U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-12-2011, 10:49 AM
 
10,543 posts, read 11,990,416 times
Reputation: 2798

Advertisements

The protestors seem to be primarily focused on either the disparity in wealth or on the role of money in politics. If they protests are successful and everyting changes as the wish, what would look different? I know the easy answer is that there wouldn't be the gap in wealth and corporations wouldn't have a role in politics, but what would be the mechanisms in place to reach those ends? If those two outcomes are acheived, what are the desired means used to achieve them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-12-2011, 11:03 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,505 posts, read 51,252,664 times
Reputation: 24611
I would like to see political contributions limited to actual living people and not corporations and other organizations like labor unions or PACs. These contributions should also be limited in amount to say $1,000 or less. The major impact would be to remove air and cable TV and radio advertizing as providing free or discount time would be a contribution. Without the sophisticated advertizing (lying) the candidates would have to do a lot more public speaking and greeting. Another effect would be the candidate would not owe any allegiance to their big donors. Cutting off the bribery channel is really needed.

Somehow I do not see these protests as achieving the goal of getting big money out of politics. Or reducing the collusion between bankers and monopolistic businessmen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 11:05 AM
 
29,988 posts, read 37,115,993 times
Reputation: 12759
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rggr View Post
The protestors seem to be primarily focused on either the disparity in wealth or on the role of money in politics. If they protests are successful and everyting changes as the wish, what would look different? I know the easy answer is that there wouldn't be the gap in wealth and corporations wouldn't have a role in politics, but what would be the mechanisms in place to reach those ends? If those two outcomes are acheived, what are the desired means used to achieve them?

Well no, they seem to be primarily focused on:

1) re-electing Obama
2) destroying all capitalism
3) blaming corporations because politicans are willing to be corrupted

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 11:06 AM
 
6,486 posts, read 5,671,040 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I would like to see political contributions limited to actual living people and not corporations and other organizations like labor unions or PACs. These contributions should also be limited in amount to say $1,000 or less. The major impact would be to remove air and cable TV and radio advertizing as providing free or discount time would be a contribution. Without the sophisticated advertizing (lying) the candidates would have to do a lot more public speaking and greeting. Another effect would be the candidate would not owe any allegiance to their big donors. Cutting off the bribery channel is really needed.

Somehow I do not see these protests as achieving the goal of getting big money out of politics. Or reducing the collusion between bankers and monopolistic businessmen.
those added regulations would hamper campaigning, thus giving the advantage to name recognition--incumbents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 11:09 AM
 
Location: 15 months till retirement and I can leave the hell hole of New Yakistan
25,241 posts, read 13,985,493 times
Reputation: 6469
even 'socialist like" europe has seen an increase in the rich/poor gap

the facts are there some people make money ...and..some are losers that rely on the government tit
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 11:10 AM
 
10,543 posts, read 11,990,416 times
Reputation: 2798
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
[color=black][font=Verdana]I would like to see political contributions limited to actual living people and not corporations and other organizations like labor unions or PACs. These contributions should also be limited in amount to say $1,000 or less. The major impact would be to remove air and cable TV and radio advertizing as providing free or discount time would be a contribution. Without the sophisticated advertizing (lying) the candidates would have to do a lot more public speaking and greeting. Another effect would be the candidate would not owe any allegiance to their big donors. Cutting off the bribery channel is really needed.
I agree that this is a big problem. I wouldn't argue against your proposal in theory.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 11:11 AM
 
2,721 posts, read 3,737,199 times
Reputation: 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I would like to see political contributions limited to actual living people and not corporations and other organizations like labor unions or PACs. These contributions should also be limited in amount to say $1,000 or less. The major impact would be to remove air and cable TV and radio advertizing as providing free or discount time would be a contribution. Without the sophisticated advertizing (lying) the candidates would have to do a lot more public speaking and greeting. Another effect would be the candidate would not owe any allegiance to their big donors. Cutting off the bribery channel is really needed.

Somehow I do not see these protests as achieving the goal of getting big money out of politics. Or reducing the collusion between bankers and monopolistic businessmen.
This sounds reasonable as long as all Unions aren't allowed to have PAC's either

No teachers lobby, no firefighters lobby, no police lobby either
^^Somehow I don't think the OWS protesters would go for this...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 11:16 AM
 
2,127 posts, read 1,682,386 times
Reputation: 1008
As far as the mechanisms go, campaign finance reform (especially w/r/t soft money, PACS), lobbying reform (a hairier beast), a stronger regulative branch (the CFPB is a start, Elizabeth Warren is popular with OWS folks for a reason), the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall, something which countermands Citizens United vs. FEC. I think Occupy Chicago has a fairly explicit list of demands, some of which I'm behind, some less so:

Quote:
1.PASS HR 1489 REINSTATING GLASS-STEAGALL. – A depression era safeguard that separated the commercial lending and investment banking portions of banks. Its repeal in 1999 is considered the major cause of the global financial meltdown of 2008-2009.

2. REPEAL BUSH TAX CUTS FOR THE WEALTHY

3. FULLY INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THE WALL STREET CRIMINALS who clearly broke the law and helped cause the 2008 financial crisis.

4.OVERTURN CITIZENS UNITED v. US. – A 2010 Supreme Court Decision which ruled that money is speech. Corporations, as legal persons, are now allowed to contribute unlimited amounts of money to campaigns in the exercise of free “speech.”

5. PASS THE BUFFET RULE ON FAIR TAXATION, CLOSE CORPORATE TAX LOOPHOLES, PROHIBIT HIDING FUNDS OFFSHORE.

6. GIVE THE SEC STRICTER REGULATORY POWER, STRENGTHEN THE CONSUMER PROTECTION BUREAU, AND PROVIDE ASSISTANCE FOR OWNERS OF FORECLOSED MORTGAGES WHO WERE VICTIMS OF PREDATORY LENDING.

7.TAKE STEPS TO LIMIT THE INFLUENCE OF LOBBYISTS AND ELIMINATE THE PRACTICE OF LOBBYISTS WRITING LEGISLATION.

8. ELIMINATE RIGHT OF FORMER GOVERNMENT REGULATORS TO WORK FOR CORPORATIONS OR INDUSTRIES THEY ONCE REGULATED.

9. ELIMINATE CORPORATE PERSONHOOD.

10. INSIST THE FEC STAND UP FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN REGULATING PRIVATE USE OF PUBLIC AIRWAVES to help ensure that political candidates ARE GIVEN EQUAL TIME for free at reasonable intervals during campaign season.

11. REFORM CAMPAIGN FINANCE WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE FAIR ELECTIONS NOW ACT (S.750, H.R. 1404).

12. FORGIVE STUDENT DEBT – The same institutions that gave almost $2T in bailouts and then extended $16T of loans at little to no interest for banks can surely afford to forgive the $946B of student debt currently held. Not only does this favor the 99% over the 1%, it has the practical effect of more citizens spending money on actual goods, not paying down interest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 11:17 AM
 
6,486 posts, read 5,671,040 times
Reputation: 1272
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I would like to see political contributions limited to actual living people and not corporations and other organizations like labor unions or PACs. These contributions should also be limited in amount to say $1,000 or less. The major impact would be to remove air and cable TV and radio advertizing as providing free or discount time would be a contribution. Without the sophisticated advertizing (lying) the candidates would have to do a lot more public speaking and greeting. Another effect would be the candidate would not owe any allegiance to their big donors. Cutting off the bribery channel is really needed.

Somehow I do not see these protests as achieving the goal of getting big money out of politics. Or reducing the collusion between bankers and monopolistic businessmen.
The SCOTUS found that corporations are allowed to contribute. It won't happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-12-2011, 11:21 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,505 posts, read 51,252,664 times
Reputation: 24611
I think they would agree. The core of their protest is big business and bigger banking has far too much power in our politics and our economy. I do not see them as protesting Capitalism but as protesting the crooked collusive market destroying system currently infesting our business community and misallocating capital from growth into gambling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top