1103
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 111 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I get the idea behind it, but this very much would backfire in that only the rich could become representation. Remember they made it a rule that they aren't allowed to sleep in their office while in D.C., and 60k not only won't afford a place in D.C, it most definitely won't allow for someone to have a home near their constituents AND D.C.

So we would end up with just having first or second sons of oligarchs, 1 trained to run the companies, the other trained to represent their families best interests.

[-] Godnroc@lemmy.world 50 points 5 days ago

Or, and hear me out in this one, if the average is not sustainable they would need to raise the average or lower costs until a balance was reached. By forcing them to play by the very rules that are writing, there is an incentive to make them fair.

While this may not be there exact way too achieve that, the goal is still a good one to work towards.

[-] Devial@lemmy.world 20 points 5 days ago

And how is that supposed to work ? You can't fix the healthcare care system or economy in a day, so non wealthy people would still struggle to live as politicians whilst those changes are being worked on, meaning there's little motivation for them to join politics, and independently wealthy people who are just in it for the power wouldn't give a fuck about being badly paid. Look at Trump. He doesn't even take a salary, because he's corrupt and wealthy enough to not need it, so his salary being low would matter fuck all to him and other corrupt pieces of crap like him.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Asetru@feddit.org 16 points 5 days ago

I get the idea behind it, but this very much would backfire in that only the rich could become representation.

Not only the rich but also the corrupt that would then sell their voice to the highest bidder.

[-] terminatortwo@piefed.social 26 points 5 days ago

Good thing neither of those are the case in the current system!

[-] Steve@communick.news 11 points 5 days ago

The point is, these changes wouldn't help any of those things.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CMDR_Horn@lemmy.world 12 points 5 days ago

Well that's easy then. Federally owned dorm housing for congress.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] 4grams@awful.systems 60 points 5 days ago

I think the government should switch to a random lottery. Every term a random person is selected from all available and eligible citizens. It would be our civic duty, put your regular job on hold for a few years and do your part.

Most would hate it, but that’s kinda the point. If we all had to eat our own dogfood, we’d eventually start making it taste better.

[-] discocactus@lemmy.world 30 points 5 days ago

I've said this for years. Live in dorms. Cafeteria food. Minimum wage. All assets put into trust and in a vanilla total market fund for 5-10 years after service. It should be like jury duty. I've not met a single person who disagrees with this system.

[-] TheMightyCat@ani.social 13 points 5 days ago

I’ve not met a single person who disagrees with this system.

Well consider me the first.

Then first the plan won't work, those dorms will be run by the very government politicians they are supposed to make miserable. so they won't.

And why must that be a goal in the first place? Instead of improving democracy so that politicians aren't in the pockets of PACs and actually represent the people, you want to just make them both miserable and now unelected.

If you want that random people are in charge instead of politicians a direct democracy system will work far better then this.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] wewbull@feddit.uk 19 points 5 days ago

Have you met a random person?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
[-] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 42 points 5 days ago

The idea behind a high salary for representatives is that they don't need to take on extra money from lobbyists to survive. Keep the salaries, but make bribery illegal again and things will get better. Make the salaries low AND get the money out of politics and you'll only get rich people becoming politicians. Oh and term limits should be a thing.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Sharkticon@lemmy.zip 31 points 5 days ago

OP has no idea what health insurance cost these days.

[-] ryannathans@aussie.zone 9 points 5 days ago

Nor do international members, care to share?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] discocactus@lemmy.world 36 points 5 days ago

I'm sorry who the fuck has a $1000 deductible??? We have decent insurance for the US and the deductible is $7500 each (family plan thru employment)...

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago

I agree on spirit, but in practice this will just make them even easier to be bought.

[-] Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca 9 points 4 days ago

As if they aren't already bought. At least you'll have one of your own elevated and not some already rich asshole trying to get richer.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)

While this sounds good on the surface, the problem is that requiring legislators to live with the same financial difficulties most of us face would lead to sharp increases in direct bribery and overt corruption. As bad as it is anyway that effectively unlimited campaign/PAC contributions can be used to corrupt them, if their personal finances were significantly more trying, it would be much worse, especially given that most legislators have more personal expenses than the average person, including maintaining resdences in both DC and their home state/district. The much better (but also much, much more difficult) solution would be to raise the incomes of most Americans rather than to reduce the income of the legislators.

[-] BussyGyatt@feddit.org 15 points 4 days ago

yeah i was a hell of a lot more sympathetic to that totally unverified supposition (not argument) when i didn't believe there was rampant corruption in every branch of local state and federal government. it's like those pictures of "LOOK WHAT COMMUNISM WOULD GET YOU" and it's just pictures of homelessness under capitalism.

solution would be to raise the incomes of most Americans rather than to reduce the income of the legislators.

yeah that's the point. if these chucklefucks kicking back on open corruption were forced (forced) to live on the average american salary they'd be more apt to fix the bullshit holding wages down. that's my unverified supposition though. actually, now i've come to think of it, the fact that our government is subject to corruption despite their high compensation (supposedly) buoying up fragile moralities seems to be evidence against your initial supposition. Let's try the other way.

[-] PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Lmao they have all ways been taking bribes. Lobbying is legalized bribery…

It absolutely is, but there is still a massive motivational difference between needing campaign funds to facilitate getting re-elected and needing personal money to pay for rent/mortgage, food, childcare, etc. The latter opens the door to the kinds of bribes that, if promises made are unfulfilled, come with direct personal consequences, and potentially violent ones. By contrast, if a politician doesn’t make good on a promise made in return for campaign/PAC contributions, they typically are only risking that support being given to their opponent next time around.

