That's called soliciting a bribe....
Gee rich people who put me into power, 300k just isn't enough to live off of and if I don't get more money I might resign in a year a liberal would pick me replacement....
Stochastic bribery? "Won't someone rid me of this meddlesome debt?"
Somehow, we've been able to raise a child on a lot less than $173,600. Of course, we didn't take a loan to buy a high-end RV.
Maybe Thomas should have done the thing that Republicans keep saying people aren't doing and live within his means.
That was the salary back when he was complaining which it appears would have been sometime in or around 2000.
It's $253,361 now.
As the excerpt from the article states, the 173,600 would be over $300,000 today. So, you should really feel bad for the Supreme Court justices. Their salary raises haven't kept up with inflation.
Seize the means of ... jurisprudence?
Neither has the salary of the majority of Americans. Federal minimum wage has been decreasing in value due to inflation for almost 15 years.
That’s a good point, they should get more pay. You’d expect them to be among the highest paid government workers. Given that DC is a high cost of living city and software engineers at other high cost of living cities can make that and lawyers significantly more, I’d agree they are overdue for a significant raise.
That doesn’t excuse the corruption, and I doubt it would be enough to stop him crying poverty
I disagree that they should be paid a lot. They're supposed to be public servants with the nation's well-being at the forefront of their minds, not people who can get comfortable with living lavishly and exploit their positions to leverage money out of others. I think they and the legislature should be paid no more than the lowest salaried government employees. Let them lead by example.
Chief Justice is one of the highest offices in US government and can hugely affect the lives and future of all citizens. We need to find some way to encourage appointment on merit rather than political hacks, and paying more would mean it’s not as much a sacrifice for the appointee
On the one hand I found data showing $285k pay for an associate justice, which is significantly higher than posted here, but in the other hand I know a bunch of software engineers who earn that much without leading the country. It may come down to where you live. I live in a high cost of living area where this really doesn’t seem like all that much: high income sure but not national leadership high. Then it comes down to us expecting someone to serve this role for life, while being able to live a life commensurate with national leadership in the DC area. Yes we should pay more
However in this case everything I read about Clarence Thomas shows he wouldn’t be happy with anything short of true wealth. He’s not appropriate for the job no matter what we could pay, since he’d always be corruptible by money (and yes I’m annoyed that I have to go to bribery training and sign that I will lose my job if I accept more than $60 value yet this clown claims that there’s no reason he can’t accept hundreds of thousands of dollars? Did we make the mistake of assuming ethical behavior rather than writing it down again)
Maybe if the dumb fucks worked towards supporting the majority of the populous and not just the ones making more than 30 million a year and we'd have affordable living situations.
He should lay off the lattes and avocado toast. Needs a side hustle
It's not like he was making payments on the loan, either.
As a parent, I get it. We had to buy 17 luxury RVs before my son turned 18. It’s brutal out there.
Nobody understandz me
You know… if you can’t make do with nearly 200k+ for a salary…
Maybe you should learn to figure it out rather than solicit bribes from people like Harlan Crow.
Has he tried laying off the avocado toast and making coffee at home?
Nope. Why do you think he got that RV? To support his avocado-toast and coffee habit! How else is he going to get out there and try the very best?
From the moment he graduated from Yale Law, he's had a chip on his shoulder about deserving to be rich. It's understandable. Many of his white classmates got high paying jobs, he struggled. He blamed it on affirmative action, believing that his degree wasn't taken seriously because they thought he didn't get where he did on merit. (Worth noting that before Yale Law he attended the College of the Holy Cross as one of the first black students there... but see he deserved that, it wasn't affirmative action.)
His whole "philosophy" is pretty interesting, not in that it makes any sense, just in that you can see how his experiences warped his world view.
He doesn't believe in any government program that could help black people. Partially, that's because he thinks that the world will only believe that black people are where they are on merit if they're never given a hand up. Partially it's because he was influenced by black separatist movements and thinks black people should stay angry with whites, and not ever feel they are allies.
Being so against affirmative action got him the attention of Reagan, and so he started moving in Republican political circles. His party trick was shitting all over social programs that helped black people, while having black skin. The GOP loved him for it. He was appointed chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, while hating everything it stood for. Basically, a typical GOP ploy of assigning someone who wanted to destroy something to run it.
Once he was enmeshed in GOP politics, he became the perfect supreme court nominee. A guy with black skin (meaning it was going to be hard to get the democrats to vote against his confirmation) but who hated every government program that helped black people (meaning the GOP was going to love him).
