Are Politicians Too Rich To Understand Us? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Are Politicians Too Rich To Understand Us?


JBnTX
06-13-2012, 07:50
How could any member of congress possibly understand how the average American citizen is doing financially?



http://www.ktvq.com/news/are-politicians-too-rich-to-understand-us-/

"The president's worth is estimated at $8.3 million, while Mitt Romney's is placed at a staggering $255 million."

"How can either of these men empathize with the financial plight of America's middle class?"

"Politics has become so saturated with cash that its protagonists have started to feel surreally detached from everyday life."

"The average citizens' annual income is $49,445."

"In 2010, the average net worth of a U.S. senator was $13.2 million, and the average worth of a House member was $5.9 million."

"...the days of the citizen legislator are long gone."

..

certifiedfunds
06-13-2012, 12:14
No issue with wealthy politicians. Wealth often follows education and various desireable professional attributes including leadership. You want those types in office and successful people have the equity with those around them to marshal the resources.

I have huge issues with politicians using their using the office to become wealthy.

countrygun
06-13-2012, 13:09
I think that brush is a bit too broad. there are all kinds of "politicians" and there are all kinds of "rich" people.

sr556m9
06-13-2012, 13:48
Hell yes they are. I've got no issue with wealthy people (they actually contribute instead of taking like the aholes in Detroit and Chicago). The truth of the matter is that the majority of our national politicians are so disconnected from reality it's sickening.

Bflying
06-13-2012, 15:05
Well their house help and gardeners are poor. Is that close enough to them to understand? ;)

jakebrake
06-13-2012, 15:12
the word "yes" comes to mind.

MLM
06-13-2012, 15:55
Seems, at the National level, politicians can get into office with very little to their name, yet, after a term or two, leave office a millionaire.

walt cowan
06-14-2012, 06:03
they just don't understand we can't do insider trading or use insider info but, we can eat cake.

series1811
06-14-2012, 06:48
It's funny to have watched one of our local politicians who went from city councilman to U.S. Congressman, and to go look at the house he lived in back just a few years ago and then to look at the one he lives in now.

It's hard not to smell something.

certifiedfunds
06-14-2012, 08:32
It's funny to have watched one of our local politicians who went from city councilman to U.S. Congressman, and to go look at the house he lived in back just a few years ago and then to look at the one he lives in now.

It's hard not to smell something.

This.

Consider Newt. Before government, Newt was a middle class history professor. Now, thanks to big government, Newt's rich enough to blow half a mil at Tiffany.

Berto
06-14-2012, 08:40
I tend to be put off by wealth envy or class warfare that gets thrown around by the media so often, but there's no question government is a growth industry with politicians further insulating themselves from the consequences that affect ordinary hard working people.
It's not realistic to believe they are stewards of our money, that's for damn sure.

certifiedfunds
06-14-2012, 08:48
You use office to make contacts. Those contacts solicit favorable legislation to suit their interests. You accept campaign donations in exchange for your support of favorable legislation and the money helps to keep you in office. So you pass the laws and grow the government in areas that the government has no business dealing.

Then, when out of office you form PACs and start consulting to help companies navigate the legislative branch and navigate the laws you created and the government you grew. For this you get paid handsomely.

All the while, you get rich off of big government without any actual government funds going into your pocket.

Is it any wonder why neither party really wants to shrink government?

barbedwiresmile
06-15-2012, 04:39
In regards to the OP question, the evolution of our government suggests that politicians understand us all too well.

beforeobamabans
06-15-2012, 04:45
How could any member of congress possibly understand how the average American citizen is doing financially?



http://www.ktvq.com/news/are-politicians-too-rich-to-understand-us-/

"The president's worth is estimated at $8.3 million, while Mitt Romney's is placed at a staggering $255 million."

"How can either of these men empathize with the financial plight of America's middle class?"

"Politics has become so saturated with cash that its protagonists have started to feel surreally detached from everyday life."

"The average citizens' annual income is $49,445."

"In 2010, the average net worth of a U.S. senator was $13.2 million, and the average worth of a House member was $5.9 million."

"...the days of the citizen legislator are long gone."

..

Typical lack of critical thinking. Don't you want experienced, proven leadership in highest office? You must love William Jefferson Clinton who never made more than $35,000 before he became president (and is now a millionaire).

BTW, do you know who our wealthiest (inflation adjusted) president was before being elected to office?

George Washington

Do you know who the lowest paid president was?

George Washington, who refused the $25,000 salary that Congress appropriated for him.

Now THAT, is statesmanship.

pugman
06-15-2012, 06:09
"The average citizens' annual income is $49,445."..

Actually, I think your figure is too high.

For the 2010 filing year, the top 50% of wage earners in this country made $33,058, the top 10% was around $133K, the top 1% made $334k (or $338 I forget which). My figure might be household not person...can't remember this either.

I have an immediate family member who was a member of Congress for 8 years (he left voluntarily which I will go into detail on). As someone who has spoken to him, his wife and his children at numerous weddings, funerals, and family reunions I can honestly say I'm sure its not the money.

He left Congress, ran for a more prestigous office and lost, was made an Ambassador then left office when his party lost the election and he felt his post would be reassigned, got a sweetheart job with a company in his former district making twice what he did in Congress and is currently running a nonprofit.

Actually, I stand by its not the money. Congress's starting salary is $174,000 a year with a extremely nice benefits package (majority and minority leaders along with the Speaker make a little more) Don't get me wrong - it more than I make. I have heard people argue they demand this salary because you want the brightest people in the country running things.

Have you seen what's in Congress - the salary certainly isn't attracting the brightest. As a matter of fact lets be brutally honest - if your goal is money and you have the brains there are a lot of other places (law firms, fortune 500 companies, etc) you can make this salary. My brother designs server packages for companies and makes this salary.

The average CEO pay in this country is over $13 million - and this isn't a bash Wall Street thread - and a partner in a law or accounting firm can make $175,000.

Politicans DO understand us - they simply don't care. I have talked with a drunken politican around a fire for hours - what he has told me other politicans have stated about the American public behind closed doors probably wouldn't shock you if you think like me.

While many feel a politican's goal is to get relected this is sort of true - a politican's goal is to stay reelectable.

Trust me....they understand us perfectly

Chuck66
06-15-2012, 06:28
Actually, I think your figure is too high.


I think the median income was $49ish. Might be where that figure came from?



Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

bear62
06-15-2012, 06:40
No issue with wealthy politicians. Wealth often follows education and various desireable professional attributes including leadership. You want those types in office and successful people have the equity with those around them to marshal the resources.

I have huge issues with politicians using their using the office to become wealthy.

Slick Willie comes to mind ......:faint:

certifiedfunds
06-15-2012, 06:45
Slick Willie comes to mind ......:faint:

It is the game. He's a great example but it crosses party boundaries.

The only current one I can think of who breaks that mold is Ron Paul.

pugman
06-15-2012, 07:09
I think the median income was $49ish. Might be where that figure came from?



Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

I'm sure they are both right - its income numbers which means given enough time I can get them to say anything.

When I talk to people (and this includes republicans and democrats and liberals and conservatives since cluelessness doesn't discriminate) it surprises them how little money people in this country make.

My point is $33,000 a year is NOT a lot of money. Stock shelves at target full time and have a part time bartending job on the weekends and you are probably in the upper 50% of wage earners. This is not a judgement on the person's ability to generate an income - its a reflection on the fact nearly 50% of this country is on some sort of dole

.264 magnum
06-15-2012, 07:21
This.

Consider Newt. Before government, Newt was a middle class history professor. Now, thanks to big government, Newt's rich enough to blow half a mil at Tiffany.

