Ron Paul Wins Iowa Debate

NoDrama said:

WTF are you talking about? Who the F ever said we need to cut the pay, cut the benefits etc etc of Congress? Im all fine and happy that they get 175K a year and great health care/retirement WHILE THEY ARE WORKING, I am not fine with them getting it for life. In a persons life span of 80 years, the country could possibly have up to 10,700 former and current congresspeople still alive. That would be an expenditure of $1.9 BILLION PER YEAR, just on pay, not even going to go into how many millions could be spent on health care... You don't think $1.9 Billion is a lot? If we only paid them while they were in office it would save $1.8 BILLION PER YEAR!!

Click to expand...

OGEvilgenius said:

They get it for life so that they are less influenced by outside sources. It would be a bad idea to remove that balance (even though, practically speaking it means not much right now, that can change with other changes to government elsewhere, this is a battle not worth fighting).

Click to expand...

I guess our politicians are no where near as influenced by outside sources as they could be!

Click to expand...

Dan Kone said:

I'd like to see some sort of proof that this is a real number and not something you invented.

Click to expand...

OGEvilgenius said:

They get it for life so that they are less influenced by outside sources. It would be a bad idea to remove that balance (even though, practically speaking it means not much right now, that can change with other changes to government elsewhere, this is a battle not worth fighting).

Click to expand...

NoDrama said:

Simple math, if you are unable to do multiplication then I suggest you go back to school. There are 535 members of Congress, it is possible for all 535 members to be voted anew every 4-6 years (depending on Senator vs Rep) over a 80 year span that Could possible mean there are 10,700 possible congresspeople who are still alive and collecting 175,000 each year. 10,700 X $175,000 = $1,878,000,000. Currently there are 535 congresspeople currently serving. 535 X $175,000 = $93,625,000. Math...it proves itself.

Click to expand...

canndo said:

The biggest problem with Paul is simply that he is just not "presidential" - sorry as that sounds, people want a bigger than life type person as their president and Paul isn't it.[/QUOTE
Time to try something different because all those ''PRESIDENTIAL" types really havent worked out so well recently have they?Ill take a normal guy to represent me over a presidential blowhard lining his own pockets anyday.

Click to expand...

fishwhistle said:

canndo said:

The biggest problem with Paul is simply that he is just not "presidential" - sorry as that sounds, people want a bigger than life type person as their president and Paul isn't it.[/QUOTE
Time to try something different because all those ''PRESIDENTIAL" types really havent worked out so well recently have they?Ill take a normal guy to represent me over a presidential blowhard lining his own pockets anyday.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, this notion is not very widespread.

Click to expand...

sync0s said:

Yeah, how has that worked out for us?

I guess our politicians are no where near as influenced by outside sources as they could be!

Click to expand...

NoDrama said:

How much influence does a Rep who served 20 years ago have? Almost none since they have no vote.

Click to expand...

canndo said:

fishwhistle said:

Unfortunately, this notion is not very widespread.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is.

Click to expand...

OGEvilgenius said:

It's to help prevent payoffs after the fact. Reduce the incentive by taking care of those who serve.

I'd take it further and suggest they not be allowed to work for anyone but themselves or charity (volunteer) after their term is over.

Click to expand...

Uncultivated said:

Yeah, his answers on Iran were surely something to marvel at.

I wonder if he's picking out drapes for the oval office yet?

Click to expand...