• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NDAs: Is the government representing your best interests by keeping secrets?

NDAs: Is the government representing your best interests by keeping secrets?

  • 1) Yes, it's perfectly fine.

    Votes: 2 18.2%

  • 2) It's only acceptable fine in cases of legitimate national security. Otherwise, no.

    Votes: 3 27.3%

  • 3) No, it's never fine. As a taxpayer and citizen, have the right to know what my govt is doing.

    Votes: 2 18.2%

  • 4) #3, but with legitimate national security exceptions.

    Votes: 3 27.3%

  • 5) Other.

    Votes: 1 9.1%
  • Total voters
    11
radcen

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
NDAs: Is the government representing your best interests by keeping secrets?

NDA = Non-Disclosure Agreements. Agreements to parties in a (usually) settled lawsuit to not say or disclose anything whatsoever regarding the settlement terms.

When government... federal, state, local, etc... settled a lawsuit against them, a NDA is a very common clause in the settlement. What do you think?

1) Yes, it's perfectly fine.
2) It's only acceptable fine in cases of legitimate national security. Otherwise, no.
3) No, it's never fine. I, as a taxpayer and citizen, have the right to know what my representative government is doing.
4) #3, but with legitimate national security exceptions.
5) Other.
 
Not enough information.
 
I definitely think they are fine at least some times.

For instance, there are certain things that the public has no legitimate purpose for knowing specifics about, such as what shape our ship propellers are or the full extent of our safety precautions in relation to nuclear power (although this would definitely be a balancing of what would ease public sentiment and what is just too much). These are also things though that could easily be used against us by those looking to hurt us, as a country.

Certainly there are some grey areas for where the limits are for how much should be okay for disclosure and how much is too much.
 
If I truly believed that all Americans, or even most of them, are rational and that some Party or other or the Media wouldn't pick up some little tidbit and blow it all out of proportion then I would have said, no, it's not acceptable. But the reality is that **** happens all the time and if everything were 100% open to the public then all the relatively minor things that happen would constantly be turned into a never-ending barrage of bull**** - and that happens enough already.


I also suspect, even though I'm an amateur, that it's a viable negotiating tool for lawyers, which means it probably saves us some money at times.
 
Options 2 and 4 are close enough to be the same thing.
 
Secrets in government inevitably lead to suppression of citizens. Citizens should have open access to government policies to keep them honest and crack down on corruption. They only represent THEIR best interests with secrets...not ours.

"The very notion of secrecy is repugnant in a free and open society." JFK
 
Last edited:
AreteCourage said:
Secrets in government inevitably lead to suppression of citizens. Citizens should have open access to government policies to keep them honest and crack down on corruption. They only represent THEIR best interests with secrets...not ours. ...
Click to expand...
I also think that secrets held by private organizations, e.g for profit corporations, can lead to suppression of citizens. So?
 
OhIsee.Then said:
I also think that secrets held by private organizations, e.g for profit corporations, can lead to suppression of citizens. So?
Click to expand...
Private corporations are just that... private. Beholden only to themselves (i.e.: their stockholders).

Public entities such as government are public. The public... read: every citizen... is the stockholder.

What is done by an entity affects the stockholders. Shouldn't the stockholders know what the entity is doing in their name?
 
radcen said:
Private corporations are just that... private. Beholden only to themselves (i.e.: their stockholders).

Public entities such as government are public. The public... read: every citizen... is the stockholder.

What is done by an entity affects the stockholders. Shouldn't the stockholders know what the entity is doing in their name?
Click to expand...
No it's not required that "the stockholders know what the entity is doing in their name?" And, recent experience verifies this. Also, there are many other types of private organizations that have reason to keep things secret.
 
OhIsee.Then said:
No it's not required that "the stockholders know what the entity is doing in their name?" And, recent experience verifies this. Also, there are many other types of private organizations that have reason to keep things secret.
Click to expand...
Examples of recent experience/verification?
 
radcen said:
Examples of recent experience/verification?
Click to expand...
Do you watch any news? This type of thing makes the news all the time. How is this for one you might be interested in: I worked for a company where standards for internet security were going to influence what we did. I was a member of an international organization of private corporations developing those standards for G2 & G3. Getting more security into G2 would delay our product introduction and some other corporations also, though some others needed some delay so they were arguing for more robust security. What G4 would be was also being discussed. In our corporation there were thousands of employees and 100's of thousands of stock holders and there were ten's of us working on this and managing this. It was essentially secret otherwise. So, are you as a private citizen interested in internet security? How aware were you of the product introduction schedule vs. security for the internet a decade ago?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom