If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   The more you pay a politician, the less work they do   (theguardian.com) divider line 40
    More: Obvious, EU institutions, percent increase  
•       •       •

1232 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Dec 2013 at 5:12 AM (39 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



40 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-12-14 10:29:34 PM
Thats Motivation 101

You can't pay them too much but you can't pay them not enough. You need to find a balance betwixt them.
 
2013-12-14 10:43:49 PM
Because they can now afford that second home in Spain.  Der.
 
2013-12-14 10:45:16 PM
Wait... they could do less?
 
2013-12-14 11:24:03 PM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Wait... they could do less?


Actually, no.  The metric was number of meetings attended.  So, they still do nothing, they just don't bother to pretend.
 
2013-12-15 12:30:52 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Wait... they could do less?

Actually, no.  The metric was number of meetings attended.  So, they still do nothing, they just don't bother to pretend.


It's easier to look busy than to be productive.
 
2013-12-15 01:02:57 AM
So, the "backward bending supply curve of labour" applies in politics, too? Cool.

Of course, while you may be able to get less work out of them, pay raises may still be worth doing if it can help reduce the level of corruptive influence from other revenue streams. However, I'm not certain that's the case.
 
2013-12-15 02:01:02 AM
So we should be Teddy Cruz more and he'll actually shut up?
 
2013-12-15 05:15:57 AM
Yeah, but the less you pay them, the more they steal. Hurp. Durp.

Remember, my little willful ignorati:
"GOVERNMENT: Always malevolent. Always incompetent. Always omnipotent. Always your enemy."

You just tell that there teachin' lady that's the only civics y'all need to know.
 
2013-12-15 05:18:16 AM
This is what you want, right?

I think I'd be inclined to vote for the politician who promised to do not a damn thing.
 
2013-12-15 06:18:02 AM
I find that rule applies to most professions.
 
2013-12-15 06:29:50 AM
There was an article a few months back about how the most highly paid professions are the ones that, if no one did those jobs anymore, few would notice.

Trust fund managers, advertising executives, HR managers.. wouldn't really be missed.

Janitors?  Yeah, people would noticed if they didn't come in.
 
2013-12-15 06:40:43 AM
When you pay them less they work much harder...finding other ways to expand their incomes through per diems, reimbursements, consulting gigs and pro bono amateur intern proctology.
 
2013-12-15 06:58:55 AM
Pay them too little and they might be easier to bribe, pay them too much and then they can not relate to the problems of the average citizen.

That noted, I reject the notion that politicians pay must raise in order to make them more in line with their corporate counterparts who's pay scale has gone all out of whack in recent years.
 
2013-12-15 07:24:44 AM
When I buy a Congress, I expect them to do nothing. I don't want anything that might change my bottom line.
 
2013-12-15 07:36:10 AM

cman: Thats Motivation 101

You can't pay them too much but you can't pay them not enough. You need to find a balance betwixt them.


upload.wikimedia.org
Awesome.

upload.wikimedia.org
Not bad, but the original's best.
 
2013-12-15 07:55:59 AM

rzrwiresunrise: Awesome.


Silly Wabbit, Twix are for kids!

/I am so, so very sorry for that.
//Tried to resist but failed.
///*Throws himself on mercy of the Fark court*
 
2013-12-15 08:45:47 AM
So the government and the private sector have something in common,  I see.
 
2013-12-15 09:12:27 AM
Stupid premise.  As if politician pay was anything more than token to them.  Barring the occasional exception, your average politician is already rich.  They spend their own money pushing their campaigns along as the law allows them, and in ways it doesn't but nobody bothers to check.  Then when they're elected, they hand out cushy deals paid with our tax dollars to cronies.  You ever wonder why one of the richest countries in the world was running a deficit, had shiatty healthcare and schools?  It's because your pockets are being picked to pad the pockets that are already the deepest.  Less than twenty bucks of your yearly tax dollars goes to pay for food for poor people, but more than six hundred goes to subsidize already profitable corporations.

We are being robbed blind.  This is why campaign finance reform is so damned critical.  This is also why it will never happen.
 
2013-12-15 09:16:06 AM

quatchi: rzrwiresunrise: Awesome.

Silly Wabbit, Twix are for kids!

/I am so, so very sorry for that.
//Tried to resist but failed.
///*Throws himself on mercy of the Fark court*


dailybunny.typepad.com
 
2013-12-15 09:32:28 AM
We could try paying them at a scaling rate to GDP growth for the two year period. Want more money? Make more jobs.

Then publicly fund elections to cut out the biggest problem.
 
2013-12-15 09:46:12 AM

Mr. Coffee Nerves: When you pay them less they work much harder...finding other ways to expand their incomes through per diems, reimbursements, consulting gigs and pro bono amateur intern proctology.


