“At Southwest Georgia Community Action Council, director Myrtis Mulkey-Ndawula said she followed the guidelines the Obama administration provided. She said she multiplied the 508 employees by 1.84 — the percentage pay raise they received — and came up with 935 jobs saved.”

Yep. Sounds like typical civil servant thinking to me.

I thought Hank Paulsen forced the healthy banks to take the funds:

“We don't believe it is tenable to opt out because doing so would leave you vulnerable and exposed.”

CEOs usually get a lot of their compensation in deferred stock. CEO's have bosses. By selling their stock and even shorting it, shareholders can easily reduce a CEO's pay until it reflects their opinion of how well he's doing steering the company.

Politicians decide their own compensation. We, their supposed bosses, don't have any say in how our rulers choose to compensate themselves.

Why, they're even excusing themselves from that super duper awesome government meatgrinder “health” plan they're forcing everyone else into.

http://www.chron.com/apps/comics/showComic.mpl?...

Bingo.

“President Obama said: “They’re doing what they always do — descending on Congress, using every bit of influence they have to maintain the status quo that has maximized their profits at the expense of American consumers, — despite the fact that recently a whole bunch of those same American consumers bailed them out as a consequence of the bad decisions that they made.”

Obama presumes that we the people are to weak minded to remember that the bailout decisions weren't made by the American consumer, and that it was socialist government that shoved it on us, particularly the socialist leadership from president through both houses of Congress.

But, lie is what politicians do.

There are ways to mend the constitution so that it will work for the people and not the servant, and pay is just one minor part of what needs to be addressed.

Without the bailout, lots of the so-called “talent” would now not have to worry about executive pay caps.

Bingo!

Is, say, the pay for a congressional representative why they take and keep the job and do what they do?

Or is it the millions of dollars in donations to their re-election campaign, the perks lavished upon them by lobbyists and constituents, and the huge salaries the get speaking, lobbying, and consulting after they leave?

Want to figure the odds on that one?

Dem what make de law no gotta live by de law.

I wonder if Public Choice economists would approve of this amendment as a method of ensuring that Congressmen have more “skin in the game”.