[charia]

For the same reason why people are against high level government officials anywhere getting pay raises. The public perceives it as a waste of money and believe that public servants should be solely motivated by the work and not the money. People forget that paying people who have significantly disproportionate power well makes them less likely to be tempted by outside influences.

The second is because that looks very weird and improper. It's a government job and the person who works gets compensated. Not taking a salary would make his tenure and situation even more abnormal. It also sets a bad precedent for potential future holders of the job.

The better option would be to accept the salary and donate it alongside the fortune he has vowed to give away.

[eru]

> For the same reason why people are against high level government officials anywhere getting pay raises. The public perceives it as a waste of money and believe that public servants should be solely motivated by the work and not the money. People forget that paying people who have significantly disproportionate power well makes them less likely to be tempted by outside influences.

Interestingly, that's part of the reasoning why Singapore pays ministers millions per year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_Singapore

[jmnicolas]

> People forget that paying people who have significantly disproportionate power well makes them less likely to be tempted by outside influences.

630k ought to be enough for anybody.

[laurent92]

> The better option would be to accept the salary and donate it alongside the fortune he has vowed to give away.

And this exactly what Trump did, for example. He considered he was rich enough, so every trimester he donates his salary to a different ministry, once it was the General Surgeon, another time it was the DHS, or the Department of Agriculture. The list is here: https://www.snopes.com/news/2019/12/13/president-trump-salar...

[croon]

Well, it is exactly what he has claimed to do, but given his history with truth, it's highly unlikely.

[laurent92]

Source? You can accuse him of whatever else you want, but here, it’s hundreds of thousands of dollars of payments that have happened in reality and can be cross-checked by journalists. You are literally claiming a past event doesn’t exist « given his history with the truth ».

A man can do the best action possible and still be told it didn’t matter.

[zimpenfish]

> can be cross-checked by journalists.

"To be clear, this list documents announcements — not receipts — of Trump’s donations."

"We contacted the Department of Treasury to find out if documentation for any such deposits is publicly available and have yet to hear back."