Anyone have any thoughts on this? This kind of builds on the sequestration thread.
http://cnnradio.cnn.com/2013/03/08/congressional-bonuses-in-a-time-of-cuts/?hpt=hp_t2
I have a big problem with this quote:
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-FL, responded, "We have not had raises or bonuses in several years. The small compensation reflects an increased workload each person had to take on after our staff was downsized because of budgetary cuts."
Most companies across the US have experienced such hardships, that they've had to layoff staff, cut payroll, and pretty much all areas across the board, let alone even think of giving raises. These poor babies expect the population to feel bad because they claim they haven't had a raise or bonus in a few years. They should be thankful to have a steady paycheck, because a lot of people don't anymore.
And a problem with this one:
Rep. Mike Thompson, D-CA, wrote, “have a hard working, dedicated team… and I want to pay a salary that reflects their service.”
He said he only gives bonuses if there is “money left over” at the end of the year.
First, there shouldn't be any money left over. There's huge budget deficits, and with the sequestration issue, no way they should have all that 'extra' money.
Second, his 'hard working staff' is part of a group that hasn't been effective in any productive way.
Anyone else getting tired of these clowns? When the government forced banks to take TARP funds, any bonuses had to be approved by a government financial manager. How is it, that when the government can't balance their budget, can't agree on spending cuts, and feel the only way to increase revenue is to tax an already burdened middle class, they can decide to give themselves bonuses. That should have to be approved by a civilian vote IMO.
http://cnnradio.cnn.com/2013/03/08/congressional-bonuses-in-a-time-of-cuts/?hpt=hp_t2
I have a big problem with this quote:
Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-FL, responded, "We have not had raises or bonuses in several years. The small compensation reflects an increased workload each person had to take on after our staff was downsized because of budgetary cuts."
Most companies across the US have experienced such hardships, that they've had to layoff staff, cut payroll, and pretty much all areas across the board, let alone even think of giving raises. These poor babies expect the population to feel bad because they claim they haven't had a raise or bonus in a few years. They should be thankful to have a steady paycheck, because a lot of people don't anymore.
And a problem with this one:
Rep. Mike Thompson, D-CA, wrote, “have a hard working, dedicated team… and I want to pay a salary that reflects their service.”
He said he only gives bonuses if there is “money left over” at the end of the year.
First, there shouldn't be any money left over. There's huge budget deficits, and with the sequestration issue, no way they should have all that 'extra' money.
Second, his 'hard working staff' is part of a group that hasn't been effective in any productive way.
Anyone else getting tired of these clowns? When the government forced banks to take TARP funds, any bonuses had to be approved by a government financial manager. How is it, that when the government can't balance their budget, can't agree on spending cuts, and feel the only way to increase revenue is to tax an already burdened middle class, they can decide to give themselves bonuses. That should have to be approved by a civilian vote IMO.