Nothing gets the hackles of the population up like a pay raise for politicians. And understandably so. Even some politicians, especially new ones, can't see the sense in raising pay, really, but bend to the will of the majority of politicians, eventually.
Well, I want to toss my $.02 into the ring. (Haven't I already solved Korean nuclear weapons, and Alberta beef?)
I think politicians, all politicians, every politician, should be paid thusly:
income = (political expenses) + (fixed household expenses) + (twice the minimum wage)Political expenses = costs of being a riding politician. All politicians are reimbursed for these necessary costs.
Fixed household expenses = existing mortgage, insurance, , phone, cable, power, etc payments. The politician shouldn't be punished for entering politics. Food, entertainment, clothing, etc is EXCLUDED. Automobile license, payments and insurance included; gas excluded.
Twice the minimum wage = just as it states and based upon residence location. Politicians deserve some extra cash. The sum should be a tolken yet symbolical amount.
It does not allow for putting children through post-secondary education or vacations in Jamaica. Politicians should thusly be welcomed to the real world.
With this pay formula I can run and not worry about being driven into bankruptcy or increased poverty. It maintains the standard of living one has when one enters politics but gives nothing extra. If you are poor then you'll stay poor; if you're rich then you'll remain rich. It isn't a job ... it's you trying to help.
We will never have to worry about how much a politician is worth or of when a raise is deserved, again.
Ricia writes,
"If, just to give a small example, the salaries of top managers were linked
also to a “Socially Responsible Scale of Performances”, probably their
daily decisions about profit-goals would be quite different."
And that is a tempting idea to entertain for application to politicians but it is too green for other parties to support or maintain. I like it; I'd get paid more (assuming I was elected). A politician from another party however would not want to be tied to green priorities.
When I was young I believed that to attract "the best" candidates to lead a city/province/territory/country, the pay had to be attractive enough to draw the bright minds from the corporate sector.
ReplyDeleteAfter a decade of watching BC and federal politicians do their jobs, I must say Herbie's proposal sounds like just the solution to the arrogance and lack of consideration (understanding, if I'm being generous) of what life is like for real citizens.
I also think the formula could help raise the living standards of all Canadians, since for politicians to get a raise, all of the lowest income earners would benefit. A very good thing, especially if you live in BC where we have a training wage that is lower then the minimum wage...
I like the idea of tying politicians' wages to the minmum wage, but the part about fixed household expenses is a bit dogdy, as there is still a moral hazard there.
ReplyDeleteA politician could eat up funds by racking up expenses, both political and household, so those areas need a little more work.
Maybe their wages could be tied to Anielski's Genuine Wealth model. (see www.anielski.com). If the Genuine Wealth Index rose by 4%, then politicians could be rewarded based on that.