Ziad wrote:Well I agre with your comments straightshooter.
Money always plays a part, but as evident by a few examples once they leave the parliament they usually end up on better paying jobs
straightshooter wrote:How simple or perniciously envious do you have to be to believe that the big name politicians of any colour are in it for the parliamentary salary?
They are there to deliver power to their party organisation and the 'opportunities' it brings for the party and themselves individually.
The parliamentary salary is to keep the 'seat warmers' loyal to the party and continue to be totally compliant.
If you think politics works the way it is presented to us plebs by the media then sadly you are rather low IQ.
The only person to enter parliament with honest intentions was Guy Fawkes.
on_one_wheel wrote:In order to attract the right candidates the pay needs to match or be greater than what they'd otherwise earn elsewhere.... even at $500,000 plus perks, some of the greatest business people won't get out of bed for that.
Pay peanuts, get moneys.
flutch wrote:on_one_wheel wrote:In order to attract the right candidates the pay needs to match or be greater than what they'd otherwise earn elsewhere.... even at $500,000 plus perks, some of the greatest business people won't get out of bed for that.
Pay peanuts, get moneys.
Lol no, not even, if someone wants to make a change and not just looking to line their pockets that's the appropriate candidate, this idea that all politicians are people who would otherwise be CFO's, CEO's and other industrial tycoons is utterly retarded. That just shows the complacency and willingness to roll over to the oligarchs that impose that mindset. It's not a job, they aren't applying for a job as head of accounting or sales, they are asking to be elected to a descision making role that Impacts law.... The very last people that should be in office are those who are completely removed from the day to day necessities and desires of the average person.
on_one_wheel wrote:flutch wrote:on_one_wheel wrote:In order to attract the right candidates the pay needs to match or be greater than what they'd otherwise earn elsewhere.... even at $500,000 plus perks, some of the greatest business people won't get out of bed for that.
Pay peanuts, get moneys.
Lol no, not even, if someone wants to make a change and not just looking to line their pockets that's the appropriate candidate, this idea that all politicians are people who would otherwise be CFO's, CEO's and other industrial tycoons is utterly retarded. That just shows the complacency and willingness to roll over to the oligarchs that impose that mindset. It's not a job, they aren't applying for a job as head of accounting or sales, they are asking to be elected to a descision making role that Impacts law.... The very last people that should be in office are those who are completely removed from the day to day necessities and desires of the average person.
So we're looking for a buisnes / economic genius who's a philanthropist and would rather sit in on the top job and earn a fraction of what their capable of ?
What a wonderful Fairytale that would be.
I don't think that I'm the one here with retarded ideas here flutch.
flutch wrote:on_one_wheel wrote:flutch wrote:on_one_wheel wrote:In order to attract the right candidates the pay needs to match or be greater than what they'd otherwise earn elsewhere.... even at $500,000 plus perks, some of the greatest business people won't get out of bed for that.
Pay peanuts, get moneys.
Lol no, not even, if someone wants to make a change and not just looking to line their pockets that's the appropriate candidate, this idea that all politicians are people who would otherwise be CFO's, CEO's and other industrial tycoons is utterly retarded. That just shows the complacency and willingness to roll over to the oligarchs that impose that mindset. It's not a job, they aren't applying for a job as head of accounting or sales, they are asking to be elected to a descision making role that Impacts law.... The very last people that should be in office are those who are completely removed from the day to day necessities and desires of the average person.
So we're looking for a buisnes / economic genius who's a philanthropist and would rather sit in on the top job and earn a fraction of what their capable of ?
What a wonderful Fairytale that would be.
I don't think that I'm the one here with retarded ideas here flutch.
Yes because thats what we have now and in the past genius, look if you're happy throwing money at selfish c#nts then go ahead, personally that just makes you a dumb ass and a sucker
on_one_wheel wrote:So now I'm a naive dumb ass sucker ?
You know what they say ... it takes one to know one
They also say that he who resorts to insults to bolster his argument has lost.
I guess we'd get along just fine, provided I remember that your opinion is more important than anyone else's.
flutch wrote:on_one_wheel wrote:So now I'm a naive dumb ass sucker ?
You know what they say ... it takes one to know one
They also say that he who resorts to insults to bolster his argument has lost.
I guess we'd get along just fine, provided I remember that your opinion is more important than anyone else's.
Classic words of a shill
on_one_wheel wrote:flutch wrote:on_one_wheel wrote:So now I'm a naive dumb ass sucker ?
You know what they say ... it takes one to know one
They also say that he who resorts to insults to bolster his argument has lost.
I guess we'd get along just fine, provided I remember that your opinion is more important than anyone else's.
Classic words of a shill
Straight back to the name calling.
Oh it burns ... such hurt.
What are you, 16 ?
16 year old antics coming from all parties on the last page and a half otherwise this page would not have been here so lets go to Adult age and agree to disagree gents
TassieTiger wrote:Even the President of the USA and their retired senators are on much less $$$ than Australia's equivalents.
President USA presiding over 330,000,000 ppl = $400k a year...
Retired president = $207k.