Should Ron Paul accept a salary as President?

[Bluedevil]

I dont think he should, it isnt consistent with his philosophy. I also think it would make waves on the campaign trail if he said, "I dont want to run your lives, I dont want to run the economy, I am not doing this for power, presitge or money. I will not accept a salary as President." We also we could get a number of supporters to pledge to pay his salary, that would gather a lot of media attention. I would be happy to put in atleast a thousand.

Good idea?

[JPFromTally]

It's Constitutional so I don't see why not.

The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.

[Mitt Romneys sideburns]

Does a president even need a salary? They have free housing, free food, free rides... and after they are out, they can just give speeches for 50G a pop.

[margomaps]

I don't see a problem with Ron taking the presidential salary.

BUT, it would be cool if he declined the salary, and instead told the American people that if they liked the job he does, they can contribute what they feel his performance is work. You know, putting his faith in his abilities and the free market. :) If the amount raised was a lot, he would probably donate the "extra" to charity anyway, or return it to the donors.

[Chibioz]

He's still doing a job, I don't see why he wouldn't get paid.

[New York Central]

Absolutely, he should take every penny of it if he does what he's supposed to do. Same for all of our Senators and Congressman IF they do the jobs they were put in office to do.

[jj111]

He's already said at one of his rallies that he would like to cut his Presidential salary in half, that act being the first act of his Presidency. ...Since I don't want to run the economy, I don't want to rule the world, and I don't want to run your life.... His line got tremenous applause.

[terlinguatx]

...

[amonasro]

Isn't it only 500k? It doesn't matter either way, imo.

[curtisag]

One of his biggest selling points is he doesn't take part in the lucrative congressional pension program. What he could do is only take what he received as his income in congress, and nothing more. How can he ask for the government to cut spending if he doesn't voluntarily cut his own income as President? 500k is too much.

[Syren123]

Of course he should. It's a job. He should get paid. And $500K is not too much for such a stressful and important job, especially since he won't be getting any side millions.

[mtmedlin]

Its $400,000, President Bush was the first to get that much, Clinton got $200,000


Given that is for life, not just the 4 or 8 years.

[jj111]

He's already said he will cut his salary in half and that will be his first act in office. How can anybody not love this guy once they get to know him?

[Bluedevil]

Didnt realize he has said he would cut his salary in half as his first act in office, he should bring that up more.

[Hook]

$400,000 is extraordianarily cheap for a CEO. I have no problem with that salary for the Pres.

[LibertyEagle]

I dont think he should, it isnt consistent with his philosophy. I also think it would make waves on the campaign trail if he said, "I dont want to run your lives, I dont want to run the economy, I am not doing this for power, presitge or money. I will not accept a salary as President." We also we could get a number of supporters to pledge to pay his salary, that would gather a lot of media attention. I would be happy to put in atleast a thousand.

Good idea?

Do YOU accept a salary for the work you do?

Of course he should accept a salary. Doh. :rolleyes:

[Taco John]

I think he should take a salary. I think people would actually react negatively if he started saying that he wasn't going to. It sounds desperate.

[terlinguatx]

...

[Bluedevil]

The obvious difference is that my salary does not come from taxation. Ludwig Von Mises describes the situation as follows, “a ‘chocolate king’ has no power over the consumers, his patron. He provides them with chocolate of the best possible quality and at the cheapest price. He does not rule the consumers, he serves them. The consumers are not tied to him. They are free to stop patronizing his shops. He loses the ‘kingdom’ if the consumers prefer to spend their pennies elsewhere. Nor does he ‘rule’ his workers. He hires their services by paying them precisely that amount which the consumers are ready to restore to him in buying the product (Mises Human Action 272).”

I believe it is unethical to accept money from the government given that it is taken coerceively through taxation. Im a student and so do not have a salary, but I did obviously accept money when I was working. It is a completely different situation.

[libertarian4321]

I dont think he should, it isnt consistent with his philosophy. I also think it would make waves on the campaign trail if he said, "I dont want to run your lives, I dont want to run the economy, I am not doing this for power, presitge or money. I will not accept a salary as President." We also we could get a number of supporters to pledge to pay his salary, that would gather a lot of media attention. I would be happy to put in atleast a thousand.

Good idea?

No.

He takes a salary as congressman, why not as President?

Would you work for 4-years with no pay?

If you have "supporters pay his salary", it looks like he is being bought.

Silly idea, any way you look at it.

[libertarian4321]

"500k is too much."

This is silly, too. First off, the President gets $400k per year.

