How Much is Congress Worth?

Some research was done on what the median income of various caucus's of the congress is. Cenk Uygur reports the numbers and breaks down which caucus has the highest median net worth.

Source: http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/01/tea-party-house-members-wealthy-gop.html

Subscribe to The Young Turks: http://bit.ly/eWuu5i

Download the politics or entertainment hour of this TYT episode: http://goo.gl/O131y

Find out how to watch The Young Turks on Current by clicking here: http://www.current.com/gettyt

The Largest Online New Show in the World.

Google+: http://www.gplus.to/TheYoungTurks

Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/tytnation

Twitter: http://twitter.com/theyoungturks

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Median Income
• Net Worth
• Progressives
• House
• Senate
• Progressive Caucus
• Democratic
• Republican
• GOP
• Wealthy
• Limo Liberals
• Politics
• Senators
• Tea Party
• Tea Party Caucus
• Caucus
• TYT
• Young Turks
• Cenk Uygur

[calimar28]

I think if we outsourced congress to India, we could get the same bad laws and overspending, but for half the price! I say outsource.

[savageecho]

What if we passed a law that fixes all congresspeople's pay each year to be the average income of their immediate constituents for the year prior and all senator's pay to the average of income in their State of the year prior? That would both lower the deficit AND give them great incentive to raise the standard of living across the us.

[luvcheney1]

@savageecho If the CEO does happen to own most of the stock, then if he takes dividends, or wages instead comes down to a simple tax question: is it better to take profit at personal rates, or pay corp taxes, and then dividends? OR, reorganize as an S-Corp, and just pay personal. If its HIS corp, of course the profits are his. Yes, it IS necessary to pay market wages to workers. UAW got WAY over market. UAW 1.5 mill workers 1979, 350,000 today. Over market? GET FIRED.

[savageecho]

@luvcheney1 So where is your 'logic'? Often those who are majority shareholders ARE the CEO's, board members, and upper management. So they would not see it as a waste to collect such a large protion of the profits. You also failed to show ANY reason why you might think paying them so much is necessary, you just asserted that it was necessary by virtue of stockholders. "The same is true for ordinary laborers" youlost me here. Are you asserting that it is necessary to pay them so much less?

[luvcheney1]

@savageecho Lets try logic, on the unfair and silly wage gap. Why would stockholders allow a business to waste THEIR money, overpaying executives, when the money would go into their own pockets, if indeed, it isnt really necessary? The same is true for ordinary laborers, as well, and skilled labor. Wages are prices, and are set at the point where there is balance between the supply of individuals capable of doing the job, and the jobs available.

[savageecho]

@luvcheney1 Why are you so angry and why are you resorting to strawmen arguments? "Perhaps you think labor makes automobiles," and then you procede to argue that point. I never even implied that labor alone does anything in particular. My question to the system is, why the huge divide? FedEx cannot run without the labor and it cannot run without the management. Both are important and so is incentive but there comes a point where the divide is so great that the incentive is unfair and silly.

[luvcheney1]

@savageecho Perhaps you think labor makes automobiles. OK, fine, try it. I bet you might actually need a fucking factory building, machines, research and development, engineers, and God knows what else, I dont. Glad you do. Labor + nothing= very little. Go mow a lawn, clean a pool, etc. Even then, you need a fucking truck. But, Capital + labor= something far more. Capital needs its share. BTW, if you take WalMarts CEO`s wages, given to each of WM`s employees, its fucking 5 cents.

[savageecho]

@luvcheney1 I am not complaining about my wages, I'm speaking to the system. Your statement, "Wages are the price of labor. Price of oranges is the price of oranges." is a bad comparison. Oranges are priced higher than the cost it takes to produce them in order to make a profit, which is fine. Wages are not. They are priced absurdly low so that others can make the profit created by labor. The divide is so great that it takes the average worker a full year to make what their CEO makes in a day.

[luvcheney1]

@savageecho Wages are the price of labor. Price of oranges is the price of oranges. Do you think the price of oranges doesnt include a profit, wages, insurance, water, and all other related costs? Of course, the entire value added by a worker isnt given to him. The value added must cover all other costs. If you dont like your wage, start your own business, get another job, get more training in something employers are willing to PAY for, or shut the fuck up.

[savageecho]

@luvcheney1 I'm not talking about opinion in worth. For example, if a salesman brings in 12 million dollars in profits to a company he will NOT be paid 12 million for his efforts yet his work is CLEARLY of that value. By the nature of the structure he will get a part of that and the rest will be passed up the chain with some actually being kept by the company and not all paid out. Ditto for labor. So, no it is not simply the "price of labor."

[marvelous3999]

congresson is supposed to make 250k annually so hard are they making more than that?

[luvcheney1]

@savageecho Wages are simply the price of labor. They respond to the "supply- demand model", which has nothing to do with your opinion of your worth. If you are worth more, get another job. If you cant earn more, then you KNOW your worth.