Don't forget the speaking tours and lining up lobbying jobs after retirement.
 
2013-12-15 09:47:13 AM
They should be paid inversely based on the distance to their constituents. Those from far away should receive less that those down the street.
Oh, and their vote should be based on how much they earn.
 
2013-12-15 09:57:32 AM

abb3w: So, the "backward bending supply curve of labour" applies in politics, too? Cool.

Of course, while you may be able to get less work out of them, pay raises may still be worth doing if it can help reduce the level of corruptive influence from other revenue streams. However, I'm not certain that's the case.


That combined with limiting corporate executive pay through ratios and shareholder votes might do some wonders.
 
2013-12-15 10:10:45 AM
Linking pay with percentage of votes might help gerrymandering.
 
2013-12-15 10:28:52 AM

quatchi: rzrwiresunrise: Awesome.

Silly Wabbit, Twix are for kids!

/I am so, so very sorry for that.
//Tried to resist but failed.
///*Throws himself on mercy of the Fark court*



You've just been double-favorited.

s3.amazonaws.com
 
2013-12-15 10:40:02 AM
The more you pour water on something the wetter it gets
 
2013-12-15 11:22:00 AM
Well, functionally speaking, *we* don't pay them; they pay themselves with our money.
 
2013-12-15 11:25:15 AM
This just in!!! Criminals are lazy deadbeats!!!
 
2013-12-15 12:25:43 PM

abb3w: So, the "backward bending supply curve of labour" applies in politics, too? Cool.


Well, the interesting thing here is that was made with hourly workers in mind, not salaried workers - whose pay is always decoupled from the hours worked.
 
2013-12-15 12:49:49 PM
This means that there are obvious advantages to paying them  more. Keep them busy with golf and vacations,  and they will have far less time to harm us.
 
2013-12-15 01:18:29 PM
This sort of thing happens in the private sector too
 
2013-12-15 01:49:48 PM

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: We could try paying them at a scaling rate to GDP growth for the two year period. Want more money? Make more jobs.

Then publicly fund elections to cut out the biggest problem.


Whoa, that's making too much sense. It's Sunday, you know.
 
2013-12-15 02:30:26 PM
Getting a pretty crappy ROI from Congress right now...
 
2013-12-15 02:38:53 PM

Cpl.D: Stupid premise.  As if politician pay was anything more than token to them.  Barring the occasional exception, your average politician is already rich.  They spend their own money pushing their campaigns along as the law allows them, and in ways it doesn't but nobody bothers to check.  Then when they're elected, they hand out cushy deals paid with our tax dollars to cronies.  You ever wonder why one of the richest countries in the world was running a deficit, had shiatty healthcare and schools?  It's because your pockets are being picked to pad the pockets that are already the deepest.  Less than twenty bucks of your yearly tax dollars goes to pay for food for poor people, but more than six hundred goes to subsidize already profitable corporations.

We are being robbed blind.  This is why campaign finance reform is so damned critical.  This is also why it will never happen.


Then what caused the sudden increase or decrease in participation (attending meetings and asking questions) that researchers in the article saw when the pay was suddenly changed?
 
2013-12-15 03:11:08 PM
The more you pay an politician american, the less work they do.


True.  that's the entire point of our system, to rise to the level of doing little/nothing and getting paid a bundle to do it.

stockholders love sitting on their monthly dividends.  beats the hell out of working for it.


finding a way to live off someone else's labor is the Apex of success in America.
 
2013-12-15 04:01:01 PM
Politicians aren't there to earn a paycheck. THEY WANT RECOGNITION AND POWER

Most of them are rich anyway so a bigger paycheck is not going to satisfy their megalomania.
 
2013-12-15 05:46:13 PM

Linux_Yes: finding a way to live off someone else's labor is the Apex of success in America.


Do you grow your own food?
 
2013-12-15 07:56:25 PM

evil saltine: Linux_Yes: finding a way to live off someone else's labor is the Apex of success in America.

Do you grow your own food?


He's a level five vegan. Only things that have come out of him may enter him.
 
2013-12-15 11:47:53 PM

quatchi: Pay them too little and they might be easier to bribe, pay them too much and then they can not relate to the problems of the average citizen.

That noted, I reject the notion that politicians pay must raise in order to make them more in line with their corporate counterparts who's pay scale has gone all out of whack in recent years.


Median income is about $50K. Fine, give 'em a 50% advantange of $75K.

Obviously, the death penalty as the punishment for taking bribes.

/death penalty for nobody else, however
//seriously
///better to spend less subsidizing a killer w/life w/out parole than a corrupt politician
 
2013-12-16 02:38:23 PM
Actually that is the way it is in the American economy in general. The more you make, the less actual work you do. That money is for your expertise and availability. Let the plebs grunt.


/this is a true statement.
 
Displayed 40 of 40 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report