Single Post Display - The Market Ticker


RSS available Fact: There is no immunity or protection against The Law of Scoreboards. Did you know: What the media does NOT want you to read is at https://market-ticker.org/nad. You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!

The Market Ticker Single Post Display (Show in context)

User Info

Freedom Of Speech: How Quaint; entered at 2010-01-22 13:21:22

Vapor
Posts: 1266
Registered: 2008-04-10 virginia

Quote:

And here, I have a solution.

Public employees - that is, politicians - should not be able to receive a campaign donation (in any form) from anyone except an actual constituent - that is, someone who is qualified and registered to vote in their district or state.

Let the corporations (and individuals), along with PACs, Unions and others buy all the issue and even candidate ads they want - so long as they honestly identify who is funding the speech in question.

But bar all public employees from receiving any campaign contribution from anyone other than a natural person who is registered to vote in the area represented by that particular politician, with violators subject to felony prosecution. If such an act is traced to a corporation the firm's charter is revoked.

Isn't it funny how we never address the actual problem - the fact that candidates have huge war chests funded by corporations (directly and indirectly) and instead try to focus on trying to restrict people's desire to speak - a right that is guaranteed under our Constitution?

Solve the problem instead of allowing politicians to play Kabuki Theater with this (very legitimate) issue.

You make two big mistakes Karl:

1) Corporations are organized to pursue profit for their investors. They have a fiducial duty to do so, and nothing else. Hence they will pursue speech and propaganda to the maximum extent possible in pursuit of profit. They have no interest in politics other than how politics affects their bottom line. How then does unlimited free speech for corporations advance the public interest? Monetary limits must be imposed on all corporations so that the few powerful cannot dominate the media and discourse.

2) You fail to provide any solution for how to deal with corporations spending advertising intended to influence political campaigns. Your "solution" only deals with direct gifts to politicians and campaigns. It does nothing to deal with the ability of huge corporations to spend money influencing political races indirectly via advertising, and this will always be done in pursuit of their profit. It doesnt take much to influence an election, and corporations will now be able to spend as much as they like to get their favorite political *****s elected.

I am shocked that you think this decision is OK, in view of everything that has happened in the last year. DO I need to remind you that political influence spending is why wall street is ripping us off?

You are clueless karl. This decision amounts to the political death of the citizen. Your wrongheaded opinion on this critically important issue makes me wonder if I should bother being part of TF any longer.

Karl Denninger and FedUp: FAIL.

2010-01-22 13:21:22