This is why we're idiots...

[Bill Mattocks]

http://rich-erinn.newsvine.com/_new...-of-2011-an-email-sent-to-me-thought-id-share

Warren Buffett, in a recent interview with CNBC, offers one of the best quotes 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.

Warren Buffet is 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.

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.

THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!!

I've been getting this wretched piece of crap in my email box all day from my conservative relatives. Now it's being posted and reposted on Facebook. It's utter garbage; half of it is untrue, regardless of how people feel about Congress. To wit:

Warren Buffett, in a recent interview with CNBC, offers one of the best quotes 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

ACCURATE QUOTE, BUT OUT OF CONTEXT:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/43671706/CNB...or_Corporate_Jets_and_America_s_Bright_Future

Buffett was describing how the deficit could be ended. He also wasn't talking about ending the deficit, and he never said it was a good thing to do so or his goal to do so. He was talking about his anger that Congress was ruining the nation's credit arguing over extending the debt ceiling. So I'm going to call that a LIE.

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.

TRUE. And so what? Amendments can be pushed through quickly. I think everyone knows that.

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.

TRUE. And so what?

Warren Buffet is 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.

FALSE. No, Warren Buffett is not asking that.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/03/congressional-reform-act/

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.

MEANINGLESS.

Congressional Reform Act of 2011

FALSE. There is no such act.

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

TRUE. Congress gets a pension, which they become vested in after five years:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_pension

But they can't collect on it until they turn 62.

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.

FALSE. They do participate in Social Security.

3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

FALSE. Most Americans do not purchase their own retirement plan, and Congress pays into Social Security (see above) just like nearly everyone else.

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

FALSE. Congress does not vote themselves pay raises.

5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

FALSE. The American people don't have 'a' health care system and Congress participates in the same health care system as all federal employees.

6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

FALSE. This issue was fixed in 1995, with the exception of the limited immunity Congress enjoys, as written into the Constitution intentionally (see Factcheck article).

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.

FALSE. As in WTF is this anonymous moron talking about?

If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S.) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.

THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!!

This is how morons self-identify.

 

[MA-Caver]

Well, we (the voters) reap what we sow.

 

[Steve]

It's funny that your conservative friends have forgotten that Warren Buffet is an enemy of the movement.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

It seems to me that on both the left and the right these days, being ANGRY is more important than having SOLUTIONS. Being LOUD is better than being CORRECT. FEELINGS are more valid than FACTS. And it's beginning to cheese me right off.

 

[oftheherd1]

Bill,

You might want to clarify #4. They don't vote themselves pay raises only because their pay raise is automatic unless they specifically vote not to get the pay raise. I don't recall for sure when they passed that law, but it is currently in effect. So they must vote not to get a pay raise, or they will get one.

A few months ago, when it was brought to the public's attention that some congressional members were living in their offices, one was interviewed on national TV and made a comment that he had to sleep in his office since he only made $175,000 per year.

However, truth is, the cost of campaigning is so high, members of the Senator and House must cozy up to lobbyists in order to have funds to campaign for re-election. Lobbyists are allowed to put money (limited) in campaign coffers, and almost unlimited amounts in "slush" accounts. They often write legislation, being "experts" on certain subjects. That is what staffers should do, as well as congressional members themselves. In fact, they often become just political movers and shakers. It is no wonder that so many laws favor those with money.

 

[Steve]

It seems to me that on both the left and the right these days, being ANGRY is more important than having SOLUTIONS. Being LOUD is better than being CORRECT. FEELINGS are more valid than FACTS. And it's beginning to cheese me right off.

Give em a knuckle sandwich, Bill. Sosabiches.

 

[Nomad]

It seems to me that on both the left and the right these days, being ANGRY is more important than having SOLUTIONS. Being LOUD is better than being CORRECT. FEELINGS are more valid than FACTS. And it's beginning to cheese me right off.

This has been true for more than a little while now.

 

[zDom]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif]

[/FONT]

"It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see..."
"You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"
"No," said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like to straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"
"What?"
"I said," said Ford, with an increasing air of urgency creeping into his voice, "have you got any gin?"
"I'll look. Tell me about the lizards."
Ford shrugged again.
"Some people say that the lizards are the best thing that ever happened to them," he said. "They're completely wrong of course, completely and utterly wrong, but someone's got to say it."

-- from "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" (er.. or one of the followup books) by Douglas Adams

 

[oftheherd1]

It seems to me that on both the left and the right these days, being ANGRY is more important than having SOLUTIONS. Being LOUD is better than being CORRECT. FEELINGS are more valid than FACTS. And it's beginning to cheese me right off.

