"They are of the People, and return again to mix with the People, having no more durable preeminence than the different Grains of Sand in an Hourglass. Such an Assembly cannot easily become dangerous to Liberty. They are the Servants of the People, sent together to do the People's Business, and promote the public Welfare; their Powers must be sufficient, or their Duties cannot be performed. They have no profitable Appointments, but a mere Payment of daily Wages, such as are scarcely equivalent to their Expences; so that, having no Chance for great Places, and enormous Salaries or Pensions, as in some Countries, there is no triguing or bribing for Elections"
Do you think he meant that careerists in Congress were to be treated as royalty and lavished with riches the rest of their lives?
Do you think he meant they were to be treated differentially than the rest of us? That their perks and benefits should exceed the average citizen?
We need a citizen legislature, NOW!
2007-05-10 15:15:23 · 14 answers · asked by rmagedon 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I think he meant they were to be nothing special and only get paid their daily due or just enough to make the same wages as they were on the outside of Government. If politicians were forced to do it for free, no one would do it.
I think he intended them to be regular citizens and when done go back to being regular citizens and not Celebrities or having lavish pensions etc.
2007-05-10 15:25:52 · answer #1 · answered by Ret. Sgt. 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
A patriot is a person risks personal loss (money, job, status, freedom, life) to protect our nation and uphold its values. Sometimes the case is pretty self-evident: Pat Tillman was moved by 9/11 and quit a lucrative NFL career to become an Army Ranger and fight the Taliban in Afghanistan; that was pretty patriotic by any measure. Other times it may take our society longer to recognize someone's actions as patriotic. Mohammed Ali opted not to fight in Vietnam, citing issues of racism and morality. Ultimately he too was recognized as a patriot. Will self-proclaimed pornographer Larry Flynt one day be considered a patriot for upholding first amendment freedoms? Maybe, maybe not, but at least he's put his money where his mouth is on that issue. You can be a Good American (and there's nothing wrong with that, by the way) by simply living your values and our shared values as Americans. If you want to be a Patriot, you need to go that next step and take some action that places you at risk in support of your goal. Quit your job and work as a volunteer for the presidential candidate who best reflects your views. Join the Army or the Peace Corps. Max out your credit cards to start a web site dedicated to bringing the troops home, or sending more over. Being a patriot means risk and sacrifice. Being a Good American only requires the latter, and is still noble.
2016-05-20 01:28:50 · answer #2 · answered by julian 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think he meant that elected officials were no better than the citizens who elected them and should not be treated any better. And that their pay should be no more than an average citizen's, that they should have benefits that the average citizen has, so that the person running for office really and truly wants to serve the people and desires the job and not the pay, prestige, and benefits.
2007-05-10 17:03:19 · answer #3 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It appears to me old Ben was using the pen to prevent social servants from becoming overpaid elitists.
I think if he were here today he would be sorely disappointed. The majority of those in service to the public nowadays treat their position as an entitlement of lavish lifestyle. It also seems they are more interested in having their agenda heard and passed rather than listening to the needs of those they serve.
2007-05-11 01:15:55 · answer #4 · answered by burdawg 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it means that government officials are elected by the people, and are granted certain authorities over the citizenry but only for a set amount of time. Then he states that officials are not to be paid exorbant sums of money for serving the public since money leads to greed which leads to corruption.
he meant the opposite that officials shouldn't be treated as royalty but as ordinary people since they were from the people and were not granted emminence and would return to the people
2007-05-11 01:09:21 · answer #5 · answered by **drew** 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ben was right. That's exactly what we need now to save this country. Fat chance of getting that as long as the average working class citizen either stays away from the polls or lets the liberal media tell them who to vote for.
2007-05-10 16:50:23 · answer #6 · answered by CT2007 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Great quote! Where did you find it? You should put it in a letter to every congressperson! Then ask them to raise the minimum wage to equal their salary!
2007-05-11 06:35:21 · answer #7 · answered by kermit 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whoa Boss, I think you misread the elder statesman, I read that the appointed servants of the republic, should be given subsistence salaries, and no quarter for special treatment, to ensure that they maintain the will of people, and not their own wills! He states that they must not be greater than the rest, or allowed to elevate themselves above the masses!
2007-05-10 15:25:13 · answer #8 · answered by Paully S 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Ben was right, we do not get adequate representation. Government by the wealthy has been a recipe for disaster.
2007-05-10 16:22:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I agree with Ben.
The call to riches should not be the reason people decide to "serve."
2007-05-11 12:42:05 · answer #10 · answered by Moneta_Lucina 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