DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is embarrassing.

I should have worked for google....


I don't have a problem with her salary... she got elected... that's what they make... I have a problem with her policies (which I completely disagree with) and the fact that she is inaccurate frequently and sounds like an idiot.....

I have similar problems with trump... agree with more of his policies but dude sounds like an idiot frequently....

The L4 comp I mentioned across all job sites. If you're just talking California, an L4 at Google can hit $300k or higher fairly easily. But really this is all besides the point. Calling a seat in the US House an " entry level position " makes absolutely no sense.

I think the disconnect is that entry level != experience. You can have no experience and be above entry level. My companies CEO has known only one job: the one he is in. We generate millions/yr in revenue and have employees on 4 continents. He has no prior experience, as he formed this business straight out of grad school. Yet I wouldn't typically consider the CEO of a company to be an entry level position, inexperienced or otherwise.

Both. I don't think we should be using tax funds to pay people exoborant amount of salaries to work part time when they are supposed to be working for the betterment of the country.

Which make me wonder : Why does Washington have all this time off? Is it not an important job to work full time?

As far a PRIVATE citizen goes, that's a completely different topic.

I've generally considered total compensation to be a function of skill and rarity. It's why a software engineer makes six figures and a burger technician at five guys doesn't. I don't know how many people hold the title "Congressperson" in the US (speaking state here not just federal) but given that most states probably don't have more than a few hundred, you're still talking an incredibly rare position to hold.

To me part time / full time doesn't matter as everything gets extrapolated from hours worked in the end. Even if you're salary, the salary tables your boss/company uses will adjust for hours. Maybe this is why US congresspeople make 174k and the president makes 400k... Just speculating.

That's why I don't see the problem... As for taxpayer funds, I think as a taxpayer I want competent people in positions of power, for our benefit, and if we made being a congressperson a pro bono job or something very low, the only people who would do the job would be independently wealthy people or people who cannot find a job that pays more.

I don't have a problem paying competent people their worth. when we have competent people in congress worth their pay, let me know.

We don't. However some things to consider before I get into my main point.

1. Most of these jobs are "part time" because historically congressmen have participated a lot more in their state politics instead of national politics. Especially the further we move back in time and start to see a lot of resentment towards any grand federal government action. Like schools' summer breaks, congressional recesses are holdovers of the past.

2. While the jobs are "part time" senators and congresspeople are working 24/7 for their party to fund future campaigns and to fund their national committee. Each party is pulling about 800+ million dollars per election (Presidential and midterms). Congresspeople are always greasing palms and playing politics.

3. It's a cross country job. For most congresspersons (AOC excluded), Washington is very far from their district. Over 2 hours away. Could you imagine doing travel jobs for less than six figures? Especially when talking about a bureaucratic and powerful job like working in the legislative branch. It makes sense that most congresspeople seek long term living arrangements in DC or, if you're super rich, Northern Virginia. Neither areas are cheap. These people do need to be compensated, even if many are rich enough to not need it.

I'm not sure on where exactly I stand, but I would like to see congress members possibly be paid more. Of course most are slimy greaseballs, which makes me want to not do that, however maybe financially compensating them while stripping them of a lot of their economic freedoms, such as, being able to serve on company boards, stock trading based on privy information, and a much more transparent system to record their financial records.

174 is just pay. were not even talking about healthcare for life and other benefits. they are making millions of dollars within a short few years.

FYI, i don't think them campaigning all the time and getting greased is a good argument for them working more hours. That less time they are working.

Yeah, healthcare for life is stupid considering how rich they get when they serve.

Yes, that would be the case in an uncorrupted DC, however lobbyists have been writing most of the bills for the past decade, if not longer, so getting slushed at dinner while some lobbyist feeds them talking points, is the closest thing congress members get to working that doesn't involve their portfolios. I personally wouldn't consider it working either, but the congress people, mainly the house members who are a bit more vulnerable, work for the party not for the US. The parties are ran like a Fortune 500 company, if you aren't repeating the company line and raising enough money, not only will the congress person face their opposition party in the fall, but also a primary challenger who will work for X party. The bureaucratic efficiency of the two parties are disgusting, but something to behold.

we agree on that, for sure.

