How much do you think politicians should get paid?

[graffic]

So I gather most of you have been viewing the recent media sabotage on MP's, led by the daily telegraph, for their expenses claims.

Basically MP's have been milking the system in order to claim more money on top of their £60,000 - a year salaries. Many have been caught red handed in claiming for second homes that they don't actually live in.

The first problem is greed. Not all MP's have engaged in the dubious behavior and the motivation is primarily to make more money.

However if you look at the finance sector and most of the profit seeking business world this practice is standard and happens on a far worse scale.

Many people think it is because MP's get a relatively low income. For many MP's they could quite easily move sideways and become a lawyer and earn 10 times as much money.

This is also a time for toxic anti-politics which the populist right will love. Voter apathy, which continues to sink further, suits big business heads like Rupert Murdoch because it is easier for him to persuade politicians to back him.

[Lynx]

In Canada, politicians should not be paid more than $20,000.00 per year.

[Die Neue Zeit]

Comrade, that I think is a wee bit unfair for the lot. Most clerical workers and professional workers get paid a whole lot more than that. The Paris Commune's maximum re. skilled workers still applies, though. :)

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Two cents, before tax.

In Texas, our senators and congressmen are considered part-time employees; they technically get paid about $1,000 a month. Compared to the federal alternative, it's acceptable.

[Lynx]

Given the number of hours they work, and the level of effort and skills required, $20,000.00 sounds fair to me.

[bellyscratch]

Whatever the average workers wage is...

[graffic]

Well the average wage in the UK right now is around £30,000,

The only problem is that corruption in politics would undoubtedly increase and politics would probably not attract the most able people.

[Pogue]

They shouldn't exist.

:)

[Lord Testicles]

Politicians should get paid the value of what they are paid now in bullets and it should be delivered to them post-haste via the barrel of an AK47. :lol:

[Lynx]

Two cents, before tax.

In Texas, our senators and congressmen are considered part-time employees; they technically get paid about $1,000 a month. Compared to the federal alternative, it's acceptable.
What is the federal alternative?

[Die Neue Zeit]

Two cents, before tax.

In Texas, our senators and congressmen are considered part-time employees; they technically get paid about $1,000 a month. Compared to the federal alternative, it's acceptable.


So what would you make of these historic demands, then?

http://www.archive.org/download/EisenachProgram/725_socDemWorkersParty_230.pdf

"The elected parliamentary deputies are to be granted adequate per diem pay."

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/reviprog/ch04.htm

"Salaries to be paid to the people’s representatives"

[Bud Struggle]

The problem is that if you keep the wages of politicians too low only the rich will be able to afford to be politicians. Actually for the most part that's the case now. Where I live we had a race for State Representitive and the guy who won (Republican) put in $350,000 of his own money. That's just not something most people could afford.

And that's only for the stinking state legislature.

[Black_Flag]

One bullet in the head...:D

[F9]

One bullet in the head...:D

I call that a waste of a good functioning bullet!

[Black_Flag]

I call that a waste of a good functioning bullet!

Hahaha, good thinking. Lets just pay them nothing and let the fuckers starve!

[Steve_j]

Minimum wage!!!! Lets see those fuckers try live in london on £5.73 an hr. Then maybe their own self interest can be used to benifit the working class.

[danyboy27]

the problem with paying politician a shit salary is that they are far more easy to corupt than they where before.

right now, it may seem corrupted, but cap their salary to lets say the minimum wage, and your gonna have verry powerful people giving them pitful sum of money in exchange of big favor.

so far, the fact that they are well paid limit the kind of people who can corrupt them.

in the actual system, the shit system, we dont have really much choice but to give them big money, otherwise you gonna have the mob and other criminal groups infiltratred into the deep sphere of the governement, if you think capitalist is shit right now, go in russia figure out what it could look like with powerful mobster dragging people out of their house in the middle of the night to shot them in the brain beccause they talked too much.

[Revy]

$50,000 a year seems reasonable.

[swampfox]

$50,000 tops plus transportation and housing expenses paid for by the government.

[Cult of Reason]

The median wage of their country. NOT mean (average), MEDIAN. That way, they have an incentive to improve equality. If that is too low :rolleyes: (UK median is what, £17k? UK MPs currently get £60k), then how about 3 or 4 times the median?

[RGacky3]

Nothing, being a politician should'nt be a job.

[NecroCommie]

Nothing, being a politician should'nt be a job.
Agreed.

In a capitalist society being a politician is just talking about how fun capitalism is, and what is the best way to increase capital. In no way is it productive, let alone productive enough to earn such wages. Representing your community to the best of your ability is a duty, not a priviledge.

[Die Neue Zeit]

The median wage of their country. NOT mean (average), MEDIAN. That way, they have an incentive to improve equality. If that is too low :rolleyes: (UK median is what, £17k? UK MPs currently get £60k), then how about 3 or 4 times the median?

Ah, this morning I flirted with the possibility of amending my programmatic musings to explicitly mention mean wages.

Perhaps you should elaborate upon this more. In the meantime, please do consider a weighted mean.

[danyboy27]

$50,000 tops plus transportation and housing expenses paid for by the government.

seem reasonable, but watch out, some personnal expense might include a bathtub or other expensive goodies.

[Raúl Duke]

In Puerto Rico pragmatically things should be like:

They should get payed the average (mean/median whatever) wage, are unable to give themselves a raise, should have minimal to none police escort, and unable to abuse certain benefits (i.e. they can get things payed to them by the government like gasoline and other services, as long as they use it for official business; if it ain't for official business then no no no.).

However, it obviously is not like this (it's the opposite, politicians here are very corrupt).

[ZeroNowhere]

Somewhere between $0 and -$1.482.

[graffic]

So far the self-proclaimed communists have suggested either

a)shooting politicians
b)starving them
or c) paying them the average wage or below but then, er, corruption will probably happen so , er... just shoot the fuckers!

[graffic]

Do any of the marxist "intellectuals" have a decent or insightful comment to make? No, I didn't think so.

[danyboy27]

Do any of the marxist "intellectuals" have a decent or insightful comment to make? No, I didn't think so.

i think its beccause the way people interpreted your question that there is so many answer like the one you just mentionned.

Many communist dont accept the system we have right now and devote a lot of their free time hating the system, if you ask those folks how much a politician should be paid, they dont really think for a second that a politician is on their side, they never been really represented by nobody at all, so to them politician are nothing but crap.

but basicly, politician would exsist even in an anarchist society, we will vote to electe those we judge worthy of fufilling the task, the only difference will be that we will have power to change those who fail at the time. the whole scale level is verry important to consider, the massive electoral system we have right now avoid us to have people that really represent us, its just a big freaking monster right now, a structure so complicated and so heavy, its not really representative. its functionnal, but its far from being optimal.

i think politician should be rewarded when they come up with a good idea, or a good plan, and should have important sanction when they fail.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Do any of the marxist "intellectuals" have a decent or insightful comment to make? No, I didn't think so.

Getting rid of unnecessary authority is a lot more meaningful than talking about how we should reward the masters' puppets.

[danyboy27]

Getting rid of unnecessary authority is a lot more meaningful than talking about how we should reward the masters' puppets.

i dont see how sumary execution is actually meaningful.

[Bud Struggle]

Does anyone have a clue here about how complicated it is to run a city or a municipality? Do you have any idea what goes into making you toilet flush or having that stoplight work?

Yea, there some crooks--but on the whole there are a lot of really decent people that deserve a decent wage for getting lots of complicated things done on a regular basis without a hitch.

These people deserve to be compensated for their work. You people have any idea what goes into widening a road or puting in a water line? It's lots and lots of very tedious and time consuming work and one screw up and all hell breakes loose.

Yea, there's fat cat Senators and MP's, but 95% of elected officials do a good job with little or no recognition. And further--these folks are talented and don't look for higher office and don't look for big bucks. Some are crooks--but most are good stewarts of the public trust.

(I never was one--but a know a couple of these guys.)

