Follow by Email

Monday, January 19, 2009

What's Good for the Goose is--

Taxpayer- the Goose;
Congress- the Gander

Normally, I don’t pass much along that I receive through e-mail. Mainly, because most of it is telling me how to get rich, collect a lottery, have bad luck, have good luck, get divorced, get married, and ten dozen other idiotic suggestions.

The other day, I opened one that made me laugh. It pointed out, probably to an extreme, just how our current government representatives (I used that word loosely) who carry out (another loosely used phrase) the business of governing, can save us even more tax dollars.

I figured you’d get a kick out of it. Don’t laugh it off, there could be some substance to this guy’s suggestions.

Ready? Here we go.

Says the author, ‘When a company falls on difficult times, one of its first moves is to reduce staff. The remaining workers struggle to do even a better job, and the board awards the CEO a generous bonus for making such a ‘tough decision’.

Regarding business in Washington, the author suggests ‘reducing the House of Representatives from 435 members to 218, and the Senate from 100 to 50. Their remaining staffs should be reduced by 25% over the next eight years.

‘Such a move would result in monetary gains (think taxes) of:
‘$44,108,400 for the elimination of base pay for congress. That would be 268 members at $165,200 per year. ‘$432,100, 000 for elimination of the above peoples’ staff.
$59,675,000 for 25% reduction in staff for remaining house members.
$37,500,000 for 25% reduction in staff for remaining senate member.

NOW, DO I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION?

Let’s continue with this next juicy tidbit.

With half of Congress gone, the current, I repeat, CURRENT, $15 BILLION pork barrel is automatically reduced to $7.5 BILLION.

Whew! I’m relived. Only $7.5 billion. I thought they were talking about big money. Still we’re saving an additional $7.5 billion.

‘Naturally, the remaining representatives, senators, and their staffs would need to work smarter and harder (just like their constituents out in the real world) to become more efficient.’

‘Stop and think. Congress has more tools (technology) available than it had back in 1911 when the current number of senators and representatives were established. Why can’t Congress as a whole do more with fewer members like the American worker is being forced to do so?’

The writer added. ‘I hope you noticed Congress did not hesitate to take a holiday a few weeks back when the nation needed a real fix to the economic problems.(that should tell you something of the concern they have for us) Also, there were three senators that have not been doing their jobs for the past eighteen months-campaign trail- and still they have been accepting full pay.’

How many of us out here could get away with staying off the job for a year and a half, and still get paid? If you find a place, let me know.

Now, total the writer’s figures.

The sum total of tax dollars to be saved annually by insisting our worthy representatives and senators follow the same work guidelines as the average Joe Six-Pack comes to $8,073,383,400.

Saving that much each year, in less than ten years, we could have the $700,000,000,000 bailout paid off.

If the biggest business in the country expects big business to make the cuts to get the bailout money, why doesn’t it do the same?

No comments: