Azelma wrote:
Seems to me, politicians salaries are just about right. How much should they be paid?
You are an idiot. Those citations aren't relevant because those professions typically aren't paid a wage unless the professional has been all but run out of the field.
My father, for example, earns about the listed wage (adjusted) as a doctor only because he's blind and has to work a desk. When he worked in private practice he was a lot better off, and 20 years later he would be even more so if he could see.
There is also the issue of public trust - paying politicians $200k instead of $100k is a small price to pay for the benefit of insulating the system against corruption. It is not even a question of intentions, it is that people who are needing for money are fundamentally more likely to be inclined to compromise their position even if they are not inherently dishonest. Russian and Mexican cops vs American cops for example: the former are notoriously more corrupt because they are not paid enough to get by comfortably.
There's also the question of lifestyle. Driving a Yugo to work may be fine for a manager or private practice professional or whatever, and the worst that could happen is making oneself or the firm look bad. For politicians, however, their lifestyle is a reflection on their constituency and even the entire country. That doesn't mean they need to live Donald Trump lifestyles, but it does mean they need to maintain a certain level of decorum. A family that earns $80-150k annually, while better off than most, certainly cannot meet any incidental expense comfortably. $200k a year is a good balance between that and simply rich.
The pay is fine. All your arguments boil down to you being a sad little loser who is butthurt that some people have motivations bigger than yours.
Jubbergun wrote:
Just out of curiosity...what makes corporations spending money on lobbying any different from other organizations that spend money on lobbying, like PETA, The Sierra Club, Greenpeace, or Planned Parenthood? I get the impression that you're ignoring half the problem only because you're opposed to the parties currently winning the bidding war, and not because the practice itself is corrupt (which it is).
Because pure greed is more evil than some sort of moral or philosophical viewpoint, however imperfect it may be.