[Comrade Anarchist]

the same as every janitor that works in the government

[Bandito]

Rope is basically free.

[Bud Struggle]

the same as every janitor that works in the government

No. The job of a janitor is reactive--you clog up ther toilet he cleans ups the mess and unclogs it. Planning a city for 10, 20, 30 in the future takes skill.

He definitely should be paid more.

[commyrebel]

nothing because the should be no currency

[GracchusBabeuf]

Abolish politicians!

[Comrade Anarchist]

No. The job of a janitor is reactive--you clog up ther toilet he cleans ups the mess and unclogs it. Planning a city for 10, 20, 30 in the future takes skill.

He definitely should be paid more.


Yah but it is a "public service" job so they should work to help all for little to no pay. And yes planning a city takes skill but so does being a worker that cleans like a slave.

[swampfox]

seem reasonable, but watch out, some personnal expense might include a bathtub or other expensive goodies.

Their housing would have to be a middle class, government owned house. Not the huge mansions and condos they have now. If they want the power, they have to sacrifice some luxuries.

[Die Neue Zeit]

So far the self-proclaimed communists have suggested either

a)shooting politicians
b)starving them
or c) paying them the average wage or below but then, er, corruption will probably happen so , er... just shoot the fuckers!

Ever heard of the Paris Commune? :rolleyes:


Does anyone have a clue here about how complicated it is to run a city or a municipality? Do you have any idea what goes into making you toilet flush or having that stoplight work?

Yea, there some crooks--but on the whole there are a lot of really decent people that deserve a decent wage for getting lots of complicated things done on a regular basis without a hitch.

These people deserve to be compensated for their work. You people have any idea what goes into widening a road or puting in a water line? It's lots and lots of very tedious and time consuming work and one screw up and all hell breakes loose.

Yea, there's fat cat Senators and MP's, but 95% of elected officials do a good job with little or no recognition. And further--these folks are talented and don't look for higher office and don't look for big bucks. Some are crooks--but most are good stewarts of the public trust.

(I never was one--but a know a couple of these guys.)

Tom, I'd like to cut past the caricatures presented by some posters in this thread. The Paris Commune had its public officials - politicians and bureaucrats - on wages no more than those of skilled workers. Eco-Marxist suggested $50,000 in 2009 US dollars, which does take into account what you've said above (re. skilled work).

[RGacky3]

Do you have any idea what goes into making you toilet flush or having that stoplight work?


Politicians don't.


Some are crooks--but most are good stewarts of the public trust.


Does'nt justify power.

[Bud Struggle]

Tom, I'd like to cut past the caricatures presented by some posters in this thread. The Paris Commune had its public officials - politicians and bureaucrats - on wages no more than those of skilled workers. Eco-Marxist suggested $50,000 in 2009 US dollars, which does take into account what you've said above (re. skilled work).

That's entirely reasonable--I think. In this present society these skills are worth a certain amount of money because there is a scarcity of good public administrators, so their skills are on the auction block. Maybe good plumbers are in greater supply so they might be paid a bit less. But the idea is fair.

[eyedrop]

If it absolutely shows itself necessary to have professional politicians, I find myself rather attracted to demarchy for administrative groups and direct democracy for controversial decisions, they should get the mean wage.

Much of the politicians we have now is extremely useless at their fields, politicians aren't appointed on merit of their skills, but rather on their ability to play the political game.

Here we have a Health- and Careminister who believes in warm hands and healing, he must be damned qualified to make decisions regarding hospitals. Not to mention that he just gave a gigantic contract to a crook of a pharmaceutical company for swine flu vacinations against the advice of most experts. I can see the political advantage of doing it, after the media have done it's best to stirr up hysteria, but not the medical.

Anyway if it's shows itself to be necessary, screw the pharmaceutical companies and their patents, and just make it ourselfes at a fraction of the cost.

[graffic]

Getting rid of unnecessary authority is a lot more meaningful than talking about how we should reward the masters' puppets.

What is "necessary" authority?

Capitalism sucks and people continue to exploit power. They always will. But you think the decision of a local plumber to take out a toilet should be discussed on a round table with every persons opinion weighed equally?

[eyedrop]

What is "necessary" authority?

Capitalism sucks and people continue to exploit power. They always will. But you think the decision of a local plumber to take out a toilet should be discussed on a round table with every persons opinion weighed equally?
In short no.

Do we really need to dig up the quote which goes somewhat like; "When I need to repair my shoe, I refer to the authority of a shoemaker."

[Bud Struggle]

In short no.

"When I need to repair my shoe, I refer to the authority of a shoemaker."

Sounds Stalinist! :D

Also--great quote by your "king" in your sig line. :thumbup:

[Lynx]

Conclusion: the masses are incapable of governing themselves.

[Cult of Reason]

Does anyone have a clue here about how complicated it is to run a city or a municipality? Do you have any idea what goes into making you toilet flush or having that stoplight work?

MPs do not do any of that. You may be thinking of the civil service.

[RGacky3]

Sounds Stalinist

Not at all, it sounds common sense.

The point was you don't need authority to have responsibility. If a guy is good at reparing shoes, he does'nt need the authority to repair shoes, people will just trust that he'll do a good job, and if he does'nt then chances are they won't trust him.

What is it about capitalists not understanding basic common sense.


But you think the decision of a local plumber to take out a toilet should be discussed on a round table with every persons opinion weighed equally?

How many non plumbers do you think would argue with a plumber about plumbing matters, what are you talking about???

[Bud Struggle]

Conclusion: the masses are incapable of governing themselves.

That's really the bottom line, isn't it? Are they are aren't they able to govern themselves?

[RGacky3]

That's really the bottom line, isn't it? Are they are aren't they able to govern themselves?

the really question is how much gobernance is nessesary? (Much less than there is now), and for that governance is any innate authority nessesary? (I doubt it, I have yet to be given an example).

Also, if the "masses" cannot "govern" themselves, why would you trust one or a couple out of those masses to govern them?

The truth is governments have never grown out of public nessesity, they have always grown out of class systems and oppression.

[Dejavu]

The question is misleading.

Can I also ask how much do you think is a 'fair' amount these people rob you for?

Robbery creates no value thus there is no determination of how much robbery is worth.

[Invariance]

Generally when politicians become...politicians, i.e. leave their former work, they often "suffer" from a wage reduction, since they earn more in the private sector than as a paid MP. Isn't it odd that people see it as wrong that a politician gets paid so much yet in all probabilities their own boss earns far more? The difference being that it is explicitly clear to workers that they pay for their politicians, yet less clear that the working class create their bosses' wealth.

[graffic]

the really question is how much gobernance is nessesary? (Much less than there is now), and for that governance is any innate authority nessesary? (I doubt it, I have yet to be given an example).

Also, if the "masses" cannot "govern" themselves, why would you trust one or a couple out of those masses to govern them?

The truth is governments have never grown out of public nessesity, they have always grown out of class systems and oppression.

hmm I believe in the civil service playing a larger role.

And I agree that governments have grown out of class systems and oppression. If you think about it becoming a politician is essentially down to how good you are at public speaking. In terms of knowledge and wisdom I reckon most people on the street have the same capability as politicians. It's whether you have the confidence to stand up in front of a room of people and project what you think in a rhetorical way. I think confidence and self-esteem is strongly linked to how you are brought up. If your parents discourage you to express opinions or you suffer bullying or anything you are less likely to be good at public speaking. So the political career is much more suited to wealthy elites because of the un-equal society we live in.

It's also true that in fee paying schools here in the U.K they try and make students into leaders and encourage speaking out.

[Lynx]

That's really the bottom line, isn't it? Are they are aren't they able to govern themselves?
Yes, this is a fundamental requirement.

Also, if the "masses" cannot "govern" themselves, why would you trust one or a couple out of those masses to govern them?
Good question. I suppose when we're paying them a shit load of money we have a tendency to believe we're getting our money's worth.
Other possibilities: charisma, deference to authority or expertise, apathy, fear, cynicism.

