Bush: Not Exactly for the Working Stiff

From the National Journal comes this story about pay raises (and the lack thereof) in the Bush White House (italics mine):

President Bush’s most senior aides — the ones who hold the coveted title of “assistant to the president” — recently received a $4,200 cost-of-living bump-up in compensation and now earn a top pay rate of $165,200, according to an internal White House list of staff salaries. The list was compiled by the administration for the year that ended June 30 and is displayed both alphabetically, and by dollar ranking, below. Those at the bottom of the White House staff pay scale — the folks answering phones and responding to the president’s mail, for example — remain stuck at last year’s pay floor of $30,000, according to a year-to-year comparison of White House data obtained by National Journal.

If you are a working American, and you voted for Bush, you’re a sucker. To him, you’re less than dirt. Serfs on the manor. How hard would it have been to increase someone’s salary from $30,000 to $30,900? He just doesn’t care about people like you and me.
But I guess saving stem cells is more important than “putting food on your family” (to use Little Lord Pontchartrain’s phrase). Total fucking morons.

This entry was posted in Conservatives, Economics. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Bush: Not Exactly for the Working Stiff

  1. Clark says:

    I’ll criticize Bush for a lot. He’s not exactly been terribly competent.
    But isn’t increases of salaries due to the staggering cost of living in the DC area? No offense but a $165,000 really isn’t a lot for that area. Reminds me of when, years ago, I was offered a $80,000 job in NYC. I was terribly excited until I found out what $80,000 buys you there. . .

  2. Johnny Vector says:

    But isn’t increases of salaries due to the staggering cost of living in the DC area?

    I think you missed the point: The people at the top of the pay scale get a reasonable cost-of-living increase, and the people at the bottom get bupkis.
    You are correct, $165,000 isn’t a lot for the area, but neither is it poverty-level. $30,000, on the other hand, is tough to live on in D.C. When you’re just getting by, that extra few hundred dollars for gas this year makes a big difference. An extra $900 for them is much more important than the extra $4200 for the people at the top of the scale.

  3. Polly Anna says:

    Oh, my goodness! What a good argument for moving the capital out of the DC ghetto! What about Kansas (Lebanon) to be precise, the geographic center of the 48 states. In Kansas City (more expensive than Lebanon), one making $30000 in DC would only need $15000. Anyway– [Despite everything, I believe that Bush and even people in DC are really good at heart–Anne Frank]

  4. Barry says:

    Of course moving the odd million government employees, support staff, lobbyists, [yadda, yadda, yadda] to Kansas would boost the cost of living there. I’d love to buy some cheap real estate there, before the word got out. I could probably multiply my money by a factor of 10.

Comments are closed.