How does that happen. Consider John McCain:

http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/...net-worth/

Quote:Politician John McCain has an estimated net worth of $21 million. John McCain has been a U.S. senator from Arizona since 1987, and was the Republican nominee for president in 2008. A 1958 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, McCain had a 22-year military career as a pilot and officer in the Navy. Five of those years (1967-73) were spent in a Vietnamese prisoner of war camp after he was shot down over Hanoi during the Vietnam War. McCain left the Navy in 1981, was elected to Congress in 1982, and then was elected as U.S. senator from Arizona in 1986.

Graduated from USNA - 1958
Served in military for 22 years (1958+22 = 1980), retiring in 1981
Elected to U.S. House of Reps in 1982 (2 terms 1983 - 1987)
Elected to U.S. Senate in 1986 (1987 thru the present).

The man spent his entire career in public service. Military for 22 years and then as an elected official from 1983 thru the present. How does he have a net worth of $21 million? How does he land a wife who has over $100 million? Once we can close all the loopholes that allow politicians to get rich while "serving" in public office, real fixes to our issues will be possible.

Two words come to mind: TERM LIMITS

Yep. I think they get a million under the table for each vote they cast on bills.

They are crooks

I imagine Congress is offered lots of investments and deals with "guaranteed" returns regardless of the actual performance.

"Senator, would you like to get in on this land deal with me? $10,000 investment from you, I'll put down the remainder."

Three years later the land is sold for multi-millions and Senator pockets $300,000. Oh, and suddenly a few real estate laws are loosened back home.

It's how it works, and it's all legal.

(08-03-2017 02:27 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I imagine Congress is offered lots of investments and deals with "guaranteed" returns regardless of the actual performance.

"Senator, would you like to get in on this land deal with me? $10,000 investment from you, I'll put down the remainder."

Three years later the land is sold for multi-millions and Senator pockets $300,000. Oh, and suddenly a few real estate laws are loosened back home.

It's how it works, and it's all legal.

Stuff like that and legal insider trading. They are exempt. Also when they are writing and passing laws they have a good idea which individual public company will benefit, and certainly which market or sector.

#lobbyists

They marry rich. Pretty smart.

(08-03-2017 01:40 PM)miko33 Wrote:  How does that happen. Consider John McCain:

http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/...net-worth/

Quote:Politician John McCain has an estimated net worth of $21 million. John McCain has been a U.S. senator from Arizona since 1987, and was the Republican nominee for president in 2008. A 1958 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, McCain had a 22-year military career as a pilot and officer in the Navy. Five of those years (1967-73) were spent in a Vietnamese prisoner of war camp after he was shot down over Hanoi during the Vietnam War. McCain left the Navy in 1981, was elected to Congress in 1982, and then was elected as U.S. senator from Arizona in 1986.

Graduated from USNA - 1958
Served in military for 22 years (1958+22 = 1980), retiring in 1981
Elected to U.S. House of Reps in 1982 (2 terms 1983 - 1987)
Elected to U.S. Senate in 1986 (1987 thru the present).

The man spent his entire career in public service. Military for 22 years and then as an elected official from 1983 thru the present. How does he have a net worth of $21 million? How does he land a wife who has over $100 million? Once we can close all the loopholes that allow politicians to get rich while "serving" in public office, real fixes to our issues will be possible.

Two words come to mind: TERM LIMITS

Yup, it's one of many reasons why some of them will quite literally not leave unless it's in a pine box (With gold inlay, of course). The other primary reasons being the power and vanity.

The main culprit here used to be the ability to score big on the insider information they could trade on legally. Anyone else would get locked up for the most minor infraction (talking to you Martha Stewart), they used to be able to do so practically unfettered. I'm pretty sure that's been curtailed to a large degree, if not prohibited entirely. So that's one step in the right direction.

The other major sources have always been book deals (I haven't looked, I'll bet McCain has at least 3-4 books over the years, and recall Rubio got 800 Grand for some book 40 people read when nobody had even heard of him)), and speaking fees. Not much can be done about those I wouldn't think, just cause they're in Congress doesn't mean they can't do something else on the side I wouldn't think.

They get information that allows them to make investments that you or I would be hauled off to jail for. The Nancy Pelosi..Visa scandal is a perfect example of how they fill their pockets doing all kinds of insider trading.

It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out. They become crooks.

I thought that politicians got a windfall when they underspent on their campaign funds, but I guess that's been information is a bit dated.

Campaign Finance: Senators and House Members Can Keep Campaign Funds When They Retire - ABC News

Quote:There was a time, three decades ago, when elected officials could permissably tap unspent campaign funds for personal use after they left office. Starting in 1979, though, there have been continued efforts to outlaw unfettered personal spending of war chest money. In 1989, Congress passed an Ethics Reform Act that was to close the door for good, repealling one last prior provision that allowed some funds to be tapped by lawmakers covered by a grandfather provision.

Leftover Campaign Funds - FactCheck.org

Quote:State and local governments have their own rules, but those running for federal office — including presidential candidates — must abide by strict FEC guidelines when it comes to their extra campaign money.

Good comments and basically it was more rhetorical of an OP. My point in this is that how can we seriously take sides and give a steaming turd concerning which political party to side with when all politicians fleece us blind?

(08-03-2017 06:38 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Good comments and basically it was more rhetorical of an OP. My point in this is that how can we seriously take sides and give a steaming turd concerning which political party to side with when all politicians fleece us blind?

truth

(08-03-2017 06:38 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Good comments and basically it was more rhetorical of an OP. My point in this is that how can we seriously take sides and give a steaming turd concerning which political party to side with when all politicians fleece us blind?

1 - hence, the importance of DJT's #swamp

all he's doing is XACLY! what he said he would....

very few seem to understand that in scope....

cracks me the fk up.......