$400k is NOTHING for a job with that kind of responsibility. Its less than a rookie bench warmer makes in the NFL. Its less than the NBA minimum salary. Roger Clemens made more than that for every game he played in last year. Its less than a large company CEO makes in a week.

Presidential pay isn't the reason this country is in financial trouble, folks.

[TVMH]

The obvious difference is that my salary does not come from taxation. Ludwig Von Mises describes the situation as follows, “a ‘chocolate king’ has no power over the consumers, his patron. He provides them with chocolate of the best possible quality and at the cheapest price. He does not rule the consumers, he serves them. The consumers are not tied to him. They are free to stop patronizing his shops. He loses the ‘kingdom’ if the consumers prefer to spend their pennies elsewhere. Nor does he ‘rule’ his workers. He hires their services by paying them precisely that amount which the consumers are ready to restore to him in buying the product (Mises Human Action 272).”

I believe it is unethical to accept money from the government given that it is taken coerceively through taxation. Im a student and so do not have a salary, but I did obviously accept money when I was working. It is a completely different situation.

I guess one could rationalize that ALL taxes are collected through coercion, but if a constitutional republic is to be maintained, then some sort of taxation is necessary.

At least with a constitutional republic, taxation is kept to a minimum (assuming the rule of law is held in high regard).

[Bluedevil]

You're right, having supporters pay a salary was a stupid idea. I still dont think he should accept a salary out of principal, but I am happy with him saying he will cut his salary in half.

[TVMH]

You're right, having supporters pay a salary was a stupid idea. I still dont think he should accept a salary out of principal, but I am happy with him saying he will cut his salary in half.

I don't think there is such a thing as a "stupid idea"; ill-advised or impractical, perhaps, but never "stupid".

I don't necessarily have a problem with a constitutional government collecting taxes and using those taxes to protect the rights of all of its citizens (as opposed to using those taxes in conjunction with unconstitutional methods of expanding its own power).

The problem is, however, none of us have ever experienced the former, so our perspective is a bit skewed. :cool:

[Bluedevil]

In the case of a constitutional government taxes could be volunatry. They wouldnt need much money, and I for one would be happy to give money to a group that protected my natural rights.

[TVMH]

In the case of a constitutional government taxes could be volunatry. They wouldnt need much money, and I for one would be happy to give money to a group that protected my natural rights.
In that case, you would not have a "government", per se, rather, you would a "co-op" of sorts...nothing wrong with that model, it's just not the same as a constitutional republic.

But the issue at hand is whether RP should accept a salary...I say he should because, as long as he upholds his oath of office, he is using his labor to execute the functions defined in the constitution, and he should be compensated for doing so.

Again, I imagine if we actually HAD a majority of government officials that consistently upheld their respective oaths of office (and it is my personal belief that we don't have that), we would not be having this discussion. :)

[Bluedevil]

TVMH- thanks for the intelligent responses.

[TVMH]

TVMH- thanks for the intelligent responses.

I does my best. :D

Actually, I've learned a great deal from Dr. Paul with regard to debate tactics.

I've never seen him resort to any kind of ad hominem attack, rather, he has an amazing ability to stay focused on the issue at hand.

It's really quite inspiring. :)

[kylejack]

I believe it is unethical to accept money from the government given that it is taken coerceively through taxation. Im a student and so do not have a salary, but I did obviously accept money when I was working. It is a completely different situation.
Hopefully you didn't fill out the FAFSA or take any loans from the government?

[quezkittel]

'Course he should! He's working for us. Now... the real question in my mind is how much he should be paid- we all know some people are lured to run for the presidency because of the power involved, do we really want people to run because of money involved too?

The job's definitely important enough to merit 400,000 a year, but maybe some governor someday will just see it as an opportunity for a pay raise :) (ok, not terribly likely...)

[Omnis]

I am totally fine with him taking a salary while in office, but do Presidents get pensions like in congress? I think it is the pension that is unethical.

[evadmurd]

It's not a hell of lot more than what he makes as a congressman. Of course he should get paid. What he decides to do with it will be his decision.

[Adamsa]

Cutting his own salary in half, he needs to say that more...

[kylejack]

It's not a hell of lot more than what he makes as a congressman. Of course he should get paid. What he decides to do with it will be his decision.
Its more than double.

[constituent]

Does a president even need a salary? They have free housing, free food, free rides... and after they are out, they can just give speeches for 50G a pop.

50 g's ???

give the man some credit. :D

[mavtek]

I believe he already stated he'd cut the salary in half.