Can you and willit stop it with these tired ass lies already?

They do not get healthcare for life and other benefits.

https://www.politifact.com/ohio/statemen...-after-just-on/

Most members aren’t getting anywhere close to being eligible for that. Like honestly I expected much better than nonsense from you two.

the article you posted says nothing about healthcare, but pay. Which no one said they get pay for life - if you are going to try rebuke what was said about healthcare they receive, at least post an article that relates to healthcare, not pay.

You don’t think I looked?

You know why I didn’t post anything like that? Cause very few people are gullible enough to think they get free healthcare for life after a couple of terms. All the articles relate to how much benefits they get WHILE they are active in congress. So I posted he most relevant article I could, which basically means once they hit the required years (very very few do) they get pay AND benefits.

Also, most members actually have to pay a premium every month for healthcare just like everyone else. Another subject that I would expect you and CHS to already be well aware of.

But I guess I have to adjust my thinking on what you and CHS actually know. So disappointed.

Dems Tired Of Her. She is making enemies. She Needs To Rein It In

You're doing amazing sweetie

Seems she wants to be a twitter star like Donny Poo.

And the establishment doesnt like it.

I'm not a fan.

There is a way that s# gets did.
Banging out 'quick thoughts' on Twitter is not statesmanship. It's not how serious policy should be discussed/considered.

I don't like it when Individual 1 does it; I don't like it when anyone else employs it.

Bad policy/procedure is bad policy/procedure. Doesn't matter which 'side' uses it.

I think we’ve been down this road before. Maybe not. Jealousy will eat you away bro.

Whether you like it or not, it’s the future. Most people in the 18-35 demo don’t watch cable or local news. And for good reason - local news has become a hive of Sinclair broadcasting, and cable news - seeing their imminent extinction- have turned towards a lurid reality TV model to stay afloat.

If you’re, say, a junior senator or freshman congressperson, and you hold a speech on any particular issue on the same day that a big truck pulls up at the White House so Trump can be distracted and play with the truck’s horn, which event do you think CNN is going to give airtime to?

One could argue that Trump changed the game, or merely jumped in early on the inevitable, but it is inevitable. Social media is going to be the future of how politicians get out messaging. I’m not saying it’s better or wose, but it is the future.

You make valid points.
I guess I'm getting too old and set in my ways.

Thanks for the insight- now get off my lawn.

I don't care who you are, that's funny right there.

Funny or embarrassing depending on your point of view.

I'm saying it for the record. It's worse.... WAY WORSE.

my wig

That staff looks pretty diverse to me.

Worse than what we thought, Willit

atleast there's a token asian. they get hired less than black people do in the news industry.

Ocasio-Cortez slammed for 'hypocrisy' after her campaign fined for not providing worker's compensation coverage

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ocasio-...sation-coverage

Guess we are playing this game again.

I appreciate your consistency. "Clap back" twitter is for celebrities not serious politicians. That includes Trump, both should be condemned, but if you look at the comments on her posts, there is large backing of support from the left thirsty for clap back twitter. Maybe that is in direct response to Trump, either way it is a concerning trend.

Trump doesn't drink.

I never called for quotas. I just want quotas.

How long will it take until they understand that you can't possibly convey a comprehensive message in 140 characters.

Twitter is not the place to debate these very nuanced topics. It almost always comes off as smug and trite when limiting the characters.

It's 280 characters now and many chain tweet bigger messages. Trump chain tweets daily.

Poll: A majority of Americans support raising the top tax rate to 70 percent

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas...-tax-rate-to-70

Wow. Mind blown.

Not at all surprising for me. The concept of earning more than $500k/yr (the top marginal rate) is like winning the lottery for the vast, vast majority of Americans.

No surprise. People feel they are entitled to everyone elses money. As long as they don't have to pay they'll support tax increases.

The extent of her qualifications, knowing how to change a 20.00 bill in a dark lit room. . . .