Yep. Neither side is immune from being stupid it seems. And with Senate and House leaders, and the President, all playing politics instead of playing leadership, it isn't going to get better until they realize people really are getting disgusted with them. Maybe not even then. I heard a comment a couple of days ago where the commentator said the congress had gone home recently or contacted home, and were hearing the constituents wanted them to continue. I can't imagine who they were talking to. I doubt they made any effort to contact anyone outside of their comfort zone.

 

[Flying Crane]

It seems to me that on both the left and the right these days, being ANGRY is more important than having SOLUTIONS. Being LOUD is better than being CORRECT. FEELINGS are more valid than FACTS. And it's beginning to cheese me right off.

seems to me that the Truth has been awfully malleable lately as well.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

seems to me that the Truth has been awfully malleable lately as well.

I think truth left the building with Elvis.

It kind of seems to go like this:

Hey Everybody! I just got an email from Bill Gates! And he said that if I send this to twenty of my best friends immediately, he will donate one trillion dollars to a fund to tell Congress to stop getting free shoes! Let Congress buy their shoes like everybody else!

A) Bill Gates didn't say that.
B) Congress does not get free shoes.

WHO CARES! IT'S TRUE ANYWAY BECAUSE I HATE CONGRESS! YOU SOME KINDA COMMIE BOY? YOU HATE AMERICA, IS THAT IT? YOU LOVE FREE SHOES? WHAHAHAHA GET ME A BEER BEYOTCH.

 

[MA-Caver]

Why do we keep voting for these guys then? We've all heard the rhetoric 1000 times before in the past and it hasn't changed, but we keep voting these guys back into the cushy offices and the meager $175,000.00 annual salary... jeez I can do A LOT with that much living in a simple 2 bedroom house and a 20 year old car (which I have) and still manage to do my job adequately. Can't live on that amount then sumting veddy wong hear.
Someone told me that all ... ALL government employees (especially politicians) should live in government subsidized housing (still comfortable not like say... the projects that every large city has) and get a flat salary of a decent amount fitting to the cost of living and be allowed only 1 term limit, then they can go back to their private businesses or jobs or whatever. Career politicians keep saying they need to stay in office to keep the bills they've helped pass alive...

Bailing out the banks, oil companies, big businesses was a STUPID idea and again :soapbox: I doth protest loudly why the CEO's were allowed to retain their annual bonuses out of that bail out money, when it should've went back into the company like it was intended to.

I used to be part of that 53% or is it 51% until I got fired over some stupid b.s. and been out of work since. I want to get back to work and start living again ... yet I'm accused of being lazy because I don't have the $ for gas (which is out of control) to hunt for the jobs that are out there.

Either way... signs are showing that the American people are getting tired of it all. But will they be effective enough to effect change and the change that is needed?

“People shouldn't be afraid of their government. Governments should be afraid of their people.” ~Alan Moore

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Why do we keep voting for these guys then? We've all heard the rhetoric 1000 times before in the past and it hasn't changed, but we keep voting these guys back into the cushy offices and the meager $175,000.00 annual salary... jeez I can do A LOT with that much living in a simple 2 bedroom house and a 20 year old car (which I have) and still manage to do my job adequately. Can't live on that amount then sumting veddy wong hear.

If you're a Congressman, you have to maintain two residences; your own home, in your home state, and a place to live in Washington, DC, one of the most expensive places to live in the USA. It's a lot of money, but it's not that much.

Someone told me that all ... ALL government employees (especially politicians) should live in government subsidized housing (still comfortable not like say... the projects that every large city has) and get a flat salary of a decent amount fitting to the cost of living and be allowed only 1 term limit, then they can go back to their private businesses or jobs or whatever. Career politicians keep saying they need to stay in office to keep the bills they've helped pass alive...

Most citizens want to keep re-electing their Congressmen also, and they do, term after term. Why?

Several reasons.

First, because no matter how much we want them to cut the pork, we want the pork to come to our own states. Congressmen who 'bring home the bacon' and preserve jobs, get appropriations, and otherwise bring tax dollars back to their own state are revered. Not just in some state you don't like in, but in your state too.

Second, because as Congressmen remain in Congress and learn the ropes, they build connections, form coalitions of like-minded Congressmen, figure out how to make things happen, and most importantly, they get put on (and in charge of) powerful committees. Newly-minted Congressmen are in charge of nada. If you want a quick but accurate lesson in how this works, just watch the movie "The Distinguished Gentleman" starring Eddie Murphy.

