Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: little jeremiah

Nonsense. If government posts were unpaid, only the wealthy could afford to be involved. Which is exactly why the British didn’t pay members of Parliament until well into the 20th century. It kept the riff-raff out.

FWIW, when he was President Washington accepted his salary of $25,000. This was during a period when a reasonably decent salary was $500 to $1000 annually.

Depending on which method of adjustment one uses, this corresponds to $591,000.00 to $1,910,000,000.00 in 2009 dollars. Obama’s official salary is $400,000.

http://www.measuringworth.com/uscompare/result.php?use%5B%5D=DOLLAR&use%5B%5D=GDPDEFLATION&use%5B%5D=VCB&use%5B%5D=UNSKILLED&use%5B%5D=MANCOMP&use%5B%5D=NOMGDPCP&use%5B%5D=NOMINALGDP&year_source=1790&amount=25000&year_result=2009

Of the six numbers given, I suspect $11,600,000.00 is the closest approximation to equivalent value of Washington’s salary today. It is surprisingly difficult to compare prices and wages from one era to another.


7 posted on 04/18/2010 7:16:04 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Sherman Logan

“Nonsense. If government posts were unpaid, only the wealthy could afford to be involved. Which is exactly why the British didn’t pay members of Parliament until well into the 20th century. It kept the riff-raff out.

FWIW, when he was President Washington accepted his salary of $25,000. This was during a period when a reasonably decent salary was $500 to $1000 annually.

Depending on which method of adjustment one uses, this corresponds to $591,000.00 to $1,910,000,000.00 in 2009 dollars. Obama’s official salary is $400,000.”

Just a couple of observations:

1) With the way our political system currently works, salary is only a small part of the total wealth they realize while in office. I am in no way endorsing that as a substitute for pay, but the truth should not be avoided and should be dealt with in some way.

2) They should receive neither more the median national income nor tax-funded pensions that remove their personal interest in having to rely on the success of private investment for comfort in retirement. If they want a raise, then it would be in their interest to raise the national median income in effectal ways.

I do not agree that refusal of salary is a ploy to keep the riff-raff out. There have been periods over the last decade when either I or my husband was out of work and one stayed home with our son while the other worked. It isn’t a glamourous life style by any means, but we got by. Until Obama and his 40 thieves came along, it was possible to live off one modest income. Now, I’m not so certian but I don’t believe it is by design to keep average people out of politics.

Additionally, when George Washington became president, paper money was used (Colonials), and over used. Inflation was rampant, almost to the point of Weimar Republic kind of inflation. It’s almost impossible to compare the real value vs. nominal values as we really do not know what the buying power of that 25k was verses $25k today because the economy was in shambles along with trade.


8 posted on 04/18/2010 9:28:34 PM PDT by dajeeps
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson