• oce 🐆
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 day ago

    As an intermediate solution, you can define it as X times the median or the minimum legal wage, so they still have incentive to raise them.

      • diablomnky@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 day ago

        Nope, ETFs are too flexible for them. Only indexed mutual funds for members of Congress. Can’t have them selling off their ETFs before a committee meeting is over and the information isn’t public.

      • ClownStatue@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        21 hours ago

        They can have a retirement plan, like anyone else. There needs to be a federal law (or amendment) requiring any elected or politically appointed individual to put assets into a blind trust. And they can’t just name their kid(s) as temporary custodians of their assets. Any assets you owned the 2-years prior to running are placed in a trust unless they were sold to a third party.

      • Grimy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        I wouldn’t even let them have that. They are there to help the population, not the economy (corporations).

        Any hard measures comes with a drop of their personal wealth the moment they are investing.

          • Grimy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            That was going to be my first comment, but really, will politicians hold tech companies responsible for example if they know that giving real fines and not token ones leads directly to a drop?