Why are there always these endless relativistic arguments? Because some “bankster” is making $3 million a year and doing nothing for it or running their company into the ground I’m supposed to accept any pilfering, extortion or corruption occurring below that amount?

Since BP makes $10 billion a year I shouldn’t even question a mayor of a small town pilfering it’s residents for $800k a year? Well, there are roughly 30,000 incorporated cities and towns in the US. If, on average, the pilfering is around $100k a year per city then that’s $3 billion a year. In the larger cities it’s probably far above that. A $1 million a year pilfering equals $30 billion. Probably more than all the oil companies combined have allegedly ripped us off.

I read the comments about the focus of the media on the top pensioners as well as the justifications for some of the pensions and I can understand some of them. However, the relativistic arguments cause me to quit reading as all credibility is lost. It’s like a murderer going in to court and arguing that “Ted Bundy killed 35 people so why the heck are you punishing me for only killing 2 people?”

Pilfering the taxpayer at any level pisses me off. In fact, I think it starts at the lower levels and works it’s way up to the top. Those exploiting the system for small amounts as rookies will probably become professional big $ exploiters in due time.