Politicians deserve to be rich

01-09-11, 01:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117

to be honest...I think give them an average middle class wage, sure pay for travel...but make it illegal for lobbyists to give any gifts. Politics should be about the clout of your voice, not what you can give the politician in return for his bill.

Yet you believe in free speech. Or is it only the free speech you agree with?

Armistead · 01-09-11, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Yet you believe in free speech. Or is it only the free speech you agree with?

What doe's lobbying have to do with free speech when we know it's not. If I give you a gift and expect you to do my will over the will of the people, that's not free speech. Lobbiest expect outcomes for the money they give, has nothing to do with speech.

tater · 01-09-11, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armistead

What doe's lobbying have to do with free speech when we know it's not. If I give you a gift and expect you to do my will over the will of the people, that's not free speech. Lobbiest expect outcomes for the money they give, has nothing to do with speech.

Everyone expects quid pro quo. A union pledging votes is no different than handing money out. Do as we say, or the votes go away. Donated money is spent to buy votes at large.

When you see people who start out modestly, and only become affluent AFTER they start a political career, that is a sign of something fishy, IMO, since it's not like they get paid all that much (Senators make only a couple hundred grand a year, which is not really a huge sum (stagehands in NYC make way more than that for basically unskilled labor) (average at Lincloln center is apparently nearly ~290 grand).

gimpy117 · 01-09-11, 12:26 PM

?but where do you draw the line between speech and bribery? im in a union tater. Sure they ask you to vote for this guy, but they don't hand you cash to do their bidding.

Lobbying in this nation is the next best thing. Giving gifts with the implied idea of having them do what you want. The only reason its not a bribe is because they aren't being officially being told to do things.

Armistead · 01-09-11, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117

?but where do you draw the line between speech and bribery? im in a union tater. Sure they ask you to vote for this guy, but they don't hand you cash to do their bidding.

Lobbying in this nation is the next best thing. Giving gifts with the implied idea of having them do what you want. The only reason its not a bribe is because they aren't being officially being told to do things.

That's the obvious problem. Why it's not illegal, we all now know the ethics are violated. We all know so called campaign donations are bribes. Unions and Corporations don't hand out big money without expecting something in return. It's called "vote for sale". Congress has the ability to protect and make legal for themselves what they make illegal for the rest of us. If they had to abide by the laws they place on us they would all be under the jail.

tater · 01-09-11, 05:01 PM

They don't hand you cash? They control your income. PO the leadership, and find you get passed over, etc.They have no way of knowing how you vote, but unionized workers have a an incentive to at least publicly toe the union line or face "unofficial" sanction.

Unions give billions to the democrats, and they do so because they expect to have their way. IF individuals had to donate, the dems would get somewhat less, AND the unions would not be in the position they are to literally dictate policy to the democrats. They can for the same reason texas exerts disproportionate influence on text books. Since the money comes in a huge pile. Sell the union leadership that you will do their bidding, collect a huge sum.

Frankly I don't have a problem with it as long as the rules are exactly the same for everyone, and it is transparent (same for everyone means that if "union" or "business" is even mentioned in a law it's clearly biased. One law for all contributions. A simple law that any one of us should be able to memorize and read back verbatim—more complicated than that means it's designed to hide stuff.

gimpy117 · 01-09-11, 06:34 PM

I'm in the UFCW and I've gotten promotions and wages. Besides Im voting age and the only "harassment" I get is a poster on a wall from time to time.

Furthermore, unions giving to a candidate is how it should work in america. A union is a PRIVATE CITIZEN FUNDED GROUP, not some corporate shill organization. Its much like the NRA or AARP giving to senators to ask that they make laws that favor the citizens that belong to that group.

there is a difference between the people supporting a candidate financially via a legitimate special interest group vs. a corporation giving money.

Torvald Von Mansee · 01-09-11, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Yet you believe in free speech. Or is it only the free speech you agree with?

Are you familiar w/the concept of "one man, one vote"? Shouldn't that apply to free speech? Should one man speak in a whisper, while another speaks with the touring rig of the Rolling Stones?

01-09-11, 12:26 PM	#4
gimpy117 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Kalamazoo, MI Posts: 3,243 Downloads: 108 Uploads: 0	?but where do you draw the line between speech and bribery? im in a union tater. Sure they ask you to vote for this guy, but they don't hand you cash to do their bidding. Lobbying in this nation is the next best thing. Giving gifts with the implied idea of having them do what you want. The only reason its not a bribe is because they aren't being officially being told to do things. __________________ Member of the Subsim Zombie Army

01-09-11, 06:34 PM	#7
gimpy117 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Kalamazoo, MI Posts: 3,243 Downloads: 108 Uploads: 0	I'm in the UFCW and I've gotten promotions and wages. Besides Im voting age and the only "harassment" I get is a poster on a wall from time to time. Furthermore, unions giving to a candidate is how it should work in america. A union is a PRIVATE CITIZEN FUNDED GROUP, not some corporate shill organization. Its much like the NRA or AARP giving to senators to ask that they make laws that favor the citizens that belong to that group. there is a difference between the people supporting a candidate financially via a legitimate special interest group vs. a corporation giving money. __________________ Member of the Subsim Zombie Army

01-09-11, 05:01 PM	#6
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	They don't hand you cash? They control your income. PO the leadership, and find you get passed over, etc.They have no way of knowing how you vote, but unionized workers have a an incentive to at least publicly toe the union line or face "unofficial" sanction. Unions give billions to the democrats, and they do so because they expect to have their way. IF individuals had to donate, the dems would get somewhat less, AND the unions would not be in the position they are to literally dictate policy to the democrats. They can for the same reason texas exerts disproportionate influence on text books. Since the money comes in a huge pile. Sell the union leadership that you will do their bidding, collect a huge sum. Frankly I don't have a problem with it as long as the rules are exactly the same for everyone, and it is transparent (same for everyone means that if "union" or "business" is even mentioned in a law it's clearly biased. One law for all contributions. A simple law that any one of us should be able to memorize and read back verbatim—more complicated than that means it's designed to hide stuff.