Comment by windexh8er | Hacker News Reader

Comment by windexh8er | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

<< This.

I don't care if the number is wrong on the net worth of a sitting US senator based on the comment that the actual average is less. If you're net worth is $2.5M because of your position in the Senate and not because you were a smart business person prior too then you're paid for and bought.

I heard Senator Franken vehemently avoiding NSA questions on MPR the other week. He claims to be a proponent of Internet neutrality and privacy, yet his voting and "amendments" he coauthored day otherwise. He's an actor and a comedian first which is why he plays well in the political realm until he's asked direct questions outside of his box of comfort that is the hand that feeds him.

I'm definitely glad to see Schneier in the position he's weaving into. He's a great advocate and I support his views, perspectives and ideals to revert the damage and system that is now in place. I hope that I can tell my grandchildren Alexander and the posse under and around him were publicly shamed and stripped of all honors and decorations the United States of America has unfortunately afforded these puppets. Many of these traitors (of the American people) need to be made public examples and placed into the same solitude and torture the whistle-blowers have been subject to.

Median senator age is 62. Most Senators are highly educated (many from highly-paid professions such as legal before they became highly-paid senators) and married.

Thirty years of high income (100-150K family income in today's dollars) with 10-15% saving and investing in the market can easily result in a net worth in the low millions, not including inherited investments, long-term real estate property appreciation, etc. People in their 60s have seen an incredible appreciation over the past 30 years in most sectors (Just the S&P Index itself is over 9% annualized over that time frame).

Long story, short, $2.5M is not by any means exorbitant for retirement age people with an educated and successful life.

It would be a bizarro world where we would want idiot paupers to be Senators, or even a socio-economically equivalent demographic.

I think most government workers, elected or not, would find the idea that you work in government for the money amusing to say the least.

I think the only way to address this concern is to have a net-worth pre-public servant and a report showcasing annually going forward. I fully understand that success is not tied to any one or individual facet of life in general - however being highly educated has no bearing on being highly moral or even fundamentally believing you're actually serving the greater good of the people. It may mean you have an indelible way of speaking a good speech or understanding the game of chess that it seems our government is playing against the masses.

I'd like to think that all Senators have their caucus at heart, but I've lost a lot of faith in these sort of people over the years. When they reel on simple questions around these topics it doesn't help.

Why do you say you have to be a successful businessman or else be bought and paid for to accumulate that much? We're at the tail end of a decades long stock market boom and a decades long boom in housing prices. My parents have a $1.5m house in Virginia. My dad started with a $120k house and traded up a couple of times over 25 years. It was just a great time to be a professional with a little bit of cash flow. No need to sell a startup to Yahoo or take any bribes!

Looking at it another way, the median net worth of freshman congressmen is $1m. Do you think you need to take bribes and engage in dirty insider trading to double that in 10-15 years?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com