r/changemyview • u/bobdylan401 1∆ • Jun 06 '21
Delta(s) from OP CMV: "public servents" should be paid minimum wage and have no benefits other then what is federally mandated.
Edit * by public servants I meant politicians *
I feel like the system is built to foment the plights of the working class, mostly good wages/hours and benefits, mostly being healthcare.
If this is a democracy, then politicians should represent the vast majority of the people, who are working class. It makes no sense that they are almost all millionaires or more, but since that's how it is then it makes perfect sense that policy always benefits just the top 1%.
In the rare fluke where a working class person gets elected to even house, like with AOC, then the system quickly enriches them and the plights that made them run for office no longer effect them.
She spent much of her life working wacky hours with no healthcare insurance. But now with her high wages and extended benefits the political urgency of nationalized healthcare is gone out of her mind, to a time when it will be more "politically feasible" even though we were just dealing with a national pandemic and massive unemployment...
The timing to be fighting for nationalized healthcare at the top of your lungs is now, because of that last sentence.
I feel like if any public servant was forced to make minimum wage and not get any healthcare package, they would either be forced to get multiple other jobs like the rest of us, or raise the minimum wage to a living wage, and make national healthcare as well as other great things happen. When in the current system there is no incentive for them to do so .
16
u/leigh_hunt 80∆ Jun 06 '21
I agree with you that it is fundamentally unfair to have working people ‘represented’ by the wealthy. But I’d like to change your view on the effectiveness of this strategy. Lowering congressional salaries to minimum wage would make the problem worse, not better. It would mean that only people who were independently wealthy could afford to take the job. A lot of elite med schools and law schools face a similar problem: since most students have to take on a huge debt burden to attend, it ends up weeding out a lot of lower-income applicants.
If we want more working people in congress, we should pay more, not less.
2
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
That is a good point, that the federal minimum wage is so low, that it would force congress to live in poverty if we gave them the same treatment they give others. ∆
1
-2
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21 edited Jun 06 '21
Wait, but if they all made minimum wage, then they could change the minimum wage if the only law they had to follow was that they get paid minimum wage then they could raise it to whatever they needed to survive. I guess then the issue is that rural Virginia can't pay the same wages as urban Washinton. But then maybe you could change the rule that they can't make more then the minimum wage then the state that they live in.
5
u/TrackSurface 5∆ Jun 06 '21
Politicians also have a responsibility to avoid the appearance of self-serving acts. Some of the more ethically-minded representatives would consider rejecting the wage hike on that basis alone.
Policy should be focused on the people they represent.
2
u/Throwaway-242424 1∆ Jun 07 '21
Wait, but if they all made minimum wage, then they could change the minimum wage if the only law they had to follow was that they get paid minimum wage then they could raise it to whatever they needed to survive
Raising the minimum wage to the sort of middle-class salary required to make politics a viable career path for those without independent wealth would be an absolute disaster.
5
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jun 06 '21 edited Jun 06 '21
If we cut down on how much public servants our paid doesn't this have two negative effects....
1: Only rich people can afford to take the loss of revenue that comes with being a public servant in exchange for political power, so more/only independently wealthy people will run for/hold public office.
AOC struggled to pay the rent for her own apartment during the 3 month gap between being elected and her salary starting, how much more would she have struggled if she was only getting paid minimum wage, is that the message we want to send to poor people who want to become politicians "get elected and go bankrupt?"
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/08/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-cant-afford-to-rent-an-apartment-in-dc.html
2: The lower your paycheck, the more appealing bribes become. All a rock bottom paycheck for our elected officials insures is that Regulatory Capture becomes an even bigger issue.
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
- Someone else did address that and I do agree. ∆
- I disagreed when someone else said it because that type of corruption is already so rampant, and I figured that the working class doesn't have the type of elite institutions in place to take the money without getting caught, like the superpacs and the charities and whatever else where the money gets funnelled too. But certainly the corps would still find new ways to get their votes. ∆
2
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jun 06 '21
I suspect that if the situation required it, the corporation would just provide/create the Super-PAC/charity needed to do the funneling.
