Why do so many Congressmen, Senators & Governors live in mansions while we suffer a $13T Nat. debt
Check out the financial picture of many of our Congressmen & women, our Senators, and our State Governors. These elected officials live pretty high on the hog, yet our nation suffers with problems of debt and a high percentage of poor. Why is it acceptable for our government officials to be so well off while so many others suffer? As a side question, I ask the followers of Jesus would Jesus approve of this? To anyone who feels for the suffering of the poor, do you think this is right? To you in the middle class suffering to pay your bills & raise your children, do you think this is right?
I am neutral about this, I am more concerned that these elected officials do their jobs, stop the partisan bickering and take steps to get the economy back on track without delay.Elected officials of this sort have always lived well relative to the rest of us and the 'system' makes sure that they always will. Whether they live well or not is less important than whether or not they do their jobs. If they don't then we have to fire them and they probably will continue to live well, regardless.
Ask why already rich want to go into gov. Answer, it leads to preserving their finances & power to maintain their money. Do u really believe the rich want to "help" others become well off? If they did their gov job, why is there a national debt
I am with you RT, but being resentful as to where and how they live is not going to help. You are right 'the rich' has an interest in maintaining the status quo as it always works to their advantage. If the politicians are non responsive remove them!
I don't think we are far often in agreement, if at all. I'm not resentful. I'm disgusted. I'm neither rich nor poor, but happy where I am. It disgust me to see an elite manipulate the system to add to & maintain their wealth at others expense
Because the general public are suckers for politicians such as Hilary Clinton and Obama who point the finger at other politicians for being too rich while they collect our money, live better than any of us can ever hope to live, and then tax us to further fund their looney plans.
Obamacare is another disaster that they brainwashed the ignorant poor into voting for. They don't it to the uninformed as a free gift that would "tax the rich", which they know full well will motivate the masses, and give the poor something that they don't have. The stupid plan is hiking up our taxes to keep us poor, forcing us into the worst level of healthcare imaginable, and taking away our right to choose.
Yes, the democrats want to say that they "care" about a woman's right to choose whether or not she wants to kill her babies, yet the general public no longer has the right to choose whether or not they want health insurance or not. It used to be that one could say, "I am young and I just don't want to pay for healthcare at the moment" and then when on their feet they would get insured. Now, we are either buying healthcare or being fined. No choice in the matter, we have to pay the government. This will keep it nice and fat so that it will keep coming back for more.
Mark my words, we will continue to vote in our own high taxes. This is what the poor have always done, and always will do. We shoot ourselves in the foot every time.
My answer-Asymmetry of information between the powerbrokers and the public and the reframing of information to make unsustainable practices look good to the public. Excellent and insightful question. We need more people asking questions like this. I thought I might share a short link below related to your question. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zq3OQ2QBqms
I think that they have every right to live in mansions that they pay for and in the states where it's tradition for Governors to live in the state's Governor's mansion there's no reason to end that practice. Even if all of the Governor's homes were sold to the highest bidders, this would not put a dent in the debts of each state and proceeds should not go towards federal debt. I am not one of those miserable people that envy and want to pull others down for their wealth, instead I observe, take notes, and try to learn from them. Nor have I ever agreed with taking from the rich to give to the poor.
I know for a fact that those who are affluent or rich (politicians or not) got there by taking risks that 90% of Americans are too afraid or ill equipped to. Don't get me wrong, there are many politicians that I disagree with however, when it comes to building assets or wealth, a large number did it honestly and should not be envied or shamed for their wealth. To answer your side question, yes I think it is right and Jesus approves. Many wealthy people give to charities and start their own. Some brag about it but the smartest ones give anonymously and never brag.
What they do on the job is most important to me.
What u r buying into is that everyone rich got their by honest means. It is not envy, it is disgust many feel. That so many can b living in squaller while those elected to help r controlling the system & putting everyone in debt is disgusting.
I don't buy into everyone being rich by honest means. I don't live in squalor and no one put me into debt. What I'm saying is that those who are rich often help the poor & don't have to and shouldn't give away all they have to raise up the poor.
RealityTalk:. It's the same in the UK, a government of millionaire passing spending cuts that have driven people to suicide. Here we have a self selected elite safe because their tribe will vote for them no matter what happens or what they do.
We live in an interest making system (based on usury), so by default anyone who is earning money from nothing, is sucking the blood out of the integrity of society. So everyone is to blame really. But big $$$ makes loads even on small %.
I don't think there is anything wrong with being rich or being well off. I do think it is unfair for the government to run up debt, since they have no money.
The only way the government can get money is to steal it from the people. This is done be either printing the money, borrowing the money or taxing the people.
If you read the founders of the US, they said to not run up debt, to use gold and silver as currency, and to not have many taxes.
It doesn't seem like we followed their advice.
The Fed is counter to what our system claims to be. The Fed should be abolished and those that fail, should fail. The system is suppose to favor no one & allow only the successful to survive. Our system keeps individuals in power.
How is it counter? The first Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, set one up in the form of the First Bank.of the United States, after convincing Washington it was a good idea; this was his idea of a Fed at the founding of our nation.
The Fed was not what the forefathers had in mind. I suggest you re-read your history. Also the Fed floods the system with printed money & fools investors. Our system was meant to weed out failures, not prop them up with printed cash.
Yes we had the First Bank and the Second Bank and then we got rid of it until the Federal Reserve. In our early history they expanded the money supply creating runaway inflation. So the founders were strongly opposed to central banks.
For one, I know that a lot of the higher profile politicians had plenty of money before they got elected, and they probably had nice, fancy houses before then, too. Also, for those that live in homes owned by the government (the White House and governor's mansions. etc.), it likely is a good idea for them to use these places because of their ability to be secured.
For two, honestly, I'm tired of wondering what other people have versus what I don't. Am I sick of some of these politicians getting six figures and then some for not pulling their weight or delivering on their campaign promises? Heck yes. Do I think their salaries (plus retirement and benefits) are way off of what they should be making? Heck yes. Especially when the state of this country is evidence of the fact that they are not doing their jobs.
That, however, is a deeper issue and not related to the buildings in which these people live.
I am not a Christian so I am apparently not allowed to answer your other questions. Im am, however, slightly perturbed that the followers of Jesus, by your insinuation (intentional or otherwise), are the only ones capable of answering those questions. I can haz gud opinyuns 2.
I am only allowed so many letters so I chose Jesus; any philosophy will do. As for the other sub questions, they never mentioned Jesus, so no one is stopping you from answering them. As 4 pre-rich: Q: Why do the rich control & tax & get riche
Well, as an atheist, I think that Jesus would have advised you not to covet that which other people have. He was also smart enough to know that not every rich person is banking dirty money. Not being disrespectful - I happen to like Jesus.
I am an atheist as well & I don't covet ... I am disgusted that rep of gov have wealth while they have near bankrupted the nation perverting spending & laws to support maintenance of their power & wealth.
It's obvious..they are on the take! And, we as American citizens are too cowardly to do anything about it! By the way, the debt is way more than that.
In a sense the people we actually see in the media (politicians) are not those to worry about, and are certainly not the richest. From the earliest of days, the US was hijacked by private banking, which eventually developed a cleverly crafted facade called the Federal Reserve, but it's all the same game.
Those who try and do the job for 'the people' and who start off with good intentions - some politicians - discover the monster that lurks beneath. As Clinton said, there's a government within a government.
What we have today isn't really democracy, but the illusion of it is bandied around. Neither is the US a Christian country in its power brokering core, by the basic spiritual definitions given to us by Jesus - which are entirely absent by the way the inner government operates.
On this one, I would have to my friends on the Right, the fact our nations leaders live "high on the hog" is completely disassociated with our national debt; if they earned the money, they have every right to spend it they way they want.
The fact that most, if not all, of our elected representatives are rich to really, really rich is your fault ... the large you, meaning the People of America for two reasons; 1) we respond to negative advertising in predictable ways and 2) we don't force our representatives to do something about unlimited money in elections. These two factors lead to the inevitable consequence that only the rich can get elected.
If you want regular people in Congress, you must lobby your Congress men and women to pass the appropriate laws, that will pass a Conservative Supreme Courts test of Constitutionality, which will reduce how much can be donated to/spent on a federal election.
Your first point I meant to mention as well. We kind of behave like automatons and eat certain things and do things just because advertising tells us to. We vote with our wallets.
The system is now set to discriminate against those out of power & lacking money to become involved in gov. It is naive to claim disassociation. The richest did not become so by fair & honest means. Corruption runs rampant in our gov.
Because poor people don't have the money to get votes, I too care about how they take care of the people!
For the same reason the bankers aren't in jail. They approve the loans knowing it will not be them having to pay it back and all sit back enjoying life living off the interest. All the income tax collected in the US does not even pay the interest payments on the loan, how is that fiscally sound? Why agree to the bank bailout and pay the banks for their mistakes whilst kicking people out of their homes, they could have given the banks the same money by agreeing to pay the peoples mortgages, ah but then the banks wouldn't get the houses to re-sell and accumulate still more funds by others having to pay huge insurance payments for the pleasure of getting into debt. What happens to the insurance payments made by those who get foreclosed on? oh yes, the banks own the insurance companies (they get paid 3 times). Only two things can change the situation 'we the people' who are completely brainwashed by their jointly owned media or a country stepping up and asking for the money they are owed. Even Mexico who is all too often looked upon as the poor neighbor is owed more by the US than they owe to the US. The banks encourage the military disputes so that both countries involved will have to borrow and the politicians go along with it or risk being cut off by their financiers, why else is it that Saudi Arabia and Israel, who have the worst human rights records in the Middle East aren't getting invaded to "protect the people", it is them that jointly own the banks, meaning also the US politicians. How many of the, i think 8 members of the FED board are NOT backed by either an Israeli or Saudi? Where are the reps for the American people?
The National Debt is more like 16.8 trillion, with an 800 billion annual deficit to be added on to that figure. But that is a nominal point these days. Never look at debt in dollars but rather as a percentage of the GDP. And in those terms, it's not so great either.
Ultimately, the answer to you question, is they don't care. The altruistic politicians are few and far between. In fact it is in the best interest of political figures to keep people poor. The more inefficient wasteful social programs I create, the more poor people I get to vote me into office. As long as a good majority of people believe that I am helping them by giving them just enough to survive and be dependent on me, the better chance I have of getting re-elected and maintaining my power base. If you want to help poor people, teach them not to depend on the gov't for help. They'll only be disappointed. And the more self sufficient society we have, the less influence bureaucrats have over your life.
There is nothing wrong with being wealthy. Having wealth doesn't mean someone else is losing what you have gained, as long as you are creating your wealth privately. Unfortunately that is not typically the case with politicians. Most often their wealth comes directly from the taxpayer.
One fallacy with your proposition is that poor people vote in large numbers; they don't. 41% of votes cast in 2012 earned less than $50,000. Assuming linearity, which it isn't. that means only 20% of the votes were cast by poor people (<$25K)
One fallacy of you assumption is that only poor people receive gov't entitlements. I don't use the gov't definitions of poverty. In the Northeast you can make well in excess of 50k and barely afford a studio apt. Addiction to entitlement spans income
Most of their wealth came long before they entered public office, especially US Senators and Governors, not as much with US Representatives.
That's not always true....But sometimes it is very true. But they have often used public office to greatly enhance their wealth.
Why don't you ask Jesus instead of using rhetorical questions??? Probably because he is dead and can't answer. So for the fairness of the situation, why don't you let him rest in peace and bring him into this discussion???
We have exactly what we deserve in this country. Nothing more nothing less. Thinking about their salaries and houses, is a totally obtuse way of solving the problem. It is a distraction that will never let us solve the problem
Why are we mesmerized by people with money, and let them buy us, like cheap whores???
No rhetoric or I wouldn't have asked for your reply. Mesmerized, hardly. What is dumbfounding is that people continue to elect corp elite believing they will run this Country for the better of all or shrink gov intervention as originally intended.
Most politicians were wealthy before they were elected. If you belief in free enterprise and the capitalist system, then some will be in mansion, some will not.
I am not a communist so I do not judge the haves by what I have not. I am responsible for creating my own wealth and life circumstances.
I think I have not been clear with the pt I'm trying to make. I'm not suggesting no one should have wealth in our system. I'm suggesting it disgusting that people elected to help our system control it, make money on it & have put us in debt.
Okay that makes more sense to me. Yes, if our elected officials are doing what you suggest and putting us in debt...that is disgusting but with our system, little can be done but to re-elect different bozos.
Politicians are supposed to act as servants of the people. If they do that well then I have np problem with them getting (honestly) rich.
If they are incompetent, corrupt or deliberately game the system to the disadventage of most, then I object.
I understand frustration, but we can change the system. To start, we need to vote in not someone who talks the talk, but someone who walks the walk. Ron Paul was discredited by the corp controlled media. We have to be smart & not believe TV ...
I do understand what you are asking here. I'm going to answer the question about how I personally feel. I honestly don't care who lives where and how much money they have. That's never impressed me. I have a relative that worked his way up from poor farmer to rich senator and he is not the same person. Money and power have changed him.
But, what I do care about is my personal security and future which has been totally devastated by health issues. Through no fault of anyone, I became deathly ill and my son was diagnosed with Autism. So, as a parent raising children on almost nothing, do I think it's right that elected officials live high on the hog? I'm happy for them, I just wish that for us "middle" class suffering due to circumstances beyond anyone's control, there was more help.
Because of our medical expenses, we tried to get a loan and couldn't because my income wasn't enough. So I don't think it's fair that someone making 6 figures can buy a million dollar home down the street from my neighborhood when I can't get a small loan to pay off medical bills. The balances are completely off. One block away are people living in poverty. Our town's schools get federal aid. Yet the big boys are living it up on the hill looking down over us.
Quite simply, because they're all a bunch of wolves in sheep's clothing. Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still voting for evil.
Because America has become a Greedocracy and government goes to the highest bidder. Sadly the courts have joined them.
Note that even those who enter politics with medium to lower finances end up rich with a pension and health plan that we can't even dream of.
It's interesting that you added the Courts to the mix. I read an interesting book written on the Supreme Court Justices on the 70s Court and the politics involved in their decisions was shameful.
It was the courts who gave corporations personhood and unlimited contributions. Also it was the SC that decided that private entities could use eminent domain laws to enhance tax revenues.
There are a couple logical reasons.
One, most politicians have a lot of money long before they start into politics so they brought their mansions with them when elected. The reason they want to be a senator, governor, or president is power and image, not money.
Two, is nearly all of them are from the two major parties, Democrats or Republicans, and they have ruled this country since the beginning of the American Civil War. The reason we are what we are and nothing ever seems to change other than a few faces every four years or so, is the two incumbent parties have been in control for over 150 years.
Hi RealityTalk. I know that many of our elected officials like Congressmen, Senators, and Governors were monetarily wealthy before taking office. It could also be the reason why they were elected as well. It seems that the man (or woman) who has the most campaign dollars are the ones who win. That in itself should be a crime in my opinion. I think we should limit campaign advertising to a certain dollar amount so that every nominee is on the same playing field when it comes to elections. Because they are already independently wealthy, I personally would like to see more elected officials work out of passion and not money. Arnold Schwartznegger,Mitt Romney, and Michael Bloomberg all worked for only $1 per year.
Should they live "high on the hog?" I believe in capitalism and freedom of choice; however, I would not agree to government officials using taxpayer dollars to fund their hogging. Though I believe that mansions for the President, Vice President, and state governors are acceptable. Those positions are to be respected by the community, and their "work" is done within their homes much of the time. Besides, they need extra security in which us commoners do not need. Work and extra bodies require extra space. However, I don't believe that taxpayers should fund their vacations, apparel, and all the extras that seem to come with the title.
Why is it acceptable for our government officials to be so well off while so many others suffer? Again, many of those officials were wealthy prior to becoming officials. There is nothing wrong with being wealthy in my opinion. We live in a capitalist society, and every American has the right to build or tear down for himself. In many instances, Americans created their own suffering by living beyond their means (i.e., spending money they do not have on unnecessary items). Why should the wealthy suffer when they have worked hard and managed their funds well?
Would Jesus approve of this? I would say that Jesus probably doesn't care whether a person is monetarily wealthy or not. Suffering can come in many forms, and the worst type of suffering is not financial. It is emotional and mental, and both of these types of suffering can affect both the monetarily poor or wealthy. I believe that Jesus only cares that we love one another. Giving to the poor and hungry shows love. However, generosity doesn't mean that we need to be communist either.
What is right is to work hard, be generous, and to love with compassion.
The people who make the laws make their income higher. The rich get richer so the poor get poorer. We have a vanishing middle class. There are many serious economic problems in the U.S. and in the world. The cause of this is greed.
These elected officials were usually extremely wealthy before entering political office. I remember reading an article about twenty years ago that stated every single US senator, serving at that time, was a millionaire well before being elected. Not all congress members are necessarily wealthy, but governors and senators are very wealthy.
by Rev Bruce S Noll HMN5 years ago
Do you believe our elected officials are being honest with us?There is so much information concerning impending financial and environmental crises, do you feel out government warrants out full faith and trust?
by Goodpal2 days ago
Are the poor useful for the society in any way?Is it that Poverty and the Poor are mere burden on the society? Do they serve any meaningful purpose?
by JON EWALL5 years ago
How many elected officials in Congress will reconsider their YES vote when repealing Obamacare ?
by Don Bobbitt2 years ago
What if our Elected representatives actually worked for us, the people.You have to wonder, in times like these, what would happen for America if our elected officials actually stood up, tomorrow and concentrated on...
by Goodpal2 days ago
Why everything in society gets decided by the rich?Will the rich any importance left if suddenly all the poor people vanish from the societies? In fact, poor people work at cheaper wages to create wealth for the rich....
by ptosis5 years ago
Why do the elite rich think that poor people should be pilloried?Does the following statment show that the speaker thinks being rich makes them better person? This political hack wants bright prison orange EBT cards as...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.