republican congressman wants our tax dollars to pay his rent

[z31maniac]

but especially the first because the Rs are supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility, and if they take that stance, i expect them to lead by example and not request a housing stipend that is larger than lots of americans' paychecks because "my lifestyle".

Taking home 2500/month requires about $23/hr-ish. And that's taxed, where things like allowances/stipends aren't. So that's really more like $28/hr which is well above the avg pay for a single person in this country.

Sorry sleeve, you aren't convincing anyone on this issue.

[decay]

And a nice little loophole about travel:

"None of these totals include hundreds of other trips for which the military provides transportation; the costs of using those military aircraft are never disclosed."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...seas/98351442/

here's the really fun part.

the military uses chartered flights for transport, a *lot*.

on my way into iraq, the only transit that was actually in a military aircraft was from riyadh to fallujah (via kuwait city).

every other part of transit, my brigade was on commercial aircraft.

so when you read this, don't assume that some representative or senator is being strapped to cargo webbing in a C-130.

[MR E30 325is]

here's the really fun part.

the military uses chartered flights for transport, a *lot*.

on my way into iraq, the only transit that was actually in a military aircraft was from riyadh to fallujah (via kuwait city).

every other part of transit, my brigade was on commercial aircraft.

so when you read this, don't assume that some representative or senator is being strapped to cargo webbing in a C-130.

Seconded. Would fly in and out of the air station I was stationed at on big, comfy, regular old planes. On-board bathrooms and in-flight movies galore. And I was only an NCO in the USMC.

[kronus]

don't assume that some representative or senator is being strapped to cargo webbing in a C-130.

but can i still imagine that

it's amusing to imagine

[decay]

And I was only an NCO in the USMC.

i was just spec-4 mafia.

i didn't want SGT stripes, that's when they start making you accountable for shit. :P

#goddamnitcarl

[profbooty]

Congressmen have been making the same salary since 2009 (zero raises). Since then DC area housing is up considerably, likewise inflation since 2009 is about 22% (real number is likely higher). Yes maintaining two abodes is not cheap, living in the DC area it is not unheard of to hear of congressmen who live in their offices. The DC metro area has the highest income of all major metro areas, which has inflated housing considerably, further DC are housing did not drop that much during the financial crisis as federal jobs/contractors are more insulated.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2016/09/15/d-c-and-maryland-have-the-highest-median-incomes-in-the-country/?utm_term=.ef48d4a146b3

Our congress is relatively not corrupt (compared to other countries). If you want to keep it that way, you need to make sure congressmen are compensated accordingly. In other words if you don't keep them paid well, they have more of an incentive to do naughty naughty things.

Sure plenty of congressmen are rich, but not all are. Not providing cost of living increases to congressmen will surely concentrate representation only from those who can afford to be congressmen.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/19/politics/members-of-congress-pay-raise/

As an aside, as a federal employee my pay has only gone up 4% since 2010 due to a pay cap/step 10 situation. The same issues for potential corruption applies as well.

[kronus]

"pay me more or i'll become corrupt", nice.

[parkerbink]

Congressmen have been making the same salary since 2009 (zero raises). Since then DC area housing is up considerably, likewise inflation since 2009 is about 22% (real number is likely higher). Yes maintaining two abodes is not cheap, living in the DC area it is not unheard of to hear of congressmen who live in their offices. The DC metro area has the highest income of all major metro areas, which has inflated housing considerably, further DC are housing did not drop that much during the financial crisis as federal jobs/contractors are more insulated.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/local/wp/2016/09/15/d-c-and-maryland-have-the-highest-median-incomes-in-the-country/?utm_term=.ef48d4a146b3

Our congress is relatively not corrupt (compared to other countries). If you want to keep it that way, you need to make sure congressmen are compensated accordingly. In other words if you don't keep them paid well, they have more of an incentive to do naughty naughty things.

