snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Inboxer Rebellion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 17 April 2011, 01:30 AM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 108,339
Icon605 Government salaries

Comment: Salary of the US President...$400,000. Salary of retired US
Presidents...$180,000. Salary of House/Senate...$174,000. Salary of
Speaker of House...$223,500...Salary of Majority/Minority
Leaders...$193,400...Average US Salary...$33,000 to $77,000. HELLO! I
think we found where the cuts should be made! If you agree... repost! I
think we...... should start from the top and work our way down.

Snopes - are these figures accurate?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 17 April 2011, 01:45 AM
quink quink is online now
 
Join Date: 22 June 2005
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 2,617
Default

Call me crazy, but I would hope that the person running the country is being paid more than your average retail assistant manager...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 17 April 2011, 01:58 AM
A Turtle Named Mack's Avatar
A Turtle Named Mack A Turtle Named Mack is online now
 
Join Date: 21 June 2007
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 17,465
Default

I do not know why people get so upset over the pay for some of the positions carrying the most responsibility in the nation. Quink, I don't think those figures are even close to what a retail assistant manager makes (my guess is that figure would be about $40-50,000), but nonetheless, we want intelligent capable people to work very long hours making sound laws and policy for the country, so what is wrong with pay above the average for all workers. Most have to have a second home of some sort in the DC area, in addition to the one in their home district. The pay is not the primary draw of there positions, but there are major costs to these positions, and we should pay to defray these costs
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 17 April 2011, 02:14 AM
AnglRdr's Avatar
AnglRdr AnglRdr is offline
 
Join Date: 06 June 2002
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 50,682
Default

The President is the Chief Executive Officer of the largest employer in the country, managing a budget of over $3,456,000,000,000.

Sounds to me as if he deserves a raise.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 17 April 2011, 02:24 AM
A Turtle Named Mack's Avatar
A Turtle Named Mack A Turtle Named Mack is online now
 
Join Date: 21 June 2007
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 17,465
Default

It certainly would not be merit-based!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 17 April 2011, 03:35 AM
quink quink is online now
 
Join Date: 22 June 2005
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 2,617
Default

I was talking about the comment in the that the average US salary was 33k - 77k. I read it as the OP saying that that's what the government salaries should be in line with, as if it's outrageous that politicians are above-average wage earners. I'm not American, but I would hope that the president is making more than the $16.50 an hour he'd get from a $33k salary

Really, none of those seem out of the ordinary, especially when you consider what the jobs involve.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 17 April 2011, 01:51 PM
RichardM RichardM is online now
 
Join Date: 27 March 2004
Location: Sachse, TX
Posts: 2,963
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A Turtle Named Mack View Post
It certainly would not be merit-based!
But I think it would. At least for those I voted for but certainly not for those who I did not vote for.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 17 April 2011, 06:16 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 5,054
Default

What are these email writers smoking? I want some!

The CEO of GE makes about $10 million/year in total compensation, GE's gross sales are something like $75 billion/year. (And the CEO of GE is underpaid compared to CEOs for companies with much smaller yearly sales.)

The US President makes $400K/year and heads an organization with a yearly budget of about $2.6 Trillion dollars.

So, using the corporate number for GE to "properly" scale the salary for the President gives a presidential salary that should be about $350 Million/year. That would be a 25 times salary increase for the President.

And that doesn't even take into account the other compensation that the CEO of GE gets that doesn't show up in his salary.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 17 April 2011, 06:20 PM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 108,339
Ponder

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmy101_again View Post
The US President makes $400K/year and heads an organization with a yearly budget of about $2.6 Trillion dollars.
Sure, but how well is our stock doing on the market?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 17 April 2011, 06:34 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 5,054
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snopes View Post
Sure, but how well is our stock doing on the market?
Ah, see that would be one of the great things for the President if his salary was based on performance of the US "stock" on the market.

Stock goes up, President gets a big-ass bonus.

Stock goes down, President gets a big-ass bonus to retain him to get it back up again. (Just like many for-profit companies Take a look at the compensation for the CEOs of banks and car companies that the gov't had to bail out.)

CEO salaries are a classic "win-win situation". No matter what happens their compensation goes up.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 17 April 2011, 06:43 PM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 108,339
Ponder

I'm not sure how well a government bailout of the government would work, though.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 17 April 2011, 06:48 PM
Richard W's Avatar
Richard W Richard W is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2000
Location: High Wycombe, UK
Posts: 22,856
Default

Well, first you have to buy eggs in Cairo at 10 cents a dozen...
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 17 April 2011, 08:07 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 5,054
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by snopes View Post
I'm not sure how well a government bailout of the government would work, though.
Isn't that what raising the debt limit is?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 17 April 2011, 10:19 PM
stalker stalker is offline
 
Join Date: 10 July 2006
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 2,013
Icon605

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmy101_again View Post
So, using the corporate number for GE to "properly" scale the salary for the President gives a presidential salary that should be about $350 Million/year. That would be a 25 times salary increase for the President.
875 times, really.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 18 April 2011, 12:52 AM
Steve Eisenberg Steve Eisenberg is offline
 
Join Date: 15 October 2001
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 11,841
Default

Obviously the only way to make a dent in federal spending is to go after the big items (Medicare, Social Security, defense). On the other hand, there would be a hard to measure benefit in changing incentives.

The OP writer wants to change the incentives in just the wrong way. That plan would lead to lawmakers going into debt in office, and then, even more than today, feeling a need to cash in on their fame, such as by moving to a K Street lobbying organization.


It would probably be worthwhile, from a purely budgetary standpoint, to pass a law vastly increasing the pensions of members of congress while forbidding them from public relations jobs in which they inevitably lobby their former colleagues and/or sell expensive items to the government. Maybe there should be a law requiring land grant universities to take on ex-members of congress of poly sci faculty, as this would keep them away from the federal purse.

Former civil servants should also be permanently forbidden to lobby, or to sell stuff to the government. There are ethics rules in this general area now, but they are limited and weak.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 18 April 2011, 01:00 AM
AnglRdr's Avatar
AnglRdr AnglRdr is offline
 
Join Date: 06 June 2002
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 50,682
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Eisenberg View Post
Maybe there should be a law requiring land grant universities to take on ex-members of congress of poly sci faculty, as this would keep them away from the federal purse.
Steve, land grant universities (as well as most other public non-land grant universities) receive a great deal of federal money.

Quote:
Former civil servants should also be permanently forbidden to lobby, or to sell stuff to the government.
All civil servants? And should I not, for example, be able to lobby on behalf of an environmental group?

And I don't really blame you for thinking K Street lobbyists are representative of all lobbyists. It is a common mistake people who do not understand lobbying make.
Quote:
There are ethics rules in this general area now, but they are limited and weak.
They should be definitely limited. There is nothing in my current position that would serve me in any future lobbying or selling to the government.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 18 April 2011, 01:25 AM
Steve Eisenberg Steve Eisenberg is offline
 
Join Date: 15 October 2001
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 11,841
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnglRdr View Post
Steve, land grant universities (as well as most other public non-land grant universities) receive a great deal of federal money.
That's why I mentioned them. It wouldn't be fair to put a somewhat expensive new requirement on a school which received little in the way of federal funds.

Quote:
All civil servants?
Yes, but see below.

Quote:
And should I not, for example, be able to lobby on behalf of an environmental group?
To answer, I would have to start asking a lot of questions about what job you do now, what vendors you have contact with, who funds the environmental group, and what it was in your resume that got you the job. But in the actual world, when feds move on to jobs where they are going to sell stuff to the federal government, or lobby the federal government, they probably are using information and contacts gathered in their government position to enrich someone or some organization. And looking at each individual situation for the one in a zillion that's a (from a budget standpoint) harmless exception would be too expensive.


It might be argued that existing employees should be grandfathered into being exempt from new more stringent ethics rules, in which case you are OK.

Quote:
There is nothing in my current position that would serve me in any future lobbying or selling to the government.
Then, until you get a different job, isn't it is unlikely that an environmental lobbying outfit will hire you?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 18 April 2011, 01:36 AM
AnglRdr's Avatar
AnglRdr AnglRdr is offline
 
Join Date: 06 June 2002
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 50,682
Default

Since I am a very low level Executive Branch employee, it would be very unlikely that I, or any of my peers (which is a lot of people your proposal would affect), would have any professional contacts with those who would be lobbied, i.e. members of Congress.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 18 April 2011, 01:38 AM
damian's Avatar
damian damian is offline
 
Join Date: 14 April 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,270
Default

If the entire US Congress worked for free, the money saved coukld be used to cut the deficit in, like, a million years. I don't think this would be the first place I'd look to be cutting costs.

And if the salary of the President was zero, people would still spend $100 million dollars campaigning for the position.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 18 April 2011, 01:32 PM
Steve Eisenberg Steve Eisenberg is offline
 
Join Date: 15 October 2001
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 11,841
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnglRdr View Post
Since I am a very low level Executive Branch employee, it would be very unlikely that I, or any of my peers (which is a lot of people your proposal would affect), would have any professional contacts with those who would be lobbied, i.e. members of Congress.
Then why would an environmental lobbying organization hire you? I would think that competition to get jobs with environmental lobbying organizations is very great.

A more realistic scenario is that next week you are put on a committee to evaluate vendors that propose to revolutionize the efficiency of your workgroup at high cost. Then if you are really nice to them, a few years from now, they hire you to explain, to other organizations, what a great product they have. Then after the one or two year cooling off period, depending on exactly what your role was in procurements, you can be back working with your old colleagues from the committee, who will act in a way to follow in your lucrative footsteps.

Or you are put on a committee relocate your office building, and after an environmental group sees you agreeing with all their ideas that are going to increase the cost of the new building, they then hire you to make the same kind of pitches to similar low-level committees. The people on these low-level committees are are new to you, and don't imagine they could follow your career path. But you have a few key construction management civil service friends in Washington who you got to know in their oversight role regarding the committee you were on, and who wish they could one day get the great job you now have, and will act accordingly.


It is true that the environmental scenario is less likely than the business process reengineering scenario, probably because there are more people trying to sell goods and services via low level civil servants than to lobby them on policy.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Union salaries in Wisconsin snopes Inboxer Rebellion 43 08 March 2011 09:10 PM
Who says the government can't do anything right? snopes Inboxer Rebellion 20 29 October 2010 08:16 PM
Etymology of 'government' snopes Language 24 19 September 2010 08:51 AM
Keep your government hands off my Medicare! snopes Questionable Quotes 12 14 August 2009 12:06 AM
USPS conspiracy to lower rural carrier salaries snopes Business 4 28 December 2007 02:09 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.