If citizens actually had free choice in which government programs to fund as well as how much to contribute, the size of the US government (measured both in revenue and power over the people) would be 1/10 the size of today's utter monstrosity.
And if citizens literally had to cut a check at the beginning of every year, rather than pay through deliberately-obfuscated systems designed to hide the true cost of government, the size of government would be cut again by 90%.
This is one of those forwards that your crazy uncle sends you all the time. Unlike "Lets not buy gas on 9/11", this one actually makes a bit of sense. - 1. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office. [You are paid X for being in 'full session'. If you show up to 50% of sessions, you get 50% pay.]
2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.
3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work. - I like the way that Indiana does it. "The Senate convenes its annual session the first Tuesday following the first Monday of January every year. In odd numbered years the senate must meet for 61 days (not necessarily consecutive days), and must adjourn no later than April 30. This is typically called a long session. In even numbered years, when elections are held, the Senate must meet for 30 days (not necessarily consecutive days) and adjourn no later than March 15."
There should be no such thing as a "career politician".
... the result being that Congressmen will be people who either are independently wealthy, or are doing backdoor deals which will get them lots of pay, benefits, and retirement money.
Of course that happens anyway, but you really don't want to encourage it even more.
Start giving law enforcement bonuses for every politician they throw in prison. That approach works so well in the private sector I'm sure that there could be no negative effects if we include it in law enforcement.
Yeah, I think Congressmen make more than the average salary. Independently wealthy would have to take a pay cut to get in there, most average people would get a pay raise.
2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
They've been doing this since the 80's. Not sure if I see the point in having Congressmen who paid into the previous system get switched at this late date; it disrupts predictability (people planned for their retirement according to assumptions that you'd now retroactively upset), and many of them are probably retired from Congress already, so it's not as though this can be used to pressure them into doing anything to help everyone who pays into Social Security out of self interest.
5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
Let's really go for representation. Why not get rid of the election of representatives. *gasp* What you say. Anti-democratic. You betcha!
Democracy is 51% telling the other 49% what to do, a.k.a. two wolves and a sheep deciding who will be dinner. Liberty being a well-armed sheep. Anyways...
Instead of voting, we draft people to Congress. Similar to jury-duty. For 2 years you find yourself serving the people for a reasonable stipend. 2x avg salary should suffice.
I've thought of similar. Unluckily it falls down as most normal people can't afford to take 2+ years off of their life. Being self-employed I'd come back to close to zero clients.
Social Security has long ago been reduced to a line on paper. Our Government currently cooks the books and manipulates the fund to make it appear as if it's not broke. Also, Social Security was never envisioned by our Founding Fathers, and knowing their disdain for Rome and its history of corruption, I doubt if they would have ever have voted for it. (the fall of Rome can be attributed to the same pattern of social and military over-spending and lack of leadership)
Also, Social Security was never envisioned by our Founding Fathers... I doubt if they would have ever have voted for it.
So? I don't want to live in a country that is governed by long dead patricians. I'd rather that the living run things, and in the here and now, Social Security seems to be well liked and useful (if not implemented as well as we might hope). I don't have a problem with its existence.
The issue isn't any of that stuff that you posted. It's that Goverment Pensions, Social Security, Medicare, and Interest on the Debt account for almost 100% of our current budget. That leaves only 25 billion (less than 1.5%!) for our entire defense department, military, and, well, literally thousands and thousands of programs and agencies. Until we get rid of these four items, we're broke. We could cut the military to $0. Kill off every single social spending program. Get rid of student aid. Stop patrolling our borders. Stop foreign aid. Close down NASA. None of it would make any more difference than spitting on a bonfire. Those four items alone are literally killing our nation, and until we get rid of them entirely, we are doomed.
Well, you seem to be ignoring half of the picture. Why have you forgotten about raising additional revenue? (Which is not to say that we should not address some of our current spending priorities)
We could double taxes at this point and still be in the red.
And, yes, I left out the military to make a point as these four are retirement and support services-related, and of course interest on the debt, which isn't going away. We have four single items out of thousands that are enough to cripple us. If we count the military, we'd have to raise taxes by almost 30% to just cover those five items. And none of that includes welfare or unemployment programs and the like. If we dropped the entire defense bu
We could double taxes at this point and still be in the red.
