When you’ve been in politics a long time, have explored almost every issue in a lot of depth, and have well-formed ideological views, you typically don’t change your mind a lot.
I'd rather see government so small it wouldn't take being at the capital more than one week out of the month at most. The current wage would be more than enough to finance that. That's never going to happen, but I can still dream, can't I?
Interesting and all good arguments, and I suspect that there are some that engage in the “legal corruption” you refer to in order to cover their costs, and for them, a larger salary would make some sense.
However, I would bet that those are not the examples we are mostly concerned about. Rather, it’s the egregious ones that shock the conscience. Let’s take just one example we all know about. Nancy Pelosi was worth more than $200,000,000 in 2024. In 2018, she was worth $124,000,000. So, Nancy Pelosi increased her net worth by about $75,000,000 in six years. She has no kids in day care, no kids in college, and I’m guessing she’s got her mortgages covered so she hasn’t been engaged in legal corruption because of the cost of living in Washington.
Rather, Pelosi and the others like her aren’t engaging in “legal corruption” to cover their costs, but to get filthy rich. Indeed, I think their egos have grown so big that they believe they should be treated like movie stars and make as much as they do.
So this is what can happen when the world's richest man turns his mind and energies to putting forth possible solutions to what ails a government on the brink of collapse. Well, he's pretty much batting a thousand so far, so we'd be advised to at least bring this discussion into the open. Did I miss the indignant response from the failing MSM and those aged rich elites Urs Broderick Furrer mentions in his comment? It boggles this old mind to consider the new regulations that we'd need to make the idea work, given the current roster of names in Congress today. But it's at least worth a try.
I'd rather see government so small it wouldn't take being at the capital more than one week out of the month at most. The current wage would be more than enough to finance that. That's never going to happen, but I can still dream, can't I?
Part time legislators. One can only dream….
So we can triple their pay in exchange for term limits?
Interesting and all good arguments, and I suspect that there are some that engage in the “legal corruption” you refer to in order to cover their costs, and for them, a larger salary would make some sense.
However, I would bet that those are not the examples we are mostly concerned about. Rather, it’s the egregious ones that shock the conscience. Let’s take just one example we all know about. Nancy Pelosi was worth more than $200,000,000 in 2024. In 2018, she was worth $124,000,000. So, Nancy Pelosi increased her net worth by about $75,000,000 in six years. She has no kids in day care, no kids in college, and I’m guessing she’s got her mortgages covered so she hasn’t been engaged in legal corruption because of the cost of living in Washington.
Rather, Pelosi and the others like her aren’t engaging in “legal corruption” to cover their costs, but to get filthy rich. Indeed, I think their egos have grown so big that they believe they should be treated like movie stars and make as much as they do.
So this is what can happen when the world's richest man turns his mind and energies to putting forth possible solutions to what ails a government on the brink of collapse. Well, he's pretty much batting a thousand so far, so we'd be advised to at least bring this discussion into the open. Did I miss the indignant response from the failing MSM and those aged rich elites Urs Broderick Furrer mentions in his comment? It boggles this old mind to consider the new regulations that we'd need to make the idea work, given the current roster of names in Congress today. But it's at least worth a try.