|
|
Post by Shane for Wax on Nov 4, 2011 14:36:33 GMT -5
 Occupy Congress much? |
|
|
|
Post by N. De Plume on Nov 4, 2011 14:49:03 GMT -5
Only thing I don’t like: Suggest eliminating Congressional salaries. The whole reason the idea of Congresspeople having no salary was specifically because it would require you to be super-rich to be in congress, since, y’know, even Congresspeople have living expenses. Unfortunately, the costs of running for Congress are what pretty much require it instead.
I think what would be better is cutting the salaries and using the savings for a mandatory publicly-funded-only campaign system. Give the poor folks a chance to run.
|
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Nov 4, 2011 17:48:51 GMT -5
Ban all advertising. No ads on TV, no ads in print, no billboards. They provide no service, cost trillions and distort the market. They're as good as a knife in the eyes. Ban them.
|
|
queenofhearts
Junior Member
Another atheist transgirl with too many opinions and not enough money
Posts: 70
|
Post by queenofhearts on Nov 4, 2011 20:18:10 GMT -5
And we wonder why they represent the 1%.
|
|
|
|
Post by wurdulac on Nov 4, 2011 21:35:05 GMT -5
Ban all advertising. No ads on TV, no ads in print, no billboards. They provide no service, cost trillions and distort the market. They're as good as a knife in the eyes. Ban them. But then how will the people know their Congressional hopefuls love America, hate taxes, and are better than all other options? |
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Nov 4, 2011 21:59:47 GMT -5
Bachmann's line in there raises a point I've wondered many times. With the American public getting broker and more pissed and all the economic woes, how in the flying fuck do these people spend millions on campaigning instead of sinking it into a charity or giving it to the people...I mean, you shouldn't run on the policy of "he who spends the most wins".
|
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on Nov 4, 2011 22:14:49 GMT -5
I think this was the exact thing Franklin was trying to avoid.
|
|
|
|
Post by largeham on Nov 5, 2011 1:28:17 GMT -5
Can't say I'm surprised. And then the right has the audacity to claim that they represent middle America and support all hard working Americans through peddling their 'trickle-down' bullshit.
|
|
|
|
Post by brendanrizzo on Nov 5, 2011 12:04:50 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, among the millionaires in Congress, how many are in which party? Intuition suggests they should be evenly split (and that would explain much of the spinelessness of the Democrats) but I want confirmation of this.
|
|
|
|
Post by N. De Plume on Nov 5, 2011 12:24:37 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, among the millionaires in Congress, how many are in which party? Intuition suggests they should be evenly split (and that would explain much of the spinelessness of the Democrats) but I want confirmation of this. I don’t know about the actual statistics, but I can point out that Herb Kohl, called out on the graph for owning the Milwaukee Bucks, is a Democrat. According to Wikipedia, he had a net worth of $279 million in 2005. Also, he will not be seeking re-election next year. So that’ll be changing the makeup of things a little bit. Darrell Issa, the one called out for being the richest, is Republican. |
|
|
|
Post by brendanrizzo on Nov 5, 2011 13:09:48 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, among the millionaires in Congress, how many are in which party? Intuition suggests they should be evenly split (and that would explain much of the spinelessness of the Democrats) but I want confirmation of this. I don’t know about the actual statistics, but I can point out that Herb Kohl, called out on the graph for owning the Milwaukee Bucks, is a Democrat. According to Wikipedia, he had a net worth of $279 million in 2005. Also, he will not be seeking re-election next year. So that’ll be changing the makeup of things a little bit. Darrell Issa, the one called out for being the richest, is Republican. Thank you. You've confirmed what I was suspecting. |
|
