reasonable definition. > f you don't think that being in congress is a good way to make lots of money right now I don't know what to tell you So, you want to keep the status quo where the people who are correctly compensated for their role are the ones willing to front-run their own citizens? (And also spending their time front-running instead of their elected job?)
    - sumeno 1y ago
      > So, you want to keep the status quo where the people who are correctly compensated for their role are the ones willing to front-run their own citizens? (And also spending their time front-running instead of their elected job? No, those are actually entirely different words than what I have said.
  - packetlost 1y ago
    The point is reducing that reliance on side channels, including the topical ban on trading.
- throwaway0123_5 1y ago
  Yeah $150k in DC is comfortable but far from luxurious (if you have a family, which it seems like most congresspeople do). It would not be enough to incentivize me to do the job of a congressperson.
  - ungreased0675 1y ago
    Also consider the need to maintain a home back in their home districts.
  - sumeno 1y ago
    Mark Zuckerberg's salary is only $1 a year! He must be homeless given bay area housing prices!
    - throwaway0123_5 1y ago
      Right, I get that they make most of their money from sources other than their salary. But that seems like something we should aim to discourage, as it is pretty ripe for abuse. It is clear that many of them trade on non-public information, and for those that own businesses there's a lot of incentive to push legislation that helps the business. So if we were to ban most of that and have them live just on their salaries, I think the salaries should be higher given the challenges/responsibility of the job and the area they're living in.
bdcravens 1y ago
Most are well-educated and "qualified"; integrity and ethics are the bigger problems.
- lo_zamoyski 1y ago
  I submit that most people with college degrees, including those in politics, do not meet the bare minimum standard of what it means to be truly educated.
hollerith 1y ago
The current pay for members of the House of Representatives and Senate is $174,000 per year [1] Rayiner is claiming we would get better members if we raise it to $1 million per year, to which your reply is unresponsive. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaries_of_members_of_the_United_States_Congress#Leadership_and_other_positions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaries_of_members_of_the_Uni...
- sumeno 1y ago
  $174k is not an accurate representation of the wealth accumulated from being a member of congress.
  - digitalPhonix 1y ago
    That’s the point. They’re making money from side channels. The idea is that if you pay them $1M, they won’t do their side channel earnings (and therefore reduce their potential conflicts of interest)
    - verzali 1y ago
      Trump has far more than that, but he still seems willing to abuse the office to make himself even richer.
    - scoofy 1y ago
      This idea seems straightforward me, but I'm a huge nerd, and every time I try to explain it to normal people they're so offended by the idea that they talk to me like I'm crazy.
      - AlecSchueler 1y ago
        Do you notice a trend of rich people becoming disinterested in amassing further riches? They just hire someone to do their trading for them and buy an island to go along with their yacht.
    - kcplate 1y ago

> Pay peanuts, get monkeys As opposed to now with all the highly qualified congresspersons.

by sumeno 1y ago

> Pay peanuts, get monkeys As opposed to now with all the highly qualified congresspersons.

Name 1 company that makes over $1 Billion in annual revenue where somebody 2 links below the top makes less than a congressional salary. Congress critters are paid peanuts and also rent in an above-median cost of living area as well as their own district. ~150k sounds like a big salary but when you're very much in charge of trillions of annual revenue it's not.

sumeno 1y ago
This is like the CEOs who "only get paid $1" Salary is not where congresspeople make their money and if you don't think that being in congress is a good way to make lots of money right now I don't know what to tell you
- lesuorac 1y ago
  > This is like the CEOs who "only get paid $1" We're so obviously talking about total compensation. CEOs making $1 while getting billions in stock appreciation or literally hundreds of millions in stock grants are not making $1/year by any reasonable definition. > f you don't think that being in congress is a good way to make lots of money right now I don't know what to tell you So, you want to keep the status quo where the people who are correctly compensated for their role are the ones willing to front-run their own citizens? (And also spending their time front-running instead of their elected job?)
  - sumeno 1y ago
    > So, you want to keep the status quo where the people who are correctly compensated for their role are the ones willing to front-run their own citizens? (And also spending their time front-running instead of their elected job? No, those are actually entirely different words than what I have said.
- packetlost 1y ago
  The point is reducing that reliance on side channels, including the topical ban on trading.
throwaway0123_5 1y ago
Yeah $150k in DC is comfortable but far from luxurious (if you have a family, which it seems like most congresspeople do). It would not be enough to incentivize me to do the job of a congressperson.
- ungreased0675 1y ago
  Also consider the need to maintain a home back in their home districts.
- sumeno 1y ago
  Mark Zuckerberg's salary is only $1 a year! He must be homeless given bay area housing prices!
  - throwaway0123_5 1y ago
    Right, I get that they make most of their money from sources other than their salary. But that seems like something we should aim to discourage, as it is pretty ripe for abuse. It is clear that many of them trade on non-public information, and for those that own businesses there's a lot of incentive to push legislation that helps the business. So if we were to ban most of that and have them live just on their salaries, I think the salaries should be higher given the challenges/responsibility of the job and the area they're living in.

bdcravens 1y ago

Most are well-educated and "qualified"; integrity and ethics are the bigger problems.

lo_zamoyski 1y ago
I submit that most people with college degrees, including those in politics, do not meet the bare minimum standard of what it means to be truly educated.

hollerith 1y ago

The current pay for members of the House of Representatives and Senate is $174,000 per year [1] Rayiner is claiming we would get better members if we raise it to $1 million per year, to which your reply is unresponsive. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaries_of_members_of_the_United_States_Congress#Leadership_and_other_positions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salaries_of_members_of_the_Uni...

sumeno 1y ago
$174k is not an accurate representation of the wealth accumulated from being a member of congress.
- digitalPhonix 1y ago
  That’s the point. They’re making money from side channels. The idea is that if you pay them $1M, they won’t do their side channel earnings (and therefore reduce their potential conflicts of interest)
  - verzali 1y ago
    Trump has far more than that, but he still seems willing to abuse the office to make himself even richer.
  - scoofy 1y ago
    This idea seems straightforward me, but I'm a huge nerd, and every time I try to explain it to normal people they're so offended by the idea that they talk to me like I'm crazy.
    - AlecSchueler 1y ago
      Do you notice a trend of rich people becoming disinterested in amassing further riches? They just hire someone to do their trading for them and buy an island to go along with their yacht.
  - kcplate 1y ago