Are you sure? The 2010 federal budget was about $3.4 billion, and 2010 federal tax receipts were about $2.1 billion. Doubling taxes -- your suggestion -- sounds like it might just work, without having to reduce spending. If we also reduced spending, and we could stick to this long enough to seriously pay down our debt, we'd probably be sitting pretty. Better still if we could stick to it even longer so that when we have good times we're building up a rainy day fund.
And, yes, I left out the military to make a point as these four are retirement and support services-related, and of course interest on the debt, which isn't going away.
The doubling of taxes includes projected future interest and the massive amounts of tax-dodging by corporations through outright lying, money laundering, creative financing, or loopholes. Doubling taxes would generate about 3.5 trillion actually collected.(payroll tax won't go up much if we double corporate and income taxes, and may actually go down a bit due to lost jobs)
I included government pensions as that's also of the same type of spending problem, is listed on that site, and also is pretty much set
"Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people"
This section makes no sense whatsoever.
Which "American people"'s policy would they have to abide to, by law? In what world do you live that you think there is a common healthcare policy for all of the people across the land? If you want to be in the business of writing policy, learn how a basic contract works, first.
Which "American people"'s policy would they have to abide to, by law?
The one that jacks premiums through the roof every year while cutting service, countermands doctor's wishes, and kicks them to the curb as soon as they get a long-term illness. You know, just like the rest of us.
The problem with term limits, is that in the last term of their tenure, they won't have to listen to the people that voted them in. I know they don't listen now either.
Everything else I agree with. Especially SS.
%
APL is a natural extension of assembler language programming;
...and is best for educational purposes. -- A. Perlis
Well ... (Score:5, Funny)
Easy enough (Score:0, Insightful)
If citizens actually had free choice in which government programs to fund as well as how much to contribute, the size of the US government (measured both in revenue and power over the people) would be 1/10 the size of today's utter monstrosity.
And if citizens literally had to cut a check at the beginning of every year, rather than pay through deliberately-obfuscated systems designed to hide the true cost of government, the size of government would be cut again by 90%.
Too bad government isn't voluntary, or t
Re:Easy enough (Score:2)
This is one of those forwards that your crazy uncle sends you all the time. Unlike "Lets not buy gas on 9/11", this one actually makes a bit of sense.
-
1. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office. [You are paid X for being in 'full session'. If you show up to 50% of sessions, you get 50% pay.]
2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.
3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.
-
I like the way that Indiana does it. "The Senate convenes its annual session the first Tuesday following the first Monday of January every year. In odd numbered years the senate must meet for 61 days (not necessarily consecutive days), and must adjourn no later than April 30. This is typically called a long session. In even numbered years, when elections are held, the Senate must meet for 30 days (not necessarily consecutive days) and adjourn no later than March 15."
There should be no such thing as a "career politician".
Re:Easy enough (Score:4, Insightful)
... the result being that Congressmen will be people who either are independently wealthy, or are doing backdoor deals which will get them lots of pay, benefits, and retirement money.
Of course that happens anyway, but you really don't want to encourage it even more.
Re: (Score:2)
Start giving law enforcement bonuses for every politician they throw in prison.
That approach works so well in the private sector I'm sure that there could be no negative effects if we include it in law enforcement.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It's reasonable and makes sense. There will be none of that here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:0)
8. Congress and staff are subject to drug tests, just like all other federal employees.
...and must share whatever it is they've been smoking.
Re: (Score:3)
2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
They've been doing this since the 80's. Not sure if I see the point in having Congressmen who paid into the previous system get switched at this late date; it disrupts predictability (people planned for their retirement according to assumptions that you'd now retroactively upset), and many of them are probably retired from Congress already, so it's not as though this can be used to pressure them into doing anything to help everyone who pays into Social Security out of self interest.
5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
Already done in the big h
Re: (Score:2)
Damn Democracy....
Let's really go for representation. Why not get rid of the election of representatives. *gasp* What you say. Anti-democratic. You betcha!
