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.
It's on my list. Did you read it already? Does the author address the black market angle? I see the regulation of campaign finance as analagous to the regulation of rec drug use. In an attempt to stop people from corrupting their own bodies, we enacted drug regulation starting in 1914. Ninety eight years later, it's pretty clear that it failed.
In an attempt to stop money from corrupting US Congress, now people want to enact campaign reform. Will it work? I don't see how you can think that vigilant interdiction, having failed miserably in one case, is now going to somehow work in another case.
That's a terrible analogy, though. Campaign finance reform is nothing like the criminalization of drugs.
That's a terrible analogy, though. Campaign finance reform is nothing like the criminalization of drugs.
'Nothing like?' You don't see the similarities. Both involve enacting laws to interdict activities that are seen as corrosive. One to the body, and the other to the body politic.
And in both cases the users/abusers perceive that they will reap a reward from the activity--in one case, getting high, and in the other case political influence, which can then be turned into money in a million different ways.
'Nothing like?' You don't see the similarities. Both involve enacting laws to interdict activities that are seen as corrosive. One to the body, and the other to the body politic.
And in both cases the users/abusers perceive that they will reap a reward from the activity--in one case, getting high, and in the other case political influence, which can then be turned into money in a million different ways.
The similarities (which rely on incredible simplifications) are minimal in comparison to the enormous differences, and the analogy is so forced that any kind of argument that you might extrapolate from it is worthless to me, especially since you're trying to argue that attempting to regulate campaign finance is as useless an endeavor as trying to regulate substance use.
But but but there is no class war............if it wasn't for the rich we wouldn't have jobs and wouldn't be able to wipe our own rear end. American populace has been hijacked by the bankers, Wallstreet, corporations i.e. the 1% and they are too stupid to realize it and too ideologically braindead to call it what it is.......CLASS WARFARE!
It's on my list. Did you read it already? Does the author address the black market angle? I see the regulation of campaign finance as analagous to the regulation of rec drug use. In an attempt to stop people from corrupting their own bodies, we enacted drug regulation starting in 1914. Ninety eight years later, it's pretty clear that it failed.
In an attempt to stop money from corrupting US Congress, now people want to enact campaign reform. Will it work? I don't see how you can think that vigilant interdiction, having failed miserably in one case, is now going to somehow work in another case.
I'm not sure what you mean by black market. Are you talking about a shady deal in a dark parking garage where an envelope of money is handed over? I'm pretty sure if there's true reform, that something like that would constitute a bribe.
I guess I'll have to base much of why I'm voting for a candidate is because I agree with all or most of agendas of their big corporate donors.
Wouldn't it be more productive to invest in those corporations with whose agendas you agree and vote for the candidate who will best uphold the US Constitution?
The similarities (which rely on incredible simplifications) are minimal in comparison to the enormous differences, and the analogy is so forced that any kind of argument that you might extrapolate from it is worthless to me, especially since you're trying to argue that attempting to regulate campaign finance is as useless an endeavor as trying to regulate substance use.
what are the 'incredible simplifications?' Where is the analogy 'forced.' I find it hard to respond to you, because you don't seem to make any real points.
Again both are interdiction strategies. How is interdiction going to work in one case but not the other?
Here's a quote from the head of MPAA basically confirming what everyone already thinks about political contributions by corporations
"Those who count on 'Hollywood' for support need to understand that this industry is watching very carefully who's going to stand up for them when their job is at stake. Don't ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don't pay any attention to me when my job is at stake,"
Here's a quote from the head of MPAA basically confirming what everyone already thinks about political contributions by corporations
"Those who count on 'Hollywood' for support need to understand that this industry is watching very carefully who's going to stand up for them when their job is at stake. Don't ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don't pay any attention to me when my job is at stake,"
NO, that's the reason why congress should only meet twice a year for 2 weeks at a time. And the reason why the income tax should be repealed. Our country didn't have one until 1913... If most the money stops going in, so do the special favors.
But democrats don't understand that, they think men, like O and Harry, and Nancy, will just do the right thing.
LMAO, sheep.
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.
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.