But, even though he got the power of the Supreme Court, he never got the payout he thought he deserved. The guy who loaned him the money to buy the half-million dollar tour bus had worked as a congressional staffer at the same time as Thomas. But, instead of staying in politics, he'd spun off into business and gotten rich. Thomas got the power, but he didn't get the money, and he's been chasing the payout he thinks he deserves ever since his Yale graduation in 1974.
Just a reminder that he voted against student loan relief and was able to get over a quarter of a million of debt forgiven.
I choose my word carefully. I said "voted". Whatever it is those people think they are doing on the court has nothing to do with the law.
The month before, the justice had borrowed $267,000 from a friend to buy a high-end RV.
Just cut back on the avocado toast.
"Borrowed" money he never repaid and was never expected to be repaid.
It seems like at the time maybe he expected to have to repay it but under very generous loan terms. But, once he started complaining about money and threatening to quit, somehow the loan was forgiven.
One of the consequences of hanging out with billionaires is that it makes one feel puny.
In an documentary about super rich kids, Ivanka Trump (a teenager at the time) said it was impossible to maintain friendships with people of modest means because you either had to exclude them from extravagant social events or pay their way. This leaves the poorer party feeling left out or awkwardly obligated.
It's likely that Thomas resents his benefactors. It's deeply ironic that Thomas apparently spends so much time in situations where he's the subordinate.
I'll hang out with him.
My wife and I haven't seen the new Godzilla movie yet. We can double date with Charence and Ginni.
I won't. He's not a good person and doesn't make even a token effort to pretend otherwise.
Yeah, plus being so poor, I don't want to have to pay for him.
If that's how she said it, it's indicative of a morally bankrupt family. Not going to extravagant social events is not an option. How foul to raise a child to believe that. Just don't go to them, and then you can hang out and be friends with normal people without imposing your wealth on them.
He found himself seated next to a Republican member of Congress on the flight home
Aww gee, what a coincidence
When Richard Nixon was President, his salary was $200,000 /year and that was considered a fabulous sum. The inflated salaries of CEOs was a result of Reagan deregulating the banks.
According to The CPI Inflation Calculator, $200,000 in December 1969 would be the equivalent of $1.628 million today.
The CPI index is useful for some things, but not the real world. In 1969, that $200,000 would have brought you a mansion, a Rolls Royce, a Jag, and you'd have had enough money left over to buy a nice little business. In 1960, minimum wage was $1/hour and the average house was $11,000.
... in purchasing power. Which is a lot.
Quit then. Corrupt piece of shit.
Really seems like this is just a blatant attempt to coerce Republican legislators though. "Give us more money or that precious right wing majority you grifted so hard to get installed might be at risk".
Edit: typo
Quit then. Corrupt piece of shit.
If you'd read the story, or even just the summary above, you'd know that this story, and his threat to quit was something that happened in early January, 2000, 23 years ago. He can't quit then, then isn't now.
Reading between the lines, the article suggests that the corruption that followed (his sort-of son's private tuition being paid off, the private jets to vacation on yachts, his wife getting a job at the Heritage Foundation and a six figure salary, etc.) was a result of his complaining that he wasn't getting paid enough.
Will no one rid me of this troublesome debt?
That sounds a lot like soliciting & being given a bribe.
Let's ask the Supreme Court if it's a crime. They said no.
Another reason for the court to be subjected to change; they’re all wealthy fucks who have no clue, or care, how their rulings affect everyone outside the donor class.
This always pops in my head when they issue some anti-privacy thing. None of them have to deal with normal border security, none of them are at risk of stop and frisk, none of them can lose their job because of some personal choice, none of them are seriously concerned that some cop will lie about drugs. Their salary and who knows how much bodyguards and aids puts them in a position that has no relationship to what the regular general public deals with.
He should be released into the streets of New York City in poor people clothes with no ID. Maybe he would learn something.
God, I wish he would have. Of course, it was nothing but an empty threat to get him more bribes.
He wouldn't even qualify for a security clearance with the kind of debt that he intentionally racked up, and that is explicitly because it would open him up to bribery.
Guess what? It did open him up to bribery! What a shock.
Maybe the people who serve in the most powerful levels of government should at least be able to qualify for a basic security clearance.
Don't threaten us with a good time, Clarence.
Why will he not fuck off and die?
He and Senator McConnell have Kissinger's kiss: Somehow people hellbent on being evil get to live for a very long time.
Do it, Tom
I wonder what his nieces and nephews call him?
Mo powa, mo monah
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.