Did you catch the Congressman who can't afford more taxes? His $400,00 barely...

Discussion in 'The Watercooler' started by DDD, Sep 21, 2011.

  1. DDD

    DDD Well-Known Member

    "supports his family" Yeah the Congressman from La. says he'll vote no on new taxes for the rich because he "barely supports his family" with $400.000 income. OMG! I had to read it twice because I couldn't believe an elected official would be dumb enough to say that.

    Gee, America, do you think YOU could support your family on that salary?? Geez, Louise. DDD

    Oh, well, time to head home and feed my family a cheap nutritious meal, LOL
     
  2. InsaneCdn

    InsaneCdn Well-Known Member

    DDD - you can afford nutritious?
     
  3. muttmeister

    muttmeister Well-Known Member

    This is a perfect example of what is wrong with our government. But nobody but a rich person can hope to runfor office. Disgusting!
     
  4. DammitJanet

    DammitJanet Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Poor guy. 400,000 just isnt enough money. I guess when you have to support two 2.5 million dollar homes and 3 mistresses it could be tight. Oh and lets not forget the cell phones for everyone and BMW's for everyone that they trade in every time a new model comes out.
     
  5. klmno

    klmno Active Member

    No and the whole thing makes me sick. Senators can serve 1 4-year term and gegt paid for life, or so I heard, and yet they want to cut benefits to the military and veterans. It's not just the federal legislators though- in this state one year they couldn't agree on budget cuts before the session ended so had to go into the weekend and they demanded to get paid for the weekend overtime, even though it was them that caused it to go into overtime.....to discuss budget shortfalls, of course. And what got cut? Funding to mental health, public k-12 schools, and Department of Juvenile Justice. I swear that's the truth- I kept up with it via their own website. That says a lot about the priorities of those in control of this state doesn't it?
     
  6. DDD

    DDD Well-Known Member

    The guy was serious. I'm sure his fellow Tea Party Republicans are blasting him, lol, for going public. I read the write up and what he said was that about half of his income was spent on his businesses so he only had about $200,000 to support his family. I'm not in that league but a couple of our grown kids are and they work hard for their $200,000. Both live in very large and lovely homes that they have earned. on the other hand neither of them have ways to hide income nor do they have any qualms about paying their fair share. They are more interested in the solvency of the government than they are in squirreling away excessive funds. This guy spoke his truth, lol. The others are lying through their teeth to avoid personal income reduction. Interesting. DDD
     
  7. slsh

    slsh member since 1999

    You know what? I'm really not sure I *could* spend $400,000 a year - even if I tried really hard. :rofl:

    Sigh.... this guy ought to try living on the average salary of his constituents.

    Reality to Congress.... anyone home?
     
  8. DaisyFace

    DaisyFace Love me...Love me not

    Awwwwww....

    That poor man! Let's take up a collection....

    Pass the hat!

    (Course, what you PUT in the hat is up to you. Seems to me my dog oughta be able to dig up something....)
     
  9. donna723

    donna723 Well-Known Member

    That's not much different than some of those professional athletes or flash-in-the-pan rock stars who made millions and millions and then a year later they're broke, they're filing for bankruptcy and the IRS is after them! Aw, too bad. The amount of money that some of those people blow in a year could probably support most of US for the rest of our lives!

    And if this guy is putting half of his $400,000 income into his businesses, then theoretically he should also be getting a nice, tidy little income from those businesses too. And if I'm not mistaken, those legislators also get their cushy medical insurance for life too. But not what the ordinary people like us get - theirs is much better than what we 'commoners' could ever afford.
     
  10. AnnieO

    AnnieO Shooting from the Hip

    I just did some quick math and it would take me almost 12 years to earn $400K even with a 3% raise each year.

    And I support my family! We're doing WELL on that!

    ARGH.
     
  11. busywend

    busywend Well-Known Member Staff Member

    I know this is on the verge of a political discussion.....so let's make sure it does not go that way.

    On the news this morning where I live an additional 35,000 people have entered the poverty level in 10 years. It is now 115,000 people total so that means a 30% increase in poverty numbers. That is just so sad.
    And poverty = impossible in my book when they show that $22,000 for a family of 4 is considered poverty. I do not know how anyone can provide shelter, clothing and food for 4 people on that amount.

    I wonder how much a family of 4 gets on welfare. Wonder if a family is better off on it than off.
     
  12. DammitJanet

    DammitJanet Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Busy...in reality, they are probably better off on it than off. If they get low income housing that is based on income it would be next to nothing, normally utilities are included, a family of four would get about 400 cash, at least 600 in food stamps, medicaid and no copays.

    If the family is below poverty line, most likely either its a single parent home working and taking care of 3 kids at a minimum wage job or a two parent family and one parent is staying home to take care of them. Most likely neither adult will have insurance but probably the kids will have state health insurance. Possibly the family will be eligible for a minimum amount of food stamps but not much. Maybe 50 bucks or so. They would probably be able to get into low income housing but the wait would be long and the rent would be high. They could probably rent a cheaper rundown trailer in a bad part of town faster. That was the life we lived for most of our lives.
     
  13. klmno

    klmno Active Member

    Yes, they are better off in the sense of how much assistance they get (the costt of the assistance) on top of a part-time min wage job, for instance, and child care covered by the government/dss. This is why so many people think some people don't ever try to get off welfare. on the other hand, I seriously doubt many who didn't grow up in families where this is all they know would perfer it - I don't buy that most people wouldn't rather have a better job, support their family, and get their kids in a better neighborhood.

    Our economy has just taken such a hit for so long and so many are trying to just survive. If this isn't a depression, I'd sure like to know what the definition of "depression" is and how far away we've been from that defining line the last couple of years. You can't tell people in the building industry that this isn't a depression.
     
  14. DammitJanet

    DammitJanet Well-Known Member Staff Member

Loading...