[Cynical Observer]

they should be paid in bullets traveling rapidly towards their skulls :thumbup1:

[Jazzratt]

If you must have them alive, they should be paid national minimum wage be granted no expenses and audited twice a year to ensure there is no funny business. If they feel they do not get paid enough they have three options:

1) Get a real job.
2) Raise the national minimum wage.
3) Introduce further benefits to help low earners.

None of which are particularly bad, right?

[eyedrop]

Sounds Stalinist! :D

Also--great quote by your "king" in your sig line. :thumbup:

That quote is just to symbolize how little a danger electoral communists are, and how short they sit when they form government.

[Rosa Provokateur]

They wanna make more, let 'em get a second job. I'm tired of politicians being paid more than they're worth. The fact that the president gets a life-long paycheck just for being president pisses me off.

[RGacky3]

hmm I believe in the civil service playing a larger role.

playing a larger role does'nt not equal needing more authority.

However if I'd have to choose from being told by a Capitalist, over whome I have no influence (unelss I make a lot more money), or a politician, over whome I at least have a vote, I choose a politician, but I would prefer not having to answer to anyone.


If you think about it becoming a politician is essentially down to how good you are at public speaking. In terms of knowledge and wisdom I reckon most people on the street have the same capability as politicians. It's whether you have the confidence to stand up in front of a room of people and project what you think in a rhetorical way. I think confidence and self-esteem is strongly linked to how you are brought up. If your parents discourage you to express opinions or you suffer bullying or anything you are less likely to be good at public speaking. So the political career is much more suited to wealthy elites because of the un-equal society we live in.


Not so much, it also has a lot to do with your being able to balance public image with what you have to do as a politician (keep the ruling class happy), also EXTREAMLY flexible morals and a dedication to being pragmatic at the expense of the semi-principles you talk about in your speaches. Also keeping your semi-principles obscure enough to where you can get away with it. Essencially, sophism.


they should be paid in bullets traveling rapidly towards their skulls :thumbup1:

HELL YEAH BRO, high five.:rolleyes:

[Dust Bunnies]

It depends, if the politician is some rich guy like John McCain, Barack Obama, Mayor Bloomburg, or Governor Corzine then nothing, consider it public service. If the guy is your average joe then give him the average salary for workers, that will put him into gear to increase wages.

[redarmyfaction38]

So I gather most of you have been viewing the recent media sabotage on MP's, led by the daily telegraph, for their expenses claims.

Basically MP's have been milking the system in order to claim more money on top of their £60,000 - a year salaries. Many have been caught red handed in claiming for second homes that they don't actually live in.

The first problem is greed. Not all MP's have engaged in the dubious behavior and the motivation is primarily to make more money.

However if you look at the finance sector and most of the profit seeking business world this practice is standard and happens on a far worse scale.

Many people think it is because MP's get a relatively low income. For many MP's they could quite easily move sideways and become a lawyer and earn 10 times as much money.

This is also a time for toxic anti-politics which the populist right will love. Voter apathy, which continues to sink further, suits big business heads like Rupert Murdoch because it is easier for him to persuade politicians to back him.
politicians are supposed to represent the people that elect them.
give them the minimum wage plus legitimate expenses as decided by the public.
watch how quickly they become interested in the plight of workers subsisting on the minimum wage.

[Dyslexia! Well I Never!]

This is conceived for application to the UK system but it's basic points reflect my views on the matter.

This idea is something myself and Jazzratt have talked about on and off for about 3 years.

Politicians should be paid the the lowest common income of the people in their constituency/country. that's who they are ment to understand and make decision in the best interests of. Just cut the purse strings and watch them squirm as the gravy train rolls off and they have smell the shit they've collectively taken on the world.

What's more, this fucking expenses bullshit can be uttlerly scrapped the common worker/commuter doesn't get paid to go to travel to work no matter how many homes he has. Why should a politician? (To be fair many of them are OAPs and thus eligible for free/discounted bus travel well in England anyway.)

Then sit back and watch how quickly they either erase the massive cock they've drawn on politics and socio-economics or they quit and we can install a more rational and intelligent systems of government.