Skip to comments.
ARNIE TERMINATES HIS SALARY
New York Post ^
| 11/19/03
| Post Wire Services
Posted on 11/19/2003 12:24:55 AM PST by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:17:29 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
November 19, 2003 -- California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will say hasta la vista to a salary as he seeks ways to help his fiscally floundering state.
The multimillionaire actor-turned-pol said he'll take a pass on $175,000 in gubernatorial wages yesterday as he proposed a record bond issue of up to $15 billion to fund the state's budget deficit.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-150 next last
1
posted on
11/19/2003 12:24:55 AM PST
by
kattracks
To: kattracks
An elected official turning down his salary? Quick! FR Research Experts to the search engines. This has to be a first!
2
posted on
11/19/2003 2:07:28 AM PST
by
kitkat
To: kitkat
It's good, but it'll hardly make a dent. Besides, how could he possibly accept a salary? The man has more money than god. He'll probably make more than $175k a month on royalties alone.
To: kattracks; My2Cents; BibChr; EggsAckley; FairOpinion; South40; Poohbah; doodlelady; RGSpincich; ...
This is our Governor Arnold. A man of his word. Magnificent.
:) *posse ping* (:
4
posted on
11/19/2003 2:15:44 AM PST
by
onyx
To: Pedantic_Lady
Hellooooo, On our side of the pond, in the US Senate alone, we have over 20 multi-millionaires (most are democrats) and they not only accept their salaries, they vote themselves 'cost of living' raises.
5
posted on
11/19/2003 2:19:43 AM PST
by
onyx
To: kitkat
"An elected official turning down his salary? Quick! FR Research Experts to the search engines. This has to be a first!" JFK donated every single penny of his Presidential salary to charity.
6
posted on
11/19/2003 2:19:50 AM PST
by
Mad Dawgg
(French: old Europe word meaning surrender)
To: Pedantic_Lady
I still think it's a nice gesture.
And it sets a good example!
Tia
7
posted on
11/19/2003 2:22:39 AM PST
by
tiamat
("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
To: onyx
I know how it works in the U.S.; I'm American. Parliament also vote themselves "cost of living" raises while the Labour government came down like a ton of bricks on the firefighters' union when they asked for the same.
Hypocrites. I didn't support the firefighters' strike, but I understood why they were doing it.
To: Mad Dawgg
He did?
To: Pedantic_Lady
It may not make a dent, but that's not the point.
It sets a tone, and it shows he's a leader.
Ever seen any other millionaire politicians say they'd forgo a salary? (and there are lots of millionaire politicians)
10
posted on
11/19/2003 2:29:21 AM PST
by
dawn53
To: dawn53
Nope. I support the gesture and wish more public servants would forego their salaries, but in this case $175k is a token gesture and nothing more.
To: Pedantic_Lady
12
posted on
11/19/2003 2:33:00 AM PST
by
Mad Dawgg
(French: old Europe word meaning surrender)
To: Mad Dawgg
Way to go JFK.
To: Pedantic_Lady
If our press wasn't tilted so far to the Left this would make a wonderful story, comparing Arnold's wealth to the sitting senate millionaires such as Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, that Corrizone from NJ who spent $67 million 'buying' his seat, Hitlery Clinton, John Heinz Kerry of Massachusettes, the Dayton heir from Indiana?, the one from Wisconsin who owns a basketball team, that horrid lib from Washington state, Maria Cantrell?, and so on.
It's sickening. The millionaires take their salary and perks, but they spend out taxes dollars like there's no tomorrow. I detest them.
14
posted on
11/19/2003 2:35:00 AM PST
by
onyx
To: onyx
I think any millionaire politician shouldn't be ALLOWED to earn a salary. They've got enough money. They could give it to me instead. ;-)
To: Pedantic_Lady
I think any millionaire politician shouldn't be ALLOWED to earn a salary.There's a word for that. Slavery. There's a political term for it. Socialism.
When you say "allow"- who are you talking about here? The rabble? Who are you to say that someone should not be allowed to make a salary for what they do? That is just about as anti-conservative as you can possibly get. Even a lot of hard core lefties wouldn't agree with that. Nobody has a right to demand that another person work for free. Nobody has the right to demand that a person can "only make this much". I detect a little class jealousy here.
To: Prodigal Son
You'd be right. Why should they get all that money for swanning around swanky parties and spending OUR money?
To: Pedantic_Lady
Because that is the salary offered. A person has a right to only trade their skills for adequate compensation. It is a thoroughly Marxist point of view to say that people should have a limit placed upon their earning capacity or that just because they have been successful in life means that they should not be compensated for their labour or that they should be forced to work for free.
BTW, it's not your money. You're not a citizen of California. You don't even get a say in the matter.
To: Prodigal Son
You can't be a citizen of California. You can be a resident of California. And you are correct...I have never resided in California.
To: Pedantic_Lady
Citizen, resident. We can get into semantics if you like, this is childish.
My poor use of the word citizen in no way excuses your Marxist sentiment though.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 141-150 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson