by Ryan McMaken
If the voting taxpayers (those who actually pay the bills) are outnumbered or outcompeted by the tax receivers, then national bankruptcy is the most likely outcome.
pull down to refresh
related posts
42 sats \ 9 replies \ @Cje95 6 Nov
I mean… as a Federal Employee does that mean I shouldn't vote? If anything I feel like I know who the real POS are lol
reply
10 sats \ 7 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 6 Nov
It does. Alaska actually tried to pass something like this a while ago. It didn't go over very well.
The point is that there's a major conflict of interest when you can vote yourself other people's money.
reply
42 sats \ 6 replies \ @Cje95 6 Nov
I do get it but I also feel like as someone who is making $70k but my take home is a little over $43k after DC rakes me over the coals the conflict of interest isn't really there….
God knows I could make more elsewhere esp cause we don't really get any sort of benefits compared to the private sector
reply
10 sats \ 5 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 6 Nov
My sense is that this idea sounds better than it would actually pan out
reply
42 sats \ 4 replies \ @Cje95 6 Nov
Yeah… while I agree the people making the max def have a different view people like myself who I mean are really taking a pay cut would be washed out… I'd bet a bunch of nepo babies would fill the spots….
reply
10 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 6 Nov
Maybe you could telework from Texas and pay no income taxes.
reply
42 sats \ 2 replies \ @Cje95 6 Nov
Tbh and I swear I'm actually really sad to say this but I'm looking now at pulling the plug in DC and leaving Congress.
Working something like Federal Affairs even in DC would be an instant $60k increase minimum for me. Moving back to Texas would only be better for me. I mean hell I could live with my parents as I navigate the whole transition and save thousands more there…
Plus my parents hate being empty nesters lol
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined OP 6 Nov
Obviously, you'll get nothing but approval from us
view all 1 replies
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @denlillaapan 6 Nov
Yes
reply
42 sats \ 3 replies \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears 6 Nov
See also: Congress should not be allowed to raise its own pay.
reply
21 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 6 Nov
That can't even be vetoed, can it?
reply
42 sats \ 1 reply \ @StillStackinAfterAllTheseYears 6 Nov
Nope. And needless to say, they all get paid during a shutdown.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 6 Nov
And, their staffers don't get paid!
That's leadership
reply
42 sats \ 1 reply \ @denlillaapan 6 Nov
Nobody should be allowed to vote.
until neeeext time!
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 6 Nov
I agree, but this is a place to start
reply
42 sats \ 0 replies \ @Machiavelli23 6 Nov
I totally agree. Politicians always appeal the lower income people and unions because they make up the majority of votes needed to win. Lower income individuals, and those receiving some type of government assistance, are more likely to receive food stamps and the majority of union workers in one way or another work for companies that are government contractors. Individuals receiving food stamps will vote for politicians who continue providing food stamps and unions will vote for politicians who continue providing their employers government contracts. Both government benefits and government contracts are paid by tax payers. “Ruled by wild democracy.”
reply