Sure plenty of congressmen are rich, but not all are. Not providing cost of living increases to congressmen will surely concentrate representation only from those who can afford to be congressmen.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/19/politics/members-of-congress-pay-raise/

As an aside, as a federal employee my pay has only gone up 4% since 2010 due to a pay cap/step 10 situation. The same issues for potential corruption applies as well.

If an employee is unhappy with their situation they are free to seek alternative employment.

The fact someone took a job that means they need to live away from home needed to be considered prior to applying.

They could be corrupted is a reason they need to quit/be fired if it is a thing.

[z31maniac]

^BUT BUT BUT.........that's only for us schmucks in the private sector!

[profbooty]

If an employee is unhappy with their situation they are free to seek alternative employment.

The fact someone took a job that means they need to live away from home needed to be considered prior to applying.

They could be corrupted is a reason they need to quit/be fired if it is a thing.

I think you're missing the point. If you don't raise congressional salaries, you are limiting your pool of talent to either the corruptible or those who don't deal much with regular people.

Neither are very good for our nation if congressmen's loyalties are not to their constituents. I feel strange as someone who is libertarian leaning to argue for greater compensation for congressmen.

[parkerbink]

I think you're missing the point. If you don't raise congressional salaries, you are limiting your pool of talent to either the corruptible or those who don't deal much with regular people.

Neither are very good for our nation if congressmen's loyalties are not to their constituents. I feel strange as someone who is libertarian leaning to argue for greater compensation for congressmen.

No you are missing the reality.

They know what the deal is long before they consider running for office. If they don't like the deal they are free to abstain.

On what planet is you don't pay me well so I will behave badly a viable argument for better compensation?

I work nights, (00:00-08:00) I don't like it. I knew what the deal was when I took the job. Can I now say shit! I hate these hours, give me the day shift or I'll do a bad job and or steal?

[z31maniac]

I think you're missing the point. If you don't raise congressional salaries, you are limiting your pool of talent to either the corruptible or those who don't deal much with regular people.

Neither are very good for our nation if congressmen's loyalties are not to their constituents. I feel strange as someone who is libertarian leaning to argue for greater compensation for congressmen.

Oh dude, thanks for the laugh this morning. Representatives being "loyal" to those who voted for them vs the money that really got them elected.

Not sure if troll or willfully ignorant.

[BraveUlysses]

No you are missing the reality.

They know what the deal is long before they consider running for office. If they don't like the deal they are free to abstain.

On what planet is you don't pay me well so I will behave badly a viable argument for better compensation?

I work nights, (00:00-08:00) I don't like it. I knew what the deal was when I took the job. Can I now say shit! I hate these hours, give me the day shift or I'll do a bad job and or steal?

you're still missing the point

the congress critters aren't threatening to do start accepting bribes (although you can easily argue that lobbyist money is merely legalized bribery with rules about how the money can be used for election/re-election)

the reality of it is that while it's obviously morally repugnant to start stealing, self-dealing or using your position as a politician (a whole variety of different careers have the potential for similar problems) to enrich yourself, the chances of that occurring can be increased by not dealing with legitimate employee complaints.

just telling these people to like it or quit only works on an individual basis, it doesn't solve the problem for the next person who fills the position.

[parkerbink]

you're still missing the point

the congress critters aren't threatening to do start accepting bribes (although you can easily argue that lobbyist money is merely legalized bribery with rules about how the money can be used for election/re-election)

the reality of it is that while it's obviously morally repugnant to start stealing, self-dealing or using your position as a politician (a whole variety of different careers have the potential for similar problems) to enrich yourself, the chances of that occurring can be increased by not dealing with legitimate employee complaints.

just telling these people to like it or quit only works on an individual basis, it doesn't solve the problem for the next person who fills the position.

I did not say like it or quit (although that works too) I said when one accepts terms of employment it is disingenuous to demand changes after the fact.

They have an amazing deal. They get a ton of time off, perks up the ass and all kinds of power with legal ways to monetize the position.

If they don't like it, they are free to step down.

[BraveUlysses]

wouldn't it be better to pay them more to disincentivize them to monetize their position?