"Maintaining residences in both DC and their home state/district" I've got that solved: We build a dorm facility in Washington and require them to stay there.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] DotEliot@lemmy.world 27 points 5 days ago

I guess the idea of paying them well is that they can't be bought with bribes. Then again, when has any wealthy person ever been satisfied.

[-] merc@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 days ago

If the job didn't pay a salary, the only people who could do the job would be the rich who don't need a salary, or those willing to accept bribes.

If you make the salary too low, it will discourage anybody who can make a better living doing something else. And, if the people doing it don't think they're being paid what they're really worth, they're more likely to take bribes or "donations" to boost their salary back up to what it should be.

Really, the salary should be high. It should be a job that people who are really qualified will want to do. It should be one where you have no need to take a bribe because you're already doing so well, and you'd be afraid of throwing away such a well compensated job.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] cryowatt@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

No salary, they should be paid hourly at leas than minimum since most of their income is from gratuities.

[-] Cheebus@lemmy.world 24 points 5 days ago

300 a month and a thousand dollar deductible?!?!

where the fuck is that deal, it’s like 8k deductible and 600 a month

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] captain_oni@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 5 days ago

How about this:

We pay politicians in "X times the minimum wage"; for the sake of this example I'll say 30x the minimum wage (too much? Too little? I don't know, that's not important rn)

The thing is, they can't change this number, at all. The only way they can increase their salaries is to increase the minimum wage.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] turdburglar@piefed.social 17 points 5 days ago
[-] 3abas@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago

$300/month 😂😭😢😐

load more comments (1 replies)

And they have to work 40 hours a week every week, or they get no benefits... just..like..us.

[-] discocactus@lemmy.world 11 points 5 days ago

Or rather, they only get the benefits guaranteed to all citizens.

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 13 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

pretty sure most of them are millionaires, because the billionaire donors are giving them money, in other forms. even with those restrictions, they get millions from the billionaires in thier pockets. Thats why Dinos are fighting just as hard to keep that way.

[-] CitizenKong@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

Also politicians wouldn't exactly be less corruptible if they were poorer.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] core@leminal.space 5 points 4 days ago

That would further incentivize their corruption

[-] Nurgus@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

Thry should get a massive salary but be strictly banned from all other forms of income.

[-] horsesaysweird@feddit.org 3 points 4 days ago

I disagree. Everyone believes that people are greedy and their only goal in life is money hoarding. But if you ask them what their own goals are, getting filthy rich has very, very low priority.

If politicians are greedy, that's because 1) to become a politician (in the USA), you already have to be rich, and 2) if politicians are paid lots of money, greedy people want to become politicians.

You don't want to attract greedy assholes to represent you, but that's exactly what you're doing if you pay them too much. The people you do want to be politicians are those who aren't interested in money.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

They weren't ever supposed to represent you, they represent rich white men like they were intended. It's literally designed to favor the rich because literally every single one of the signers of the bill of rights was a wealthy dude, to a man they were middle - upper class and in general criminals at that.

[-] nathan@lem.permisuan.com 10 points 5 days ago

I thought after citizens united they represent corporations not us

[-] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago

The Great Stink 1858 caused by the combination of everyone dumping their refuse into the river Thames and unusually low water levels, was being mostly ignored by the British parliament until the members were forced to return to work in the parliament building close to the river where the smell was at its worst.

[-] teelin134@programming.dev 12 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I disagree. Low salaries in congress is exactly the kind of thing that gives lobbyists power.

Poor staffers and low paid representatives are more likely to become lobbyists themselves or to take bribes. Congresspeople should be given an ultimatum, they can only serve in congress if they agree to never make income from any other source ever again in their lives… even after one term. In return, they’re guaranteed a modest pension starting when they leave that pays 80% of their current salary (should be a healthy salary), increasing with inflation. They can not trade stocks, accept gifts, or own any form of property except a single residence.

If you want to serve the people, you can only serve the people and not yourself. Congresspeople should be truly selfless individuals.

[-] JiveTurkey@lemmy.world 9 points 5 days ago

I agree that low salary is a losing game but a salary high enough to turn away all of the lobbiest is a losing battle also. Just make itillegal and enforce the rules.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Marn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 5 days ago

Pay them 5 million per year for all I care so long as they actually represent the people and not private interest groups, are not currupt, and are some of the best people for the job. And that would be an incredibility good deal.

People can be wealthy and not totally out of touch if they make an effort to listen to people

[-] im_fine_sandy@nord.pub 8 points 5 days ago

Salary will have unintended consequences.

Why would anyone choose that job unless they were already very wealthy?

People who want to enact change. You can find plenty of those they just don't have any visibility because money.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] lemmelemmy@feddit.org 7 points 5 days ago

Well then that’s not capitalism.

Tbh idk why people think capitalism is a good thing. It’s just feudalism with corporations.

load more comments (15 replies)
[-] spacegoat@lemmy.world 7 points 5 days ago

In the history books when they discuss the hundreds or thousands of small cuts that eventually killed America, Mike Johnson may very well be one of the most prominent captioned photos.

[-] minorkeys@sh.itjust.works 10 points 5 days ago

We are long past the point where they represented us.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2026
1103 points (96.2% liked)

Work Reform

17524 readers
1074 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS