When a former US President makes $40million since leaving office, why do taxpayers still subsidize him?

Question

with all the post-official perks?

At what point should wealthy politicians (in order words, pretty much all politicians) pay their own way? When the net worth is $1 million? $2 million?

What's the average income / net worth of the people footing the bill again?

I am not talking about people in the private sector, I'm talking about people getting rich off the TAXPAYER and for that I am a socialist?

That's hilarious! Socialism enables this kind of largesse.

I have no issue with people simply being rich you silly thing!

I think you are reading a different question.

Incidentally, no one in government has "earned" anything, they just use a distributed mob of their friends to take stuff.

Answer 1

I agree completely. The first Bush & Clinton made $200,000 a year, & W is making $400,000 a year. Then throw in book deals, lectures, & apperances where they can make $50,000 & up. It's ludacrious that we are still paying them for something they used to do. If I could get a percentage of my salary from the jobs I've had in the past I'd be set, to bad it doesn't work that way for normal people, maybe I should run for President. Ya maybe ???

Answer 2

This is the same argument put forward for anyone who brings some of their own supplies to work, and then the boss decides they don't get the office supplies because they already have them.

Why bring anything or make any extra effort if you are just going to have something else taken away?

They earned it. It isn't a "perk".

The wealthy don't owe you. If they do a job, they get paid the same as you do. You want that pay?

Do that job and stop whining.

Oh, don't stop speaking up, though! That's great! Just get off the socialist kick.

However, in correction, since being emailed by this poster, I have to agree that the "socialist label" seems wrong. If it is a matter of have they earned it, I say, "Yes". Getting upset at a salary AFTER the fact is silly. Asking that it be changed when YOU are the person who has to pay it for future Presidents? VERY reasonable. However, this has nothing to do with how much money they earn on their own!

No one should have to sacrifice in one area because they do well in another. No one should lose money because they make more money.

That's just Un-American, and definitely socialist (redistribution of money, those who earn money give it up, those who don't have it get while making no effort to earn it).

Answer 3

Government people who enriched themselves while in power must be tried in court so that they will be divested of benefits that the taxpayers will pay.

Answer 4

God knows.