My last two jobs had really great insurance with no deductible and little to no premium paid by me. Really lucked out when I had a bone breaking accident.

My current insurance from a rather large company is $3500 deductible in network, $6000 out of network, and $450 a month paid by me.

My insurance is fully covered by my employer. It's rare, but it does exist.

If you make like <=25k/year (individual), subsidizes make it possible...

Nor do international members, care to share?

If the job didn't pay a salary, the only people who could do the job would be the rich who don't need a salary, or those willing to accept bribes.

If you make the salary too low, it will discourage anybody who can make a better living doing something else. And, if the people doing it don't think they're being paid what they're really worth, they're more likely to take bribes or "donations" to boost their salary back up to what it should be.

Really, the salary should be high. It should be a job that people who are really qualified will want to do. It should be one where you have no need to take a bribe because you're already doing so well, and you'd be afraid of throwing away such a well compensated job.

I wouldn't say it's so that they can't be bought, so much as so they don't have to be bought. It's part of the reason they haven't voted for a pay raise and so long. Their owners don't want them to have other options.

Honestly, there’s a load of satisfied wealthy people - you just don’t hear about them because, well, there’s literally nothing to report about them.

They also carry a hell of a lot more responsibility than the average American worker. Is be in favor of a party raise along with restricting other income streams like stock investments.

Oh man I'm sorry

Bribery is still illegal. But it’s not a “bribe” unless it’s paid directly to the politician in exchange for something specific (quid pro quo). So you just need to obfuscate that deal enough so that you can’t prove it’s a bribe, in the legal sense. (SuperPACs, etc).

Or rather, they only get the benefits guaranteed to all citizens.

$300/month 😂😭😢😐

I was on private health insurance for a couple of years. My premium was over $300 a month and my deductible was $7000. I had looked for an ACA policy on the government website but something with the same level of deductible was closer to $1000 a month. What really sucked is that my private policy did not qualify for the exemption from the fine you had to pay for not having health insurance. Somehow I never had to pay the fine, I dunno why not. I'm sure my policy also would have fucked me if I'd ever tried to collect on it, but fortunately I was completely healthy during that stretch.

Well that's easy then. Federally owned dorm housing for congress.

Or, and hear me out in this one, if the average is not sustainable they would need to raise the average or lower costs until a balance was reached. By forcing them to play by the very rules that are writing, there is an incentive to make them fair.

While this may not be there exact way too achieve that, the goal is still a good one to work towards.

For people complaining about the cost of living to cover in DC, build them some public housing barracks they can stay in so they have that covered.

There are easy solutions to that problem. $60k plus cost of living stipends for the two homes, which can't be spent on anything else, and only modest homes are eligible.

Some state legislatures already do stuff like this. Full time job for a few months out of the year that pays like $40k.

The people who run for office are the people who can afford to.

That can easily be fixed. Salary is the median (not average, because making more ultra-wealthy shouldn't be encouraged) US income + median COL in DC. Maybe add some extra on top to cover travel and other expenses.

The goal is to make enriching the American people equivalent to enriching themselves. Currently it's usually the opposite.

That's BS, you could definitely afford to live there, it'd just be in a shithole. Which is exactly the point.

I love this idea, if they want a raise they'd have to raise the federal minimum wage.

Okay, we need you to throw your hat in the ring and start representin'. I would def vote for you.

They never represented "us" in the broad sense.

As if they aren't already bought. At least you'll have one of your own elevated and not some already rich asshole trying to get richer.

I think this is overstated. You can't even run for Congress without being a millionaire, a millionaire's family, a lawyer, a lobbyist, or a military officer looking to cash out.

You can't get in the door of Congress without being in hoc to a constellation of private interests. Capping their pay won't change that.

Also politicians wouldn't exactly be less corruptible if they were poorer.

The billionaire donors are giving their campaigns money - direct bribery is still illegal. They make their millions from either a) book deals and speaking tours (generally legal and legitimate), b) insider trading (illegal but rarely enforced against congresspeople), or c) leaving Congress to influence peddle for private companies for inflated salaries (needs to be much more heavily regulated).

Make it 70, but they have to live off the same pensions as everyone else after 60 years old.

I agree that low salary is a losing game but a salary high enough to turn away all of the lobbiest is a losing battle also. Just make itillegal and enforce the rules.

Yeah, then just their spouses will work for the oil, tech, or war companies.

I do agree with everything you said, I just also know they'll slime their ways to paydays one way or another.

Where I live, lawyers go on to be judges, preside over landmark cases, leave the bench, and go work in that industry for the people they presided in favor of. We live in joke world.

"Maintaining residences in both DC and their home state/district" I've got that solved: We build a dorm facility in Washington and require them to stay there.

Lmao they have all ways been taking bribes. Lobbying is legalized bribery…

I don't know. On one hand, I think it's naive to think that dragging these politicians down to our level is going to make them see things through a different lens, as most of them are multi-millionaires anyway and the pay they get is just the gravy on top, and reducing their salaries isn't going to fix any kind of budgetary problem all on it's own - the money that they earn off of taxpayers is nothing compared to the national debt.

On the other hand, this cadre of politicians who exercise the most power and authority is so openly corrupt now that they do not even bother to hide it anymore. I feel like you can't get much worse than we already are without them resorting to literal mustache twirling acts of villainy.

Now, if we were somehow able to make them give up their wealth, to divest themselves from the financial consequences of their actions and live with the lasting legacy that they themselves wrought for others, that might have some effect, but that would require people to be altruistic and principled enough to understand that taking a job as a public servant shouldn't make you rich, and you should do it for the good of the people you represent.

Then investigate, have a process, stop treating them as untouchable prima donas

Campaigning to keep that job gets more time than the actual job. They consider it part of what we pay them for, which is utter bullshit.

Thats not really a flaw in the above, thats just a separate flaw in the political system that also needs addressing.

Yes this is exactly the reason they should actually make more than they do.

It would also ensure only people who were already wealthy would pursue it.