Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 52
Thanks Tree22Thanks

Thread: Ohio Issue 2

  1. #21
    "Mr. Original". the watchman's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    76,534
    Thanks
    39587

    From
    becoming more and more
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    We had the same issue here in California back in November. It failed. It was backed by Bernie Sanders. The prevailing argument said that it would hurt veterans because drug companies would respond by charging the VA more so that the base price would be higher. Others opposed it simply because it involved government interfering with a market.
    why is Bernie Sanders poking his nose into what goes on in California?
    Thanks from Friday13

  2. #22
    quichierbichen
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    61,954
    Thanks
    33627

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt Sands View Post
    Did you say more than half of our Congress are millionaires did you say more than half of our Congress are millionaires? Yeah that's what I read.
    ter offi
    Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
    Right. But so what? Smart, educated people who stand out enough to get elected to Congress are mostly better off. You would expect different?

  3. #23
    quichierbichen
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    61,954
    Thanks
    33627

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt Sands View Post
    Are you saying congressmen need to be millionaires so they are not involved in stealing and Corruption?
    I'm saying they have to be compensated at least reasonably well if we expect them not to sell their offices, yes. The honesty of actual humans knows its limits, and penury is one of its enemies.
    You also mentioned how their skills with transfer to the private sector where they would also make millions. Why would they steal it from the public if they can get it from the private sector.
    They don't. But they might if we did not pay them reasonably well.
    Maybe we should pay our Congressman $2,000,000 a year on the basis that they would not become correct because they make so much money.
    I don't think that's reasonable. But we have to pay them enough to support two households, one in their district and one in Washington. We have to pay for them to move back and forth between them. And we have to provide the kinds of non-cash compensation that is customary for full-time, contracted workers.

    I guess if you wanted to pay them $2 million/year, they could buy their own insurance, but I doubt that health insurance for them costs more than $20-30K/year, even with a family.

  4. #24
    New Member
    Joined
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    382
    Thanks
    115

    From
    US
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    Right. But so what? Smart, educated people who stand out enough to get elected to Congress are mostly better off. You would expect different?
    It has something to do with electing a ruling class. Aristocrats. Oligarchs. The content of your character is not defined by your bank accounts. Let them go get that private-sector job. Good riddance and have a nice life.


    Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
    Thanks from MaryAnne and bajisima

  5. #25
    New Member
    Joined
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    382
    Thanks
    115

    From
    US
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    I'm saying they have to be compensated at least reasonably well if we expect them not to sell their offices, yes. The honesty of actual humans knows its limits, and penury is one of its enemies.
    They don't. But they might if we did not pay them reasonably well. I don't think that's reasonable. But we have to pay them enough to support two households, one in their district and one in Washington. We have to pay for them to move back and forth between them. And we have to provide the kinds of non-cash compensation that is customary for full-time, contracted workers.

    I guess if you wanted to pay them $2 million/year, they could buy their own insurance, but I doubt that health insurance for them costs more than $20-30K/year, even with a family.
    Boo who. They picked the wrong career. It sounds like you're saying two different things. One that they have to be millionaires to be elected and two once they are elected in that they need to be paid enough to be millionaires. I'm sorry you don't believe in electing your peers. You're actually defending a ruling class. I'm speechless.

    Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
    Thanks from bajisima

  6. #26
    quichierbichen
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    61,954
    Thanks
    33627

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt Sands View Post
    It has something to do with electing a ruling class. Aristocrats. Oligarchs. The content of your character is not defined by your bank accounts. Let them go get that private-sector job. Good riddance and have a nice life.
    And yet our system is designed to empower aristocrats. The design of our government has if anything moved AWAY from autocracy with the 17th amendment, for example. Hard to keep wealthy people from spending their money in a capitalist nation--and we've always been that.

    You don't know the content of any politician's character. That's an illusion.

    And you think you've proven some point by showing that 55% or so of congress members are millionaires. Again, so what? That means a whopping 45% percent AREN'T wealthy. That's pretty good in any system of actual humans rather than theoretical ones. You seem confused. You want rich people out of government, but you aren't willing to pay anyone what their skills deserve to serve in government. That's illogical.
    Thanks from MaryAnne

  7. #27
    quichierbichen
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    61,954
    Thanks
    33627

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by Dirt Sands View Post
    Boo who. They picked the wrong career. It sounds like you're saying two different things. One that they have to be millionaires to be elected and two once they are elected in that they need to be paid enough to be millionaires. I'm sorry you don't believe in electing your peers. You're actually defending a ruling class. I'm speechless.
    If you think that's what I said, you're confused. And I'm not defending a ruling class--the original point was whether members of congress should get fringe benefits, like any other high-value employee in the US. You've done nothing to address what I've said on that score except to claim--strangely--that somehow good people of modest means should give up their incomes and double their expenses in order to serve in government. Who makes that calculus? I don't care how good your character, no one can personally afford such a move. You think people in Congress should be mendicant monks, living off whatever people put in their alms bowls?

  8. #28
    quichierbichen
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    61,954
    Thanks
    33627

    From
    in my head
    Quote Originally Posted by the watchman View Post
    why is Bernie Sanders poking his nose into what goes on in California?
    I think the organizers of the initiative thought his public support would help win votes.

  9. #29
    "Mr. Original". the watchman's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    76,534
    Thanks
    39587

    From
    becoming more and more
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    I think the organizers of the initiative thought his public support would help win votes.
    dumb move.

  10. #30
    Veteran Member MaryAnne's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    45,272
    Thanks
    32167

    From
    Englewood,Ohio
    Yes,I have very clear thoughts. The man behind this has lied many times in his ads,going so far as to show the CEO
    Quote Originally Posted by Blueneck View Post
    Any thoughts on this?



    Doesn't sound so bad to me, but the commercials urging voters to reject it make it seem like it was written by Satan himself.

    What is Issue 2?
    Yes, blueneck, I have many thoughts on this.

    The man behind this has been involved in lawsuit after lawsuit. Lied in his ads,even put the CEO of Cleveland Clinic in one to make it appear he approved. Had to remove that.

    I listened to the CEO just last week and knew that was untrue.

    The money from this will go straight into Weinstein pocket.

    Man behind Ohio ballot issue wants debate with drugmaker | NBC4i.com

    You should google,there are many articles from both sides, so study them carefully.

    I am voting no. I want Congress to do something about drug prices. Not this guy.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 1st June 2017, 12:53 PM
  2. The people of Ohio notch a win over the Ohio GOP...
    By NightSwimmer in forum Current Events
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 25th May 2016, 12:47 PM
  3. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 18th October 2015, 06:38 AM
  4. Ohio Collective Bargaining Law: Fight Over Issue 2 Ends Tuesday
    By jackalope in forum Political Ideologies
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 7th November 2011, 02:29 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed