Anti-Corruption and Public Interest Act

[David T]

I begin to suspect some unfamiliarity with the motives of rich people.
There are legal bullies, eg, Donald Trump, government.
But I've never personally known anyone who considered
meritless lawsuits as a desirable thing to file.

Oh i have worked with wealthy not just mere rich folks. Money is power.

 

[icehorse]

Ugh....don't make me read the whole thing carefully.
But what I've seen smacks of too much regulation
with too little benefit.

I rank the oligarchy as perhaps our single biggest concern. The benefits seem HUGE.

 

[Revoltingest]

I rank the oligarchy as perhaps our single biggest concern. The benefits seem HUGE.

If there is really an oligarchy running things...some
shadow government...her proposal won't attack it.
But mine could make a dent.

 

[BSM1]

I suspected that such derailing would occur. How about discussing the message, not the messenger?

Ok. Now you try it with Trump.

 

[Curious George]

Maybe some...maybe not, since much expertise evaporates.
I say it would be more effective to aggressively prosecute
crimes, including those resulting from entrapment.

Some expertise may evaporate, but expertise is not in short demand here.

 

[icehorse]

If there is really an oligarchy running things...some
shadow government...her proposal won't attack it.
But mine could make a dent.

I don't think oligarchs need to be in a cabal or have a shadow government. They all can afford the best lawyers, and those lawyers find ways to game the system. No conspiracies needed.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't think oligarchs need to be in a cabal or have a shadow government. They all can afford the best lawyers, and those lawyers find ways to game the system. No conspiracies needed.

It would depend upon who the "oligarchy" is.
Some say the military industrial complex (MIC).
That one is pure conspiracy theory.
Others....we'd need specifics to address them.

 

[icehorse]

It would depend upon who the "oligarchy" is.
Some say the military industrial complex (MIC).
That one is pure conspiracy theory.
Others....we'd need specifics to address them.

Here's the first definition I found:

Oligarchy is a form of power structure in which power rests with a small number of people.

That's mostly what we've got these days. DC doesn't do what the people want it to do, DC does what the biggest corporations and billionaires want it to do. Again, no need for conspiracy to have an oligarchy.

 

[Shad]

Elizabeth Warren has proposed some new legislation: (warning, this link gets to an automatic download, sorry)

U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts

Seems like a great start to fighting those pesky oligarchs.

Against it due the draconian requirement of section 1 of Title I alone.

 

[Revoltingest]

Here's the first definition I found:

That's mostly what we've got these days. DC doesn't do what the people want it to do, DC does what the biggest corporations and billionaires want it to do. Again, no need for conspiracy to have an oligarchy.

By that definition, Poco's proposal will have no effect whatsoever.
Eliminating an "oligarchy" isn't going to happen....some small group
will always be in charge. (Just look at how Pelosi just solidified her
power over the Dems.)
We need to incentivize useful behavior. Fear of prosecution for any
malfeasance, even minor wrongs, is needed.

 

[icehorse]

By that definition, Poco's proposal will have no effect whatsoever.
Eliminating an "oligarchy" isn't going to happen....some small group
will always be in charge. (Just look at how Pelosi just solidified her
power over the Dems.)
We need to incentivize useful behavior. Fear of prosecution for any
malfeasance, even minor wrongs, is needed.

Call me naive, but how about if we set up an actual democracy? No system will be perfect, but we can do a lot better than we are now.

I'd say that virtually EVERY ONE of our critical issues (climate change, wealth inequality, human rights, the environment, nukes...), is exacerbated because of the oligarchs. They are the fly in every ointment.

 

[Revoltingest]

Call me naive, but how about if we set up an actual democracy? No system will be perfect, but we can do a lot better than we are now.

People aren't engaged enuf to vote on legislation.

I'd say that virtually EVERY ONE of our critical issues (climate change, wealth inequality, human rights, the environment, nukes...), is exacerbated because of the oligarchs. They are the fly in every ointment.

Direct democracy will change things in the manner you want?

 

[icehorse]

People aren't engaged enuf to vote on legislation.

Some are, and the others might change of they started to see that the people got what they voted for.

Direct democracy will change things in the manner you want?

I still think we should have representatives. And yes, I think that if we removed special interests from DC, we'd be far better off than we are now. Not perfect, but better.

 

[Revoltingest]

Some are, and the others might change of they started to see that the people got what they voted for.

People see the effects of what they vote for now.
And they continue to vote as before.
I don't expect people to change.

I still think we should have representatives. And yes, I think that if we removed special interests from DC, we'd be far better off than we are now. Not perfect, but better.

Which special interests should go?
Commercial
Racial
Gender
Religious
Elderly
Hispanic

 

[icehorse]

People see the effects of what they vote for now.
A

Which sadly, is thin. People who care, see that what they want, they do not get.

Which special interests should go?

The ones that benefit individual businesses.

 

[Revoltingest]

Which sadly, is thin. People who care, see that what they want, they do not get.

That will continue.
I oppose this continual waging of non-defense foreign wars.
The majority disagrees with me.
But if I ever got my way, the others would be unhappy.

 

[icehorse]

That will continue.
I oppose this continual waging of non-defense foreign wars.
The majority disagrees with me.
But if I ever got my way, the others would be unhappy.

Well that's the price of living in a democracy. But as a side note, I would guess that most people would vote for a reduction in our defense budget.

So again, no perfect solutions, but improvements. E.g. instead of the majority getting what they want 30% of the time, they could get it 60% of the time. Something like that. Not perfect, but improved.

But more to the point, critical areas like:

- shifting R&D and tax subsidies away from oil companies and towards renewables. This is blocked by a few oligarchs.
- getting the middlemen out of healthcare - again, blocked by oligarchs.
- reducing defense spending - blocked by oligarchs
- having the wealthy pay taxes for the infrastructure they use - blocked by oligarchs

and so on

 

[Revoltingest]

Well that's the price of living in a democracy. But as a side note, I would guess that most people would vote for a reduction in our defense budget.
So again, no perfect solutions, but improvements. E.g. instead of the majority getting what they want 30% of the time, they could get it 60% of the time. Something like that. Not perfect, but improved.

But more to the point, critical areas like:

- shifting R&D and tax subsidies away from oil companies and towards renewables. This is blocked by a few oligarchs.
- getting the middlemen out of healthcare - again, blocked by oligarchs.
- reducing defense spending - blocked by oligarchs
- having the wealthy pay taxes for the infrastructure they use - blocked by oligarchs

and so on

I'm unconvinced that your changes would improve things.
This is in part due to some erroneous beliefs, eg, that the
wealthy don't pay for infrastructure.
"Oligarchs" are a boogeyman....attacking them won't fix
underlying problems any more than attacking illegal immigrants,
capitalists, blacks, whites, atheists, fundies or misogynists.

 

[icehorse]

I'm unconvinced that your changes would improve things.
This is in part due to some erroneous beliefs, eg, that the
wealthy don't pay for infrastructure.
"Oligarchs" are a boogeyman....attacking them won't fix
underlying problems any more than attacking illegal immigrants,
capitalists, blacks, whites, atheists, fundies or misogynists.

Corporations like Amazon and Walmart can be categorized as parasitic. We taxpayers subsidize these corporations and their owners are multi-billionaires. I have no issue with Bezos being worth billions of dollars. I take great umbrage at the fact that my tax dollars are subsidizing that wealth.

Let's zoom out a bit from the term "infrastructure" and use maybe "the commons". Amazon and Walmart (again, just handy and common examples), BOTH use our highways and bridges - extensively. They both require a somewhat educated and healthy workforce. They both benefit from public police and fire protection services. They are not paying their fair share to fund all of this.

 

[Revoltingest]

Corporations like Amazon and Walmart can be categorized as parasitic. We taxpayers subsidize these corporations and their owners are multi-billionaires. I have no issue with Bezos being worth billions of dollars. I take great umbrage at the fact that my tax dollars are subsidizing that wealth.

Then we need to vote in candidates who oppose subsidizing businesses.
Could you be specific about the subsidies?

Let's zoom out a bit from the term "infrastructure" and use maybe "the commons". Amazon and Walmart (again, just handy and common examples), BOTH use our highways and bridges - extensively. They both require a somewhat educated and healthy workforce. They both benefit from public police and fire protection services. They are not paying their fair share to fund all of this.

They both pay real estate taxes which pay for fire & police services.
Moreover, they pay higher rates than homeowners.
They also pay fuel, property & income taxes which build & maintain roads.
If you don't think they pay enuf, how do you calculate this?

I favor much higher fuel taxes, btw.
It will raise needed revenue & reduce fossil fuel usage.