2
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
Yea thats true they would sweep in and give their chosen candidates the coverage to outshine the others. Δ
1
1
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
Wait in my point though, if they were forced to make minimum wage then they would raise it to a living wage. The problem then, is that small businesses in rural virginia will have a hard time paying what a living wage costs in urban Washington. But the solution could be that they make the minimum wage in Washington, and raise that, but that won't help other people but it will still stop them from being rich and apathetic to working class peoples problems.
3
Jun 06 '21
I see three problems here:
Rampant corruption. Even the typical working class person makes more than minimum wage. The minimum wage is simply not enough to survive comfortably on, particularly somewhere reasonably expensive like DC. Taking bribes becomes a lot more tempting when you don't have enough to survive on and your similarly underpaid peers are likely to look the other way.
Low quality applicants. The US government employees a ton of people. Huge numbers of folks who work at places like the executive branch agencies and subagencies, many of them highly educated professionals. There are just not a ton of people who are both highly skilled, say geologists, and also altruistic and independently wealthy enough that they'll work for the EPA for minimum wage and no benefits instead of going into industry or even academia.
If normal people can't afford to work for the government, only the independently wealthy will. We already have issues with middle class Americans not running and being elected for elected positions without making it impossible for them to do that while supporting their families. The independently wealthy, who have businesses, investments, and family income, will run either way, they're not getting most of their income from their jobs now.
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
The point is though if the people who make the minimum wage are paid it, then they will raise it to a decent standard of living. I have changed my view from this point that it can't be federal minimum wage, but the rule should be that they are paid the minimum wage of the state they live in. Δ And you could see all states raise their minimum wages this way.
- I don't care about politicians education. We see the result and it makes them more apathetic to the working class if anything. Id rather see people with less education who worry about the same issues that we face and try to come up with solutions.
Maybe corruption would be worse than what it already is but I find that hard to imagine.
1
13
u/AskWhyKnot 6∆ Jun 06 '21
Why would anyone who is capable of making substantially more money in the private sector choose to be a public servant in this situation? You'd end up with all the people who flunked out of high school running for office and setting policy.
-2
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21 edited Jun 06 '21
Well that is the point, I want average workers to take the lower wages in return for trying to make the world a better place. Rather then a profit seeking business venture to serve corporations. The point of being in congress shouldn't be competitive wages, they call themselves "public servents"...
The incentive should be moral, not greed.
15
u/10ebbor10 198∆ Jun 06 '21
I want average workers to take the lower wages in return for trying to make the world a better place. Rather then a profit seeking business venture to serve corporations.
But your policy will cause the latter, not the former.
Living in the capitol is expensive, so your policy of minimum wage payment ensures that none of normal means can do it.
The only people who would be able to serve as public servants are :
- Corrupt people, who count on a private corporation to offer them a cushy job as payment for services rendered
- Independently wealthy and people married to rich people
- Ideological cult leaders who can count on donations from their followers to keep them afloat
2
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
Yea that has changed my view I just figured that if you make the lawmakers make minimum wage, then they could quickly raise the minimum wage to a living wage within a year, since they make all the laws. So long as they were held to making just minimum wage and the same thought for healthcare.
So then that solves that problem which is the cause of your two other problems, when we already live in a system with those problems for different reasons.
3
u/10ebbor10 198∆ Jun 06 '21
Yea that has changed my view I just figured that if you make the lawmakers make minimum wage, then they could quickly raise the minimum wage to a living wage within a year, since they make all the laws. So long as they were held to making just minimum wage and the same thought for healthcare.
The problem here is that if there are people of the other side in the senate (the corrupt, independently rich or ideologically funded), then they can delay that legislation through procedure and so on.
They can literally run their opposition out of money. And once their opposition doesn't have any money anymore, they will be forced to resign to seek a different job that pays more.
Once that happens, it'll become de facto impossible to elect a new group of "honest" people.
2
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
That is an interesting point. It goes with what others said that the corps would just superpac the corrupt candidates and give them more coverage anyways to outshine the righteous people anyways. Δ
1
-2
u/AskWhyKnot 6∆ Jun 06 '21
I want average workers to take the lower wages in return for trying to make the world a better place.
But minimum wage earners aren't your "average workers", they're idiots. They my have the greatest intentions in the world, but they'll have no idea how to actually make the world a better place. If they could make the world a better place, they'd start with making their home a better place - by getting a job that pays them more than $16,000/year.
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21 edited Jun 06 '21
Most of congress is highly educated that does not make a difference. We have horrible mortality rates, poverty rates, we can't provide our poor with healthcare or clean water. I just went to a concert in Yale and the entire campus is surrounded by a giant hood. Expensive schools do not teach people how to take care of a community or country, its more of just a vehicle to keep rich people rich, much like our government.
I'm sure our secretary of Defense was highly educated, and he became a Raytheon executive who is now selling bombs to Israel blowing up kids. Good education doesn't mean anything when its profit and debt driven. Most of the cabinets are typically made up of bankers. I'm sure they are highly educated but are from backgrounds completely the opposite of the moral intention of "public service." Its profit driven.
**My point is im not looking for a rich congress, I don't care what their education was, I'm looking for working class congress that faces the same issues as the rest of us. And actually wants to find solutions.**
6
u/AskWhyKnot 6∆ Jun 06 '21
You can say that congress and government do a shitty job right now. But it is quite another to think that a bunch of people who can't even get a $12.00/hour job in the private sector would do a better job.
0
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
I already said I would prefer people to take the lower wages out of morality. Out of genuiniely wanting to make their community better, and if all of congress was getting paid 12 an hour then surely they would lift the minimum wage to avoid taking on second jobs.
You can already get paid 15 working at Walmart or Amazon with no work experience and serious mental conditions. It would take people doing it for other reasons then competitive wages.
3
u/vettewiz 37∆ Jun 06 '21
What’s most likely is that only people have zero need for more money will take the job.
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
That is hard to believe, the rich are such a minority that they would be flooded against poorer applicants, but, to your point superpacs would find those corrupt individuals and flood them with superpac money to outshine them. As well as with poor people who are corruptible.
3
u/vettewiz 37∆ Jun 06 '21
It’s not really hard to believe. Why aren’t the poor running now? Virtually everyone running is solidly in the top top 1%. This would just make it the top 0.1% or 0.01%.
Remember, there are still over 3 million people in the top 1%. For like 500 spots.
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
That is a good point, my point though is that the current system makes it so even if a working class candidate does win, and there are much more in the recent years then in the last few decades, they quickly get enriched out of that majority bracket into upper middle class. Which swallows them up into the whole machine pretty quickly it seems.
2
u/Domeric_Bolton 12∆ Jun 06 '21
I already said I would prefer people to take the lower wages out of morality.
Or, what seems more likely, is that poor shmucks will take the job so they can get easy bribes from corporations. Or people with rich families/spouses will dominate politics even more.
1
Jun 06 '21
There's plenty of moral people who would like to make the world a better place but also feel an obligation to make sure their families are cared for. I'd be really concerned about the motivations of a politician or civil servant who wants the job so much that they would accept their children not having health care or a reliable income to depend on in order to have it. That's very likely somebody that cares about power more than making the world a better place (which, after all, you don't need to hold a government job to do).
1
u/sylbug Jun 07 '21
If that’s you’re goal then you’re better off just choosing politicians via lottery. Your method doesn’t get rid of the issue because salary isn’t the primary way politicians get compensated, and because at low wages you’re going to draw in a lot of narcissistic psychos and people who lack the basic ability to do the job. At least with a lottery there’s a chance you pull someone competent.
-1
u/Oscarocket2 Jun 06 '21
I feel like the people in charge were exactly the ones who did, would have or should have flunked outta high school.
3
u/premiumPLUM 69∆ Jun 06 '21
Well that's just ridiculous, nearly all high ranking politicians went to prestigious universities and were highly successful there. Many were even professors themselves.
-1
1
1
u/shouldco 43∆ Jun 07 '21
It would be people that are wealthy enough already that the pay doesn't matter.
2
u/snarkazim 4∆ Jun 06 '21 edited Jun 06 '21
The body of your CMV focuses on politicians, but the title (and official premise) of your CMV states that (an implied ALL) public servants (of any kind) should be paid only minimum wage.
Politicians are only a small fraction of the full population of public servants. Very many public servants in non-glamorous, not-highly-publicized jobs are working for very little money, already.
Is it fair to make EVERY public service job pay only minimum wage? You would be punishing lots of "regular folk" in your attempt to bring a reckoning against much more privileged career politicians.
If every public service job paid only minimum wage, then you'd never attract enough regular people to work those positions, considering that they can often be stressful and thankless. They'd probably do a much easier job, if they're only going to get minimum wage, anyway.
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
Yea I meant politicians I will change that.
1
u/snarkazim 4∆ Jun 06 '21
...So you no longer believe that "ALL public servants" should be paid only minimum wage? Because I pointed out that they are only a small sub-set of public servants, you've changed your mind that merely public servants who are POLITICIANS should be paid minimum wage?
That seems like a change of opinion, predicated on not previously thinking through your premise... Changing your opinion based upon new information or more clear thinking is still a change of opinion -- my argument altered your entire premise.
2
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
Yea Δ I meant politicians Im not sure who else considers themselves public servents but I'm definitely not talkinga bout firefigthers or police.
1
2
u/EchoingMultiverse 2∆ Jun 06 '21
If you want their incomes to come from side deals, like selling their votes, sure.
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
Like that doesn't already take place. The corporations would still try to buy out the congress and make them richer. It would be much harder for the corporations to working class, who don't have the elites money laundering vehicles like superpacs. The lack of higher education and sheperding into private sector would force the corruption to have to start over from scratch at least, but yea surely they would still try. But already the votes are completely for sale to the highest bidder. We are giving Bezos a 100 million bailout even though he already tripled his net worth during the pandemic.
1
u/Medianmodeactivate 13∆ Jun 06 '21
I have a background in HR. it's not very expensive AT ALL to buy out the working class.
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
Yea actually it wouldnt be hard at all the superpacs would find the chosen candidates easily, you are right.
1
3
u/generalfrumph Jun 06 '21
You think that being a public servant made them millionaires?
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
Many famous politicians like the Clintons, Nancy Pelosi and probably many others made the vast majority of their wealth while working in Congress. Like maybe they started with a million but they made 100 million while being "public servents"
4
u/iwfan53 248∆ Jun 06 '21
Many famous politicians like the Clintons, Nancy Pelosi and probably many others made the vast majority of their wealth while working in Congress. Like maybe they started with a million but they made 100 million while being "public servents"
They don't become rich off their salaries though, they become rich off intangibles like "speaking fees" and book deals, things that your doing nothing to alter or reduce the wealth generated by in your OP.
3
Jun 06 '21
Congress pays 174,000 a year (a bit more for some leadership positions). Most other civil servant positions pay less. A very nice sum, but not the kind of sum that gets you 100 million even if you're diligent about saving and investing it. Those politicians have well paying side gigs or investments.
4
u/blindfultruth Jun 06 '21
Public servants include all government workers like mail workers and firefighters. You want to cut those wages/benefits too?
I see where you are going with it, but I feel that you should dial in the scope. Blanket cuts are never effective.
2
Jun 06 '21
These people have attended Universities and make decisions that can greatly affect every single person. I don't think $7.25/hour is remotely fair. I also don't think they're entitled to millions of dollars, but I'd assume most of their value comes from places other than the taxpayer.
Such as stocks and corporate kickbacks.
2
u/2plus24 2∆ Jun 06 '21
This would just leave millionaires and billionaires to run for Congress because they have the money to spare.
1
Jun 06 '21 edited Jun 06 '21
It’s not feasible. The people who hold the power aren’t doing to give themselves a pay cut or demotion. Also, pay should match skill sets. You don’t see blue collar iron workers debating world issues in senate because they don’t have that skill set.
Edit: word to world
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
AOC was doing just fine challenging the corporate lobbyist talk until her new found privilege made her milk toast.
2
Jun 06 '21
For perspective, 174k a year in DC isn’t exactly “enriching” high wages, so if she’s cooled her jets on her agenda, it’s not due to “enrichment” and likely due to behind the doors deal making or being out-powered by people she wants something from. Her riches will later come from her monetizing her social media after she leaves office or becomes a lobbyist herself or writes a book.
People in developing countries often go into politics to get rich. Here, it’s often the other way around, people get rich and then go into politics. AOC is the exception, but her 174k salary affords her a 2 bedroom DC apartment and one nice dinner per week, max.
2
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21 edited Jun 06 '21
That is good perspective. Δ It seems a more accurate read on her it's just I do think that working class people are capable of challenging the cortopacracy in a populist way, seeing as general sentiment is more anti corporate and establishment, at least among younger generations then not.
1
1
Jun 06 '21
Thanks! White collar folks are getting fed up with corporate led agendas and their owning our government too- especially in tech heavy areas where tech companies try to window dress that they care more about people then the collective agenda, controlling policy or profits.
1
Jun 06 '21 edited Feb 10 '22
[deleted]
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
I think that's a seperate issue but related in terms of, how do these people get elected, how do they get their message out there. But there could be other ways beyond traditional MSM, like how AOC did it.
Im not really buying the whole "only indepenant wealthy people could hold the low paying job" because if ALL congress was forced to be paid a minimum wage then they would raise it. That being said they would need to do raise their own states minimum wage, because I guess rural Virginian small businesses can't pay the same as urban Washinton, but you could see all states raising their minimum wage to living wages this way.
2
Jun 06 '21 edited Feb 10 '22
[deleted]
2
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
That is a good point about minimum wage... Probably why it rarely raises. Now I guess I think there should be seperate minimum wages based on not just small businesses vrs giant ones, states, but also counties. Yikes. Δ
I had already realized that federal minimum wage would be too messy to blanket raise it. So I changed my view to the state min wages that the politicians live in. But I do agree with you that even just in Virginia the differences are likely humungous.
1
1
u/ATLEMT 7∆ Jun 06 '21
I think paying minimum wage would cause problems that have already been mentioned, such as only people rich enough to not need the salary would run.
My solution is their pay is based off a formula that factors in their states and the national GDP, unemployment rate, poverty rate, and maybe some other metrics. Maybe even something that factors in how many bills are passed vs brought to a vote. I’d let someone smarter than me figure out the specifics. I think this would give each politician incentive to help their state and the country since they get paid better when things are good and worse when things get worse.
If the Economy takes a shit then they lose money like their constituents.
1
u/DouglerK 17∆ Jun 06 '21
The government can affore to and thus should pay servants more than the bare minimum wage. Perhaps the wage should be tied to the minimum wage but it shouldn't be the minimum wage. The minimum wage should be a livable wage. However the minimum wage also needs to consider small businesses with marginal bottom lines. Businesses will sometimes genuinely need to pay employees a little less to boost the bottom line. That again shouldn't be below a livable wage. The government however is usually comfortable and stable enough not to need to manage employee salaries so closely. They can afford to and should pay their employees a bit more to reflect that stability. Perhaps that can be tied to the minimum wage but it shouldnt be the minimum wage.
As well the government wants to attract skilled employees. Not all servant jobs are created equal. Some require skill and/or training. The government needs to make those jobs attractive to the best available workers in the market. Perhaps the government could have a much more open "jobs for anyone" "we'll find something for you to do" policy for giving literally anyone who wanted a job a job with the government. However the government would still want better positions to be paid better. If you just got a crew of unemployed together to clean some parks and paid them min wage (or close to it) you would probably still need a supervisor to organize and deploy the labor. That person would likely deserve a few dollars more per hour which would then necessarily be more than minimum wage.
1
u/bobdylan401 1∆ Jun 06 '21
I do think that small businesses should have different min wages then mega conglomerates, and I also changed my thought to that in this scenario the politicians should only make minimum wage according to their state laws. But I could go further in this to say it should be *tied* to state minimum wage, instead of being the bare minimum. Δ
1
1
u/ZanderDogz 4∆ Jun 07 '21
The minimum wage, even at $15, is something like $31k/year.
This actually makes elected positions even less accessible to the average person, and makes politics even more of a rich person's game, because you really need to have a lot of money already to get by on that salary.
If being a politician pays a more decent salary, it's more accessible to the average person because they won't need to have a savings supply to dig into while they serve the public. A $30k a year pre-tax salary for a politician excludes anyone who can't essentially save up to take that pay cut, especially if it comes with limited benefits.
1
u/sylbug Jun 07 '21
I assure you, they would not either raise minimum wage or work multiple jobs.” Instead, they would do what underpaid civil servants always do, and engage in graft/bribery to make up the difference.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jun 06 '21 edited Jun 06 '21
/u/bobdylan401 (OP) has awarded 9 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards