One bit from that article about Fox & Friends’ reaction,
Hegseth closed the segment by wondering if Ocasio-Cortez would share some of her own salary with her staff.
"Will you share some of that money, Miss Congresswoman, with the rest of your staff who is not making as much as you?” he asked.
Now this is one thing I would hope that she might make concessions on. For 18 staffers, even $100/month each would not be a horrible sacrifice, and could make all the difference when it comes to covering small emergencies.
Yeah, I think it’s absolutely key to focus on how the only congressperson to be paying their staff a decent salary could somehow be paying them more, out of their own pocket because socialist hypocrisy or something, rather than on how all the other congressfuckers don’t pay their staff enough to live on.
This isn’t even close to what I mean. and I think you know that.
I’m positive AOC would like to pay them more, and if I were in her shoes, I’d see it as a temporary stopgap until the Committee for Congressional Modernization convenes, and the topic of fair pay for all congressional staffers can be addressed. In certain cases, I do believe charity begins at home, as they say…and not in the self-serving GOP sense.
What is it about fairness and equity that people hate so much? Can you tell me that?
Maybe not what you asked, but I reckon what AOC’s haters hate about her so much is that every time she’s smart and charming and funny and lives by her principles, she reminds them that they’re deeply fucking horrible people, and nobody wants to be reminded that they’re a deeply horrible person.
I’m sorry for being all rude and sarcastic at you. But I think quite strongly that she’s done enough and shouldn’t have to be topping up her staff wages out of her own pocket.
And also, the fact that we’re even talking about it is a small victory for these tight-arsed right wing assholes, when we should be focusing on the staff who aren’t being paid a living wage.
No, she shouldn’t have to. Yet here we are, and it’s a sacrifice I would make if I were in her shoes.*
It’s possible to confront both the short-term and long-term issues simultaneously, I think.
I think it’s the whole point behind what she’s doing; leading by example.
I’m giving you likes because I believe in what you’re saying, but I also think you’re talking past me to prove a point, which I’m not very happy about.
*As long as no rules were being broken. Gifts and such.
I’m sure Republican congresscritters would answer for their staffers the same way they answered for 9/11 first responders RE restitution for their resulting illnesses. I.E. That they came to serve, not for “socialism.” That’s right, taking basic responsibility and having even a shred of empathy or sense has become Socialism. It’s like they’re trying to grease the slope.
while true, it remains a terrible way to pay people. bonuses are far more effective, especially when tied to meaningful milestones.
reasons: 1. no one is 10x all the time, all good programmers have their ups and downs. 2. some people are 10x on the front end - pulling off great demos that integrate poorly with the rest of the team, giving them star status hurts the team. 3. under paying steady workhorses - those people who can create solid low bug count code year after year, absolutely destroys team morale.
if you think you’re 10x and your goal is making lots of money, being a millionaire before you’re thirty. go for it. there’s no shortage of places that’ll burn you out.
if your goal is making good product, and you love coding, you’re better off supported by a well rounded team who can put new challenges forward for you every day.
flat(er) pay scales are almost always better for the product and the team. they reflect the reality that progress can’t be measured by lines of code, and they show respect for the diversity of skill and experience necessary to do great work.
even more so where the “product” is something like public policy.
I don’t even think there’s a realization that they might just be horrible people (insert “are we the baddies” pic here). It’s a realization that if AOC is right, that they may not be, and there’s got to be some sort of realization that the house of cards may tumble down if they even consider they possibility that their brand of self serving everything is not the One Way as ordained by blond haired blue eyed capitalist Jeebus.
That’s funny. I worked for a public water/sewer utility, and I was an engineer (with a 2nd degree in CompSci) who did my own coding when it would have taking the IT dept. 6 months and 16 meetings to do something I could knock off with a perl script or a VBA spreadsheet in a day or so. I didn’t work all that hard, which was my unfortunately missed point - I just knew the right thing to do because I was both customer and provider. (Shout out to Spike, there.)
A pretty far cry from your image of a red-bull-pounding hotshot at a video game sweatshop, sorry.
“Work smarter not harder” was turned into a cliche’ from pointy-haired bosses that meant “work harder”, but it’s a real thing.
And utilities don’t pay bonuses, save that they contrived to keep me at a supervisor level pay, about 10% more, after my subordinates were all moved away in a re-org. Upon reflection, that, and heartfelt appreciation from the people I made more efficient with my help, was enough.
Why are they taking an 80 hours a week job that does not pay a living wage?
I ask because I really wonder how this kind of manipulation works. Do they think that this a career move towards a much better pay? Then we need to make statistics on careers public. Do thy do it because of political commitment? Then we may need a different kind of financing. I really wonder what is going on.
A congressional staff position looks good on your resume when you go to work for your Mother or Fathers company. It looks even better when your just an average overachieving, high grade point college grad. Then of course there are that minuscule few who really do have hardcore political commitment. Much like Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez does.
Did you know she was worried she couldn’t even move to Washington DC if she won? Now that’s political commitment.
in texas where i live, the average food stamps recipient gets $125/month from the program. at a little over $4 a day, no one is getting a lot of steak.
Are you also going to complain about Republicans getting paid the same salary while skimping on their own lowest paid staff? The “get what you pay for” logic goes both ways-- those lower paid staffers will be grateful to finally be able to afford work in DC and will go the extra mile for her.
How much is your own labor worth? Would you work for less to advance causes you believe in? Or are you a millionaire who lives a life of leisure?