Why not term limits? Because it would leave only one set of experienced politicians in Washington; lobbyists. Yes, the most highly-paid lobbyists are former Congressmen and their most-experienced former staffers and aids. At the moment, the experience level is relatively matched - lobbyists have a lot of insider knowledge; but they can't put one over on Congress (not saying they can't buy 'em, but that's a different story). With nothing but perpetual freshmen Congress, lobbyists would eat 'em for breakfast.

Bailing out the banks, oil companies, big businesses was a STUPID idea and again :soapbox: I doth protest loudly why the CEO's were allowed to retain their annual bonuses out of that bail out money, when it should've went back into the company like it was intended to.

I'm angry too; but I don't know that it was stupid to bail out the banks or the auto industry; I'm not saying it was good or bad, because I honestly don't know what would have happened if we hadn't bailed them out. But yes, I'm angry about the big bonuses paid to CEO's of bailed-out companies, etc.

This kind of describes how I feel about it:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/christo...ips-for-the-simpletons-of-occupy-wall-street/

Not sure what that has to do with the email circulating around making false claims has to do with that, but there you go.

I used to be part of that 53% or is it 51% until I got fired over some stupid b.s. and been out of work since. I want to get back to work and start living again ... yet I'm accused of being lazy because I don't have the $ for gas (which is out of control) to hunt for the jobs that are out there.

I haven't accused you of being lazy. But for what it's worth, I got fired, lost my house, lived 800 miles apart from my wife for three years until we could get back together under one roof again, and oh yeah, bankruptcy too. I mean, if we're comparing pain and all.

Either way... signs are showing that the American people are getting tired of it all. But will they be effective enough to effect change and the change that is needed?

How about a better question. Will they manage to influence change that WORKS?

“People shouldn't be afraid of their government. Governments should be afraid of their people.” ~Alan Moore

That's ********. My opinion.

 

[MA-Caver]

How about a better question. Will they manage to influence change that WORKS?

Well yeah ... that's what I meant :wink2: Question to the question I reckon would be can we all find agreement on which change WILL work? Some changes take time to show their effectiveness.

That's ********. My opinion.

Just asking... why B.S. ? (on the government fearing it's people... )

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Well yeah ... that's what I meant :wink2: Question to the question I reckon would be can we all find agreement on which change WILL work? Some changes take time to show their effectiveness.

I a) doubt we'll all agree on what will work and b) think that even if we did all agree, that doesn't mean it would work. None of us individually are as dumb as all of us collectively sometimes.

Just asking... why B.S. ? (on the government fearing it's people... )

Because we are the government, basically.

 

[Cyriacus]

It seems to me that on both the left and the right these days, being ANGRY is more important than having SOLUTIONS. Being LOUD is better than being CORRECT. FEELINGS are more valid than FACTS. And it's beginning to cheese me right off.

Suffice to say, I know what you mean.

 

[zDom]

regarding the "big bonuses": Nevermind "big", why would an executive in charge of a company that FAILED so badly they "needed" taxpayer money to keep them from going under get ANY BONUS AT ALL?

They should have been CANNED — not sitting in their cushy office collecting a BONUS.

And any company that gives BONUSES to management that is failing doesn't deserve to stay in business.

WTF is wrong with us that we let this happen? That we punish failure on a small level but reward it if the business is big enough?

How do I get aboard that gravy train — where win or lose, I pull in six figures plus bonuses that exceed my expected actual lifetime earnings?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

regarding the "big bonuses": Nevermind "big", why would an executive in charge of a company that FAILED so badly they "needed" taxpayer money to keep them from going under get ANY BONUS AT ALL?

The more important question is why we (the government) allowed the companies we bailed out to give bonuses to their executives. This was clearly a mistake on our part.

As to companies that did not get taxpayer money, they can do whatever they wish, whether they make money or not. They're accountable to their stockholders, not to the taxpayer or the general public. It seems lately that everyone thinks they have a right to dictate what private companies pay their employees. We don't.

They should have been CANNED — not sitting in their cushy office collecting a BONUS.

But we apparently failed to require that of the companies we bailed out.

And any company that gives BONUSES to management that is failing doesn't deserve to stay in business.

But some do anyway.

WTF is wrong with us that we let this happen? That we punish failure on a small level but reward it if the business is big enough?

That is a very good question. And one which we should be asking our elected representatives. But we seem not to do that.

How do I get aboard that gravy train — where win or lose, I pull in six figures plus bonuses that exceed my expected actual lifetime earnings?

Dunno. I believe it involves unsavory acts and pacts with certain demons, but what do I know?