View Poll Results: Which group should have control of government?

Voters
40. You may not vote on this poll
  • People

    31 77.50%
  • Corporations

    1 2.50%
  • Other (e.g. Corporate Soylent Green)

    8 20.00%
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 76 of 76

Thread: People vs. Corporations

  1. #71
    Sage
    Greenbeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,511

    Re: People vs. Corporations

    Quote Originally Posted by bomberfox View Post
    Tying political spending with speech and giving it first amendment protections just puts what is essentially buying favors and speaking speaking up under the same umbrella. It also makes the wealthy have more “expression” than the poor. Money is not the same thing as speech and political spending is not the same as speaking out.
    Buckley upheld limits on direct contributions to candidates precisely because it recognized the danger of even the appearance of impropriety in giving cash to those running for office. And there are limits on how much you can give a candidate. Nobody believes "buying favors" should be legal. And it isn't. But to jump from that to arguing you shouldn't be able to spend your own money on the things you care about is a big leap.

    The New York Times Editorial Board has more "expression" than me because their thoughts on the issues reach millions more people than mine do. Should the government bust up their printing presses to make sure we're on an even footing? There are thousands of students and retirees knocking on doors in New Hampshire to push their preferred primary candidate right now. Is it fair that they have more time than I do to engage in retail politics because I have work to do? People will always have different allocations of time, money, organizational skills, talent, etc. I don't see how that unequal distribution determines whether or not you ought to get to use those things to advocate for what you care about in a representative democracy.

  2. #72
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:55 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,051

    Re: People vs. Corporations

    Quote Originally Posted by Greenbeard View Post
    Political spending is a form of expression, as with any right the only question has ever been whether there are legitimate grounds for curtailing it. I don't personally believe that politics should be left to politicians and that rest of us should be content to participate only vicariously through candidates. "People controlling the government" means more than just popping up to vote every couple years.
    In practice, the current arrangement of US electoral finance and political spending has meant essentially a form of de facto plutocracy however; something that has been confirmed by comprehensive studies on the matter, the Gilens and Page 2014 study being, to my knowledge, the most encompassing one to date (and if anything, things have only gotten worse since then). In my view, there can be no more compelling grounds for curtailing and limiting political spending in all forms than the overwhelming, dominant and disproportionate influence a tiny percentage of the population successfully and routinely exercises. The function and spirit of democracy is undoubtedly corroded when we let people purchase political influence without limit, or with limits so high or easily circumvented they may as well be non-existent.

    Though it's obvious you will never completely eliminate the considerable advantage held by the wealthy in swaying the public and politicos, there is certainly much that can be done to even the playing field through the example of countries that rank highly on the Democracy index.
    "The amount of energy necessary to refute bull**** is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it." -Alberto Brandolini

  3. #73
    Guru bomberfox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    3,657

    Re: People vs. Corporations

    Quote Originally Posted by Greenbeard View Post
    Buckley upheld limits on direct contributions to candidates precisely because it recognized the danger of even the appearance of impropriety in giving cash to those running for office. And there are limits on how much you can give a candidate. Nobody believes "buying favors" should be legal. And it isn't. But to jump from that to arguing you shouldn't be able to spend your own money on the things you care about is a big leap.

    The New York Times Editorial Board has more "expression" than me because their thoughts on the issues reach millions more people than mine do. Should the government bust up their printing presses to make sure we're on an even footing? There are thousands of students and retirees knocking on doors in New Hampshire to push their preferred primary candidate right now. Is it fair that they have more time than I do to engage in retail politics because I have work to do? People will always have different allocations of time, money, organizational skills, talent, etc. I don't see how that unequal distribution determines whether or not you ought to get to use those things to advocate for what you care about in a representative democracy.
    It is precisely because money doesnt = speech that your strawman is hilarious and the notion that you should get more say because of your riches is ridiculous. If you dont think corporations are buying politicians, i dunno what to tell you. Yeah they limit contributions from you and me but left wide open contributions from PACs and super PACs and corporations thats the problem. What you are saying is the rich having more say because of their riches is fine and dandy because people like you bastardized the first amendment which NEVER before gave credence to such notion. Those people are engaging in expression when they knock on doors which is nowhere near the same thing as giving money to a politician.

  4. #74
    Sage
    Greenbeard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Cambridge, MA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,511

    Re: People vs. Corporations

    Quote Originally Posted by bomberfox View Post
    It is precisely because money doesnt = speech that your strawman is hilarious and the notion that you should get more say because of your riches is ridiculous. If you dont think corporations are buying politicians, i dunno what to tell you. Yeah they limit contributions from you and me but left wide open contributions from PACs and super PACs and corporations thats the problem. What you are saying is the rich having more say because of their riches is fine and dandy because people like you bastardized the first amendment which NEVER before gave credence to such notion. Those people are engaging in expression when they knock on doors which is nowhere near the same thing as giving money to a politician.
    PACs do have limits on what they can contribute to a candidate. And Super PACs can't contribute to candidates at all. And I've already said that I don't think corporate treasury money should be available for electioneering activities. The question at hand isn't about giving money to candidates, it's about whether people's personal resources ought to be able to be used to directly advocate for issues, legislation or ballot initiatives, electoral outcomes, etc. If I care about climate change, can I join like-minded people by donating to the Environmental Defense Action Fund to amplify our voices and advance our agenda?

    Tom Steyer really wants to impeach Donald Trump. So he has his Need to Impeach SuperPAC (financed primarily with donations from him but also a few hundred other people as well) and spent tens of millions running ads making his case and urging people to call their member of Congress. I don't see how you can argue that's not an example of speech.

  5. #75
    User
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    111

    Re: People vs. Corporations

    Quote Originally Posted by Tlrmln View Post
    If you take all the people out of a corporation, what can it possibly control?
    Um, immortality?

    Wealth and power?

    What can't it control?

  6. #76
    Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:03 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,371

    Re: People vs. Corporations

    Quote Originally Posted by diz View Post
    Um, immortality?

    Wealth and power?

    What can't it control?
    It can't control anything. Everything a corporation does is done by the people that comprise it.

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •