Agreed. And we shouldn't have politicians that have a 150k salary that retire with a net worth of $30 million.
General The Supreme Court has overturned Roe vs Wade.
- Thread starter John Lee Pettimore
- Start date
The funny thing is, there are so few officials who would be under this microscope that it would be easy to police. ie, If you're in public office you shouldn't be able to take any money that isn't your salary. I'd add that there should be some sort of vetting system for their family members up to and including putting them on salary too to make sure there isn't one of the many "I don't make any money but my spouse is a Hell of an investor!!!"
Agreed. They all do it so nobody turns anyone in. Crooked.
Most, but not all. Not my people.
I disagree slightly with beard. I'm not against then making money outside their salary
How they make that money is the issue
Someone writing a book or having a podcast is fine
Hilary Clinton getting paid hundreds of thousands by Goldman Sachs to give a speech is obviously for nefarious reasons
There are also issues with ownership in companies. More complex solution related to trustees, funds as opposed to invidual companies, firewalls between politician knowing what companies are in the funds, and justice department actually holding politicians accountable for violations
Ultimately, the best solution will be when the public is generally aware of the corruption
When cory bookers team texted me for a donation, I told them that he is corrupt and to fuck off because I will never vote for him
Americans need to stand their ground with their own corrupt incumbents
So they can make millions white washing their disgusting behavior? No, I don't think so.
Can't take any money outside of salary?
Does that include inheritance if a relative dies?
What about insurance payouts, like if my house burns down?
Or royalty payments, if I wrote a book?
A military or civil service pension?
Can I sell my car? Or my coin collection? Or my parent's holiday cottage that I inherited years ago and haven't visited in a decade?
All of that is legitimate income, none of it is salary. Would you stop every elected representative from taking any of that money?
Kushner failed the existing vetting several times, and Trump overruled that and brought him into the West Wing to be the unofficial Secretary of State anyway. Then after years of secret, private WhatsApp chats with MBS, Kushner left the White House and immediately started a hedge fund with a couple billion in Saudi seed money.
Oh and Trump openly used and attempted to use the Oval Office and the federal government to directly grift for money into his own pocket, more times than we can list here. G7 at Doral, anyone?
And you never gave a...... single...... fuck...... about any of this at any point, surprise surprise.
So it turns out, you actually don't give a fuck about "there should be some sort of vetting system" to guard against nepotism and corruption at the top level of American politics. Why pretend like you do?
??
Last edited:
I'm not sure what that means
All I'm saying is that the topic of pay outside of their salary is a complicated one
I completely agree that dirty politicians are abusing the system. Im just not sold that a 100% ban on other income is the right solution
It doesn't mean anything, it's just babble. You act like there is some thought behind it. There isn't.
??
Keep in mind, I also believe on a much more progressive taxation system than you presumably
I used to be a flat tax guy. Now I'm someone who wants an extremely progressive system.
I like the idea outside of insurance and inheritance. Those are most likely not shady. But a 12 year max term at 150-200k per year. You wanna be a public servant then that the pay. After you leave doowutchyalike Not enough than don’t take the position or run for re-election.
It means when Dubya steals an election and starts an illegal war using the actual "Big Lie" he should not be able to write a memoir where he downplays what a monster he is and then pocket millions from it.
All that will happen if you cut off other money but let them keep book deals is that the values of the book deals will grow obscenely large. For reference, the Obama's received a $65 million dollar advance.
It's not that complicated. It's a very small group of people to monitor. It's not hard to find a handful of exceptions we can all agree should be fine, but if I'm going to pay you $150 grand a year to work and then $150 grand a year to stay home for the rest of your life, you can cry me a fucking river about other streams of income you should be allowed.
Like it as long as pension is based on years served
I dig the public servant concept. That's why I believe the real solution will be when enough voters realize the corruption and vote in srrvants as opposed to corrupt assholes
I can only speak to the left. But I know for a fact that mote and more of the left is aware of the corruption. Mainly younger voters.
So the left is going to eventually push out non-servants
Here's a potential problem with limiting outside income...
I want people who will fight. AoC and I agree on almost every issue. But she's not a fighter. She says nice things about biden and pelosi.
Part of that is because it's in her character to be cordial to people. But part of it is because of political safety. If you call out the establishment, they will send their hounds after you. MSM will attack you. PaCs will fund primary opponents.
What I'm getting at is that the best servants are those that aren't afraid to fight even if that means losing their job in the next election
If someone has other income streams, like a popular podcast, then they can fight like hell without fear of earning a good income if they are primaried
There's all sorts of earnings that are not shady, book royalties being a big and obvious one. Putting your shit in a blind trust while you're at the top levels of the government seems fair. But then, that has to be enforced, and that takes a mindset of "country over party".
Problem with term limits and "doowutchyalike" after that is, how do you guard against megacorporations buying politicians with the promise of lucrative board seats and do-nothing jobs immediately after their term limits are up?
??
A flat tax is a progressive tax, amigo. Make it a flat tax with no exceptions to payment and you'll find lots of money to finance your commie dreams.
A flat tax system by definition is regressive
Progressive taxation means higher brackets fir higher earnings
It can't be because we aren't allowing people to have extremely long terms. If you're a one hitter quitter like Trump you should still get the same pension as 2 term Obama because as far as the American people are concerned you were there as long as you were wanted.
I also think if you run for leader of a country and lose, you should probably be forced to quit politics. I could be talked out of that though.
The problem happens when someone says that they align with Lindsay Graham uses the same logic. You can’t complain when he gets a 10 million dollar donation plating leisure suit Larry on twitch.
You are correct. That being said, if Elon is actually paying 30% of every dollar he makes, that's going to go a lot farther than trying to make him pay 50% when we all know he's going to end up paying near nothing. Canada's tax system is very progressive.....so rich people ship their money out of the country and all sorts of other shit.
So if you've ever held elected office, you're forbidden to sign a book deal, ever.
And this started as "if you're in public office, you shouldn't be able to take any money outside of your salary."
Dubya wasn't in public office when he was earning money from his memoir, was he. He signed book deals as a private citizen, when he was out of office. So it's a lifetime ban on earning outside income, now?
Except that's not the case, is it?
Continuing to receive royalties from creative works that you published before you entered politics, should be fine. I have no issue whatsoever with Trump receiving royalties from "The Art of the Deal" while he was in office. I would assume that most people would find that an easy and obvious exception.
You think he shouldn't have been able to take that money, so now we can't "all easily agree", can we.
??
Was that last sentence english? Lol
Here's where I stand. I have no issue with MTG making revenue from a podcast even if she says crazy shit
I have an issue with manchin owning shares in an oil company, getting donations from oil companies, and his daughter getting paid huge money by drug companies
That last one is trickier to handle and may speak to beards idea of paying family members too
But what if a son hates his dad who is a politician and wants to live his own life and not be a "slave" with a free government income
That's why I go back to the real solution being we as Americans handling it ourselves by voting in better humans
Cory booker is a shitty human. So I will not vote for him. When more democrats in NJ join me, we will replace him with a progressive
Sean Strickland(mma) is your 2038 POTUS
View: https://giphy.com/gifs/miami-ferrari-testarossa-31wYt8pJAyyje
View: https://giphy.com/gifs/miami-ferrari-testarossa-31wYt8pJAyyje
M
