[kidd]

...while pledging to limit his presidential salary to $39,336, which his campaign says is “approximately equal to the median personal income of the American worker.” The current pay rate for commander in chief is $400,000 a year.

This is a symbolic gesture that could do more harm than good, if it were to be official policy. The only people who would then run for POTUS would have to be those that don't need the money anyway. It would prevent otherwise good people from running for office (for example, a Joe the Plummer type).

Sorry Rep. Paul. I believe that people should be compensated for the value they bring to the job or in line with the difficulty of the job. $400K for POTUS is appropriate.

The symbolic gesture only promotes more class warfare.

[stuartcr]

How many are there now, that need the salary?

[Strategerist]

Yep, even one brain neuron devoted for one second to Presidential (or Congressional) salaries is a monumental waste of time. I'd set all of the above to a million, personally. It's utterly irrelevant to the budget, cuts to $40,000 would limit a position to the independently wealthy, and an added issue is that for any government position, when your pay doesn't match your power, it vastly increases corruption.

Presidential and Congressional pay is an obsession of the stupid and clueless.

I'd argue that even discussing the elimination of cabinet departments in the current budget climate is a gigantic waste of time. Basically, if you're not talking Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, Defense, and Taxes you're wasting your time.

[newzjunkey]

I believe that people should be compensated for the value they bring to the job

At that rate, Obama should be paying us!

[okie01]

It would prevent otherwise good people from running for office (for example, a Joe the Plummer type).

When was the last time a "Joe the Plumber type" ran for the Presidency?

More to the point, when was the last time a "Joe the Plumber type" actually won -- so that he needed the paycheck?