Democracy is 51% telling the other 49% what to do, a.k.a. two wolves and a sheep deciding who will be dinner. Liberty being a well-armed sheep. Anyways...
Instead of voting, we draft people to Congress. Similar to jury-duty. For 2 years you find yourself serving the people for a reasonable stipend. 2x avg salary should suffice.
Then the people elect 100 re
Re: (Score:2)
I've thought of similar. Unluckily it falls down as most normal people can't afford to take 2+ years off of their life. Being self-employed I'd come back to close to zero clients.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow. You are so off-base with reality.
Social Security has long ago been reduced to a line on paper. Our Government currently cooks the books and manipulates the fund to make it appear as if it's not broke. Also, Social Security was never envisioned by our Founding Fathers, and knowing their disdain for Rome and its history of corruption, I doubt if they would have ever have voted for it. (the fall of Rome can be attributed to the same pattern of social and military over-spending and lack of leadership)
Th
Re: (Score:2)
Also, Social Security was never envisioned by our Founding Fathers ... I doubt if they would have ever have voted for it.
So? I don't want to live in a country that is governed by long dead patricians. I'd rather that the living run things, and in the here and now, Social Security seems to be well liked and useful (if not implemented as well as we might hope). I don't have a problem with its existence.
The issue isn't any of that stuff that you posted. It's that Goverment Pensions, Social Security, Medicare, and Interest on the Debt account for almost 100% of our current budget. That leaves only 25 billion (less than 1.5%!) for our entire defense department, military, and, well, literally thousands and thousands of programs and agencies. Until we get rid of these four items, we're broke. We could cut the military to $0. Kill off every single social spending program. Get rid of student aid. Stop patrolling our borders. Stop foreign aid. Close down NASA. None of it would make any more difference than spitting on a bonfire. Those four items alone are literally killing our nation, and until we get rid of them entirely, we are doomed.
Well, you seem to be ignoring half of the picture. Why have you forgotten about raising additional revenue? (Which is not to say that we should not address some of our current spending priorities)
We could:
Re: (Score:2)
We could double taxes at this point and still be in the red.
And, yes, I left out the military to make a point as these four are retirement and support services-related, and of course interest on the debt, which isn't going away. We have four single items out of thousands that are enough to cripple us. If we count the military, we'd have to raise taxes by almost 30% to just cover those five items. And none of that includes welfare or unemployment programs and the like. If we dropped the entire defense bu
Re: (Score:2)
We could double taxes at this point and still be in the red.
Are you sure? The 2010 federal budget was about $3.4 billion, and 2010 federal tax receipts were about $2.1 billion. Doubling taxes -- your suggestion -- sounds like it might just work, without having to reduce spending. If we also reduced spending, and we could stick to this long enough to seriously pay down our debt, we'd probably be sitting pretty. Better still if we could stick to it even longer so that when we have good times we're building up a rainy day fund.
And, yes, I left out the military to make a point as these four are retirement and support services-related, and of course interest on the debt, which isn't going away.
And other than, perhaps that you oppose cu
Re: (Score:2)
The doubling of taxes includes projected future interest and the massive amounts of tax-dodging by corporations through outright lying, money laundering, creative financing, or loopholes. Doubling taxes would generate about 3.5 trillion actually collected.(payroll tax won't go up much if we double corporate and income taxes, and may actually go down a bit due to lost jobs)
I included government pensions as that's also of the same type of spending problem, is listed on that site, and also is pretty much set
Re: (Score:2)
None of the Founding Fathers envisioned a negro President, either. Just sayin'.
Re: (Score:2)
"Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people"
This section makes no sense whatsoever.
Which "American people"'s policy would they have to abide to, by law? In what world do you live that you think there is a common healthcare policy for all of the people across the land? If you want to be in the business of writing policy, learn how a basic contract works, first.
Re: (Score:2)
The one that jacks premiums through the roof every year while cutting service, countermands doctor's wishes, and kicks them to the curb as soon as they get a long-term illness. You know, just like the rest of us.
Re: (Score:0)
The problem with term limits, is that in the last term of their tenure, they won't have to listen to the people that voted them in. I know they don't listen now either.
Everything else I agree with. Especially SS.