![]() |
|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Should politicians be paid the vast amounts that they receive now? | |||
| Politicians should be paid tons of money and retire after 5 years |
|
2 | 40.00% |
| Politicians should not be paid, but receive benefits (and receive a pension at the same age everyone else does) |
|
3 | 60.00% |
| Politicians should not be paid at all. |
|
0 | 0% |
| Voters: 5. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|||
|
Over here in the UK Politicians get over £100k a year (over $188k), voting for their own payrises, and retiring onto a comfortable pension and savings account after 5 years.
I'm sure it's similar in other parts of the world. But also here, we have 'Special Constables' which is volunteer police. They come out of their day jobs, then keep the streets safe through the night, basically fitting their community work around their main job. They don't get paid, and they work just as hard, perhaps with even more devotion to the job than most that wait for the clock to strike 60 and think 'ah another £8 in the bank' I believe that if politicians didnt receive the mass funding (and golden handshakes) they do now, many would drop out of politics, and the true devotees would step in. What do you think? |
| Sponsored Links |
| Red Cross - Donate Today Save the Rainforest |
|
||||
|
If they don't get paid, they'll me more open to take bribes to survive, the end of effective government (ask any African)
__________________
“The subject no longer has to be mentioned by name. Someone is sick. Someone else is feeling better now. A friend has just gone back into the hospital. Another has died. The unspoken name, of course, is AIDS.” “From the point of view of the pharmaceutical industry, the AIDS problem has already been solved. After all, we already have a drug which can be sold at the incredible price of $8, 000 an annual dose, and which has the added virtue of not diminishing the market by actually curing anyone.” |
|
||||
|
Not paying to the politicians is a very bad idea.. It makes them dependable of the external funders, which makes them vulnerable to corruption.. Anyway, being a political decisionmaker requires lot of time and effort for making informed decision, while staying in the contact with the people.. Not paying to politicians, would make the political career actually a considerable economic burden.. Either the parties/voters should finance their candidates (which could work), the politicians should work at a second job (terrible scenario), be rich (how representative would be that) or some other third party should pay their expenses.. At the worst case the third party would exchange the money for favours, which would be undesirable..
The best scenario would be the politicians paid by the parties, but I somehow doubt the average Joe's willingess to pay for the politicians and parties, if it were purely voluntary.. This especially considering how few people actually belong to political parties nowaday.. At the worst scenario, the situation would lead to very harmful arrangements, not at all beneficial for the people.. Overall - it would greate a bias towards the political funders, wheather they were paying party members or lobby groups.. The losers would be voters not willing to finance their candidates.. - BtD
__________________
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows." [George Orwell, 1984] |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
| Sponsored Links |
|