Talk-Polywell.org

My sister emailed this to me. Enjoy or not as you are inclined.
==================
Actually I think Warren Buffet has the correct thought.

Warren Buffett, in a recent interview with CNBC, offers one of the best quotes I've heard in all this drama about the debt ceiling:

"I could end the deficit in 5 minutes," he told CNBC. "You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than 3% of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election

The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971...before computers, e-mail, cell phones, etc.

Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.

I'm asking each addressee to forward this email to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around.

Congressional Reform Act of 2011
1. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
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 think I mentioned this Buffet idea somewhere on this website before. I think it's a good idea, provided that under no circumstances may they be allowed to raise taxes to balance the budget.

Diogenes,

That is the exact problem we have in congress now! "Sure I'll sign X if you add Z". That's garbage my friend, no legislation which does not have a direct relationship should be tied to another. Taxes would be part of a Tax Reform Act, not a Congressional reform act that deals with position.

ScottL wrote:Diogenes,

That is the exact problem we have in congress now! "Sure I'll sign X if you add Z". That's garbage my friend, no legislation which does not have a direct relationship should be tied to another. Taxes would be part of a Tax Reform Act, not a Congressional reform act that deals with position.

I have a simple Rubicon. The government has for a very long time received far more tax money than is needed for it to perform it's necessary functions. It is entitled to no more.

Every dollar sent to our masters makes us that much more their slaves.

Diogenes wrote:

ScottL wrote:Diogenes,

That is the exact problem we have in congress now! "Sure I'll sign X if you add Z". That's garbage my friend, no legislation which does not have a direct relationship should be tied to another. Taxes would be part of a Tax Reform Act, not a Congressional reform act that deals with position.

I have a simple Rubicon. The government has for a very long time received far more tax money than is needed for it to perform it's necessary functions. It is entitled to no more.

Every dollar sent to our masters makes us that much more their slaves.

Your view:
Government = Masters

My view:
Corporations = Masters

Your opinion, I disagree. I'll go on my way now

ScottL wrote: Your view:
Government = Masters

My view:
Corporations = Masters

What makes you think there is any real difference? My view, Corporations ~ Government. At least they are both headed by people with much authority and no responsibility; a situation that inevitably leads to insane results.

ScottL wrote:

Diogenes wrote:

ScottL wrote:Diogenes,

That is the exact problem we have in congress now! "Sure I'll sign X if you add Z". That's garbage my friend, no legislation which does not have a direct relationship should be tied to another. Taxes would be part of a Tax Reform Act, not a Congressional reform act that deals with position.

I have a simple Rubicon. The government has for a very long time received far more tax money than is needed for it to perform it's necessary functions. It is entitled to no more.

Every dollar sent to our masters makes us that much more their slaves.

Your view:
Government = Masters

My view:
Corporations = Masters

Your opinion, I disagree. I'll go on my way now

The flaw in your equivalence is that you are not required to pay corporations except when government compels you to, such as through mandatory insurance, etc.

Corporations likewise cannot lock you up for failing to obey them.

Your flaw would be in not considering that you work for a corporation that while not charging you directly unless you're buying their products, is exploiting you by wage. If wage were by merit, I have a feeling admin types might not make as much as they are currently.

ScottL wrote:Your flaw would be in not considering that you work for a corporation that while not charging you directly unless you're buying their products, is exploiting you by wage. If wage were by merit, I have a feeling admin types might not make as much as they are currently.

You are going to have to explain that more clearly. To me it sounds like an envy issue masquerading as a principle or something.

Diogenes wrote:

ScottL wrote:Your flaw would be in not considering that you work for a corporation that while not charging you directly unless you're buying their products, is exploiting you by wage. If wage were by merit, I have a feeling admin types might not make as much as they are currently.

You are going to have to explain that more clearly. To me it sounds like an envy issue masquerading as a principle or something.

At first your comment was confusing as I didn't interpret my statement the way you had evidentally. To clarify I wasn't making statements out of envy, I'm part of an administrative unit and I often wonder why those around me are paid as much as they are for the little they bring to the table. Merit has lost its appreciate in the world I think.

Congressional Reform Act of 2011
1. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

Include the president who signed the budget.

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.

Long term I'd prefer to move away from dependence on government for pensions.

4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

How about tying congressional pay to median private sector income?

Scott, one difference between corporation power and government power is I have choice in which corporations I do business with, baring government misconduct. There is no such option with government short of moving out of jurisdiction.

ScottL wrote:

Diogenes wrote:

ScottL wrote:Your flaw would be in not considering that you work for a corporation that while not charging you directly unless you're buying their products, is exploiting you by wage. If wage were by merit, I have a feeling admin types might not make as much as they are currently.

You are going to have to explain that more clearly. To me it sounds like an envy issue masquerading as a principle or something.

At first your comment was confusing as I didn't interpret my statement the way you had evidentally. To clarify I wasn't making statements out of envy, I'm part of an administrative unit and I often wonder why those around me are paid as much as they are for the little they bring to the table. Merit has lost its appreciate in the world I think.

THIS I understand and agree with. Merit no longer means what it once did.

hanelyp wrote:

4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

How about tying congressional pay to median private sector income?

I had to look it up to make sure I remembered correctly that median was not average. I like this plan, especially since the pay cut they'd take if it went into effect today would probably give a decent (though not really large) chunk of money back to the treasury.

Fine provided you;
1: dissociate the congressional salary from the GS salary and
2: ecpect a fairly large increase in "vote sales".

I never said I agreed with the plan, just posted it to stir some comment.

Corporations likewise cannot lock you up for failing to obey them.

But you are fine with government doing that for highs you don't approve of.

I think the Left is correct in asserting that the social conservative agenda is identical to a promise to impose theocracy. The inability of the Right to see the totalitarian nature of social conservatism when it is a political agenda to use government force where persuasion has failed mirrors the inability of idealistic Leftists to grasp that you can’t have free markets (aka capitalism) and socialism at the same time because there is no correct way to have a socialist planned economy that isn’t immediately both totalitarian and corrupt.

http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/201 ... ction.html