At least it fairly clear Newt didn't get rich through graft and malfeasance. As you know he's been a prolific author and he earns serious bank as an event speaker.

kirgi08
06-15-2012, 08:00
:popcorn:

certifiedfunds
06-15-2012, 08:11
At least it fairly clear Newt didn't get rich through graft and malfeasance. As you know he's been a prolific author and he earns serious bank as an event speaker.

None of which would have been possible without a big centralized federal government.

I'm not alleging Newt took illegal money in any manner. What I am saying is that big government has been very, very good to Newt.

Now, as to the books: It is no secret how the book deal works. Politicals don't make millions on books because Joe Sixpack buys one copy. They're bought by the pallet.

greentriple
06-15-2012, 08:29
What I find interesting in threads like this is the duality of the American thinker:
1) politicians are begrudged for looking to turn a career in politics into a lucrative income source when they are asked to be "leaders" in a capitalist state, which by definition rewards money making. If conservative you expect you representatives to cut back on free money for the poor and make profit making for the wealthy easier. In essence a rewarded for money making and a clear message that worth and value is based on cash in pocket. They are surrounded by lobbyist from wealthy corporations, individuals and interest groups, once tasting of the fruit being a simple and humble servant of the people seems, short sighted.
2) profit making millionaires are admired for their ability to make tones of money, and the method is irrelevant after all it's the private competitive sector and thus the spoils go to the victor. Further, if conservative you are convinces that the only way these millionaires and multinational corporations can make a healthy profit and thus help our economy is my reducing the obstacles to them making their massive profits.
3) when unregulated or lightly regulated capitalism "fails" as we saw with the tech crash, housing burst, market crash, auto industry melt down and bank implosion, we blame the politicians, as if they have any control or effect.

I don't believe the politician or political party matters anymore. They serve to devise us, and thus make conquest easier. They serve to foster fear and loathing, which sells goods.



Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

JBnTX
06-15-2012, 08:45
Now, as to the books: It is no secret how the book deal works. Politicals don't make millions on books because Joe Sixpack buys one copy. They're bought by the pallet.


Exactly right!...:thumbsup:

JBnTX
06-15-2012, 08:48
...I don't believe the politician or political party matters anymore. ...


Politics and politicians rule this country.

Unfortunately.:steamed:

janice6
06-15-2012, 09:13
NO: Money is second, Power is first.

Why should they care about us? We elect them and demonstrate we can't tell the difference between good and bad.

certifiedfunds
06-15-2012, 09:46
What I find interesting in threads like this is the duality of the American thinker:
1) politicians are begrudged for looking to turn a career in politics into a lucrative income source when they are asked to be "leaders" in a capitalist state, which by definition rewards money making. If conservative you expect you representatives to cut back on free money for the poor and make profit making for the wealthy easier. In essence a rewarded for money making and a clear message that worth and value is based on cash in pocket. They are surrounded by lobbyist from wealthy corporations, individuals and interest groups, once tasting of the fruit being a simple and humble servant of the people seems, short sighted.
2) profit making millionaires are admired for their ability to make tones of money, and the method is irrelevant after all it's the private competitive sector and thus the spoils go to the victor. Further, if conservative you are convinces that the only way these millionaires and multinational corporations can make a healthy profit and thus help our economy is my reducing the obstacles to them making their massive profits.
3) when unregulated or lightly regulated capitalism "fails" as we saw with the tech crash, housing burst, market crash, auto industry melt down and bank implosion, we blame the politicians, as if they have any control or effect.

I don't believe the politician or political party matters anymore. They serve to devise us, and thus make conquest easier. They serve to foster fear and loathing, which sells goods.



Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Wowzers. Lot of fail in one little post.

kirgi08
06-15-2012, 09:57
They are just affirming their irrelevance in most folks lives.'08.

countrygun
06-15-2012, 10:10
What I find interesting in threads like this is the duality of the American thinker:
1) politicians are begrudged for looking to turn a career in politics into a lucrative income source when they are asked to be "leaders" in a capitalist state, which by definition rewards money making. If conservative you expect you representatives to cut back on free money for the poor and make profit making for the wealthy easier. In essence a rewarded for money making and a clear message that worth and value is based on cash in pocket. They are surrounded by lobbyist from wealthy corporations, individuals and interest groups, once tasting of the fruit being a simple and humble servant of the people seems, short sighted.
2) profit making millionaires are admired for their ability to make tones of money, and the method is irrelevant after all it's the private competitive sector and thus the spoils go to the victor. Further, if conservative you are convinces that the only way these millionaires and multinational corporations can make a healthy profit and thus help our economy is my reducing the obstacles to them making their massive profits.
3) when unregulated or lightly regulated capitalism "fails" as we saw with the tech crash, housing burst, market crash, auto industry melt down and bank implosion, we blame the politicians, as if they have any control or effect.

I don't believe the politician or political party matters anymore. They serve to devise us, and thus make conquest easier. They serve to foster fear and loathing, which sells goods.



Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine


Do you deliberately spend a lot of time on this, or does being wrong just come naturally to you?

Dexters
06-15-2012, 10:21
How could any member of congress possibly understand how the average American citizen is doing financially?



http://www.ktvq.com/news/are-politicians-too-rich-to-understand-us-/

"The president's worth is estimated at $8.3 million, while Mitt Romney's is placed at a staggering $255 million." The question is how they got there - born into it or worked for it.

"How can either of these men empathize with the financial plight of America's middle class?" What is the plight of the middle class & what are the possible solutions. We might be able to answer the question of the author with this info.

"Politics has become so saturated with cash that its protagonists have started to feel surreally detached from everyday life." When was this not true? Then we could see what has changed and correct it.

"The average citizens' annual income is $49,445."
There is not such term as 'average citizen'. There is the term - per capita - probably what he meant.

"In 2010, the average net worth of a U.S. senator was $13.2 million, and the average worth of a House member was $5.9 million."

"...the days of the citizen legislator are long gone."
When, if ever, were those days?

..

Here's the deal we - all of use here - must use our brain and not allow others to think for us. The person writing the article wants us to think something and has lined up his info to get us there. You can tell that by the way it is written e.g. alludes to better times but does not state them.

The author has an agenda and so as not to be sucked into it we must see the holes in his presentation.

greentriple
06-15-2012, 11:19
Do you deliberately spend a lot of time on this, or does being wrong just come naturally to you?

No, you are wrong....

series1811
06-15-2012, 11:46
What I find interesting in threads like this is the duality of the American thinker:
1) politicians are begrudged for looking to turn a career in politics into a lucrative income source when they are asked to be "leaders" in a capitalist state, which by definition rewards money making. If conservative you expect you representatives to cut back on free money for the poor and make profit making for the wealthy easier. In essence a rewarded for money making and a clear message that worth and value is based on cash in pocket. They are surrounded by lobbyist from wealthy corporations, individuals and interest groups, once tasting of the fruit being a simple and humble servant of the people seems, short sighted.
2) profit making millionaires are admired for their ability to make tones of money, and the method is irrelevant after all it's the private competitive sector and thus the spoils go to the victor. Further, if conservative you are convinces that the only way these millionaires and multinational corporations can make a healthy profit and thus help our economy is my reducing the obstacles to them making their massive profits.
3) when unregulated or lightly regulated capitalism "fails" as we saw with the tech crash, housing burst, market crash, auto industry melt down and bank implosion, we blame the politicians, as if they have any control or effect.

I don't believe the politician or political party matters anymore. They serve to devise us, and thus make conquest easier. They serve to foster fear and loathing, which sells goods.



Aspirin, please.

countrygun
06-15-2012, 11:46
No, you are wrong....


"3) when unregulated or lightly regulated capitalism "fails" as we saw with the tech crash, housing burst, market crash, auto industry melt down and bank implosion, we blame the politicians, as if they have any control or effect."

You completely miss many fundamentals and manage to avoid any unfortunate realities. You threw a broad enough net there to require a long, and in your case, wasted explanation.

Some of the situations you listed were normal in a free market and are adjustments, "redistribution of the wealth capitalist style", they were not "failures" except on the par of people who made bad investments and lost, BFD. There should not be guarantees in a free market . Others were caused directly by Government meddling.


"We" didn't blame Government for more than it was responsible for. Somehow I smell the hint that "unregulated or lightly regulated capitalism" doesn't set well with you, you left an implication hanging there it seems. Care to finish the thought?

ModGlock17
06-15-2012, 13:44
A rich official is probably less likely to be BOUGHT, don't you think ?

ex. Bill Clinton is bought and paid for. He can't even speak his own mind, without getting corrected by the Master.

meshmdz
06-15-2012, 14:22
yes, willard doesnt understand you at all. and yes the BS comment that will come after this saying, "obama understands me?" is equally baseless and ridiculous. yes the pig and spineless willard was against guns before he became for them. yes he said, from one of his yahts, that Obama is out of touch. yes you are a moron too if you vote for him. have a great day!

meshmdz
06-15-2012, 14:24
Do you deliberately spend a lot of time on this, or does being wrong just come naturally to you?

countrygun, go crawl back in your bed with your cousin and shut up with your nonsense. :crying:

Dexters
06-15-2012, 14:31
A rich official is probably less likely to be BOUGHT, don't you think ?

ex. Bill Clinton is bought and paid for. He can't even speak his own mind, without getting corrected by the Master.

Bill's coin is being seen to advise BO and to speak for BO. It pays him triple, ego, can convert it to speaking/consulting fees and women.

greentriple
06-15-2012, 14:52
"3) when unregulated or lightly regulated capitalism "fails" as we saw with the tech crash, housing burst, market crash, auto industry melt down and bank implosion, we blame the politicians, as if they have any control or effect."

You completely miss many fundamentals and manage to avoid any unfortunate realities. You threw a broad enough net there to require a long, and in your case, wasted explanation.

Some of the situations you listed were normal in a free market and are adjustments, "redistribution of the wealth capitalist style", they were not "failures" except on the par of people who made bad investments and lost, BFD. There should not be guarantees in a free market . Others were caused directly by Government meddling.


"We" didn't blame Government for more than it was responsible for. Somehow I smell the hint that "unregulated or lightly regulated capitalism" doesn't set well with you, you left an implication hanging there it seems. Care to finish the thought?

Huh, talk about broad strokes....

countrygun
06-15-2012, 15:33
countrygun, go crawl back in your bed with your cousin and shut up with your nonsense. :crying:

I just wanted to preserve your post so people can see your intellectual ability while it is at it's pinnacle.

certifiedfunds
06-15-2012, 15:49
What I find interesting in threads like this is the duality of the American thinker:
1) politicians are begrudged for looking to turn a career in politics into a lucrative income source when they are asked to be "leaders" in a capitalist state, which by definition rewards money making.

Politics isn't supposed to be a career-long occupation. That said, one shouldn't parlay an office into wealth.


2) profit making millionaires are admired for their ability to make tones of money, and the method is irrelevant after all it's the private competitive sector and thus the spoils go to the victor. Further, if conservative you are convinces that the only way these millionaires and multinational corporations can make a healthy profit and thus help our economy is my reducing the obstacles to them making their massive profits.


Just curious -- what threshold makes a profit, "massive"?

3) when unregulated or lightly regulated capitalism "fails" as we saw with the tech crash, housing burst, market crash, auto industry melt down and bank implosion, we blame the politicians, as if they have any control or effect.



What progressive bilge water. The crash of 08' was caused by government, by regulation.

countrygun
06-15-2012, 15:59
Politics isn't supposed to be a career-long occupation. That said, one shouldn't parlay an office into wealth.



Just curious -- what threshold makes a profit, "massive"?



What progressive bilge water. The crash of 08' was caused by government, by regulation.


And the housing bubble was causd by the Goverment twisting the arm of lenders forcing them to give sub-prime loans to vastly unqualified people. A quasi-socialist program that failed.