Thread: For Hire: Lobbyists or the 99%? How Corporations Pay More for Lobbyists Than Taxes

We need soclialim!

What we need is a ban on lobbyists. The whole system is corrupt, top to bottom.

It's legalized bribery for fuck's sake.

Ole Mutt says, "Corporations are people my friend".




Yet, this person doesn't spend millions to influence elections, the whole time having taxes cut lower than the Mailmans.

Damn liar!

Originally Posted by Zaphod

What we need is a ban on lobbyists. The whole system is corrupt, top to bottom.

Originally Posted by DOMS

It's legalized bribery for fuck's sake.

yup.

Yet, when this practice was first implemented by the Cosa Nuestra it was widely frowned upon and quickly remedied.

When organized crime did it, it was bad.

Now organised crime gets away with it!

i'd rather pay corporations than have my money going to the ghettos and trailer parks

Originally Posted by irish_2003

i'd rather pay corporations than have my money going to the ghettos and trailer parks

Of course.

Originally Posted by IronAddict

Ole Mutt says, "Corporations are people my friend".




Yet, this person doesn't spend millions to influence elections, the whole time having taxes cut lower than the Mailmans.

Damn liar!

Mitt is not only a fucking liar but a total douche-bag. the private equity firm Bain Capital that Mitt used to run specialized in leveraged buyouts, buying control of companies with borrowed money, pledged against those companies’ earnings or assets. However, job creation at the target firms were no greater than in similar firms that were not targets, while “gross job destruction was substantially higher. Mitt made his fortune in a business that is, on balance, about job destruction rather than job creation. And because job destruction hurts workers even as it increases profits and the incomes of top executives, leveraged buyout firms have contributed to the combination of stagnant wages and soaring incomes at the top that has characterized America since the 80's.

Originally Posted by LAM

Mitt is not only a fucking liar but a total douche-bag. ........

I agree 100%

(Insert any politician name here) is not only a fucking liar but a total douche-bag

Lobbying has really hurt this country, it needs to go completely, or at least be heavily regulated...

Originally Posted by LAM

Mitt is not only a fucking liar but a total douche-bag. the private equity firm Bain Capital that Mitt used to run specialized in leveraged buyouts, buying control of companies with borrowed money, pledged against those companies’ earnings or assets. However, job creation at the target firms were no greater than in similar firms that were not targets, while “gross job destruction was substantially higher. Mitt made his fortune in a business that is, on balance, about job destruction rather than job creation. And because job destruction hurts workers even as it increases profits and the incomes of top executives, leveraged buyout firms have contributed to the combination of stagnant wages and soaring incomes at the top that has characterized America since the 80's.

Right on point LAM, as always. I still say these mutha phuqas know something we're not privy to.

Were being sold out, and people just go right on voting for these guys, and we wonder why nothing ever changes......

Would you buy a used car from that greasy mutha phuqa?

From the Federal Reserve Board - St Louis

Capital projects would solve this very easily. the jobs need to come where the people are not the other way around. far too many are locked into an upside down mortgage right now, leaving the current home work area is not a viable option for many.

Originally Posted by IronAddict

Were being sold out, and people just go right on voting for these guys, and we wonder why nothing ever changes......

Yes, these dumbasses complain about status quo politicians but that's exactly who they vote for. I guess that's a burden of being stupid.

I used to work in a shop where this stupid guy would complain about his schedule every week. He'd tell me "look at what Robert(the manager) scheduled me for, I'm gonna kill that Robert" and no matter what, there were too many hours or too few. 18 hours one week would be too many and the next not enough. Stupid people lack structural reasoning and tend to complain about 'the man' just because it's 'the man'.

Originally Posted by maniclion

Lobbying has really hurt this country, it needs to go completely, or at least be heavily regulated...

at this point because of lobbying and private money in US politics it almost seems like the easiest thing to do would be to abandon representative democracy and go with direct democracy. that would take all the power away from the lobbyists.

Originally Posted by troubador

Yes, these dumbasses complain about status quo politicians but that's exactly who they vote for. I guess that's a burden of being stupid.

I used to work in a shop where this stupid guy would complain about his schedule every week. He'd tell me "look at what Robert(the manager) scheduled me for, I'm gonna kill that Robert" and no matter what, there were too many hours or too few. 18 hours one week would be too many and the next not enough. Stupid people lack structural reasoning and tend to complain about 'the man' just because it's 'the man'.

Naw brotha, at you.

We just have to endure, and hope someday the rest catch up.

I'm nobody, But, I can call a spade a spade.

And a crook a crook!

And I feel every bit of the repercussion.

Originally Posted by maniclion

Lobbying has really hurt this country, it needs to go completely, or at least be heavily regulated...

it needs to go away completely.

Originally Posted by LAM

at this point because of lobbying and private money in US politics it almost seems like the easiest thing to do would be to abandon representative democracy and go with direct democracy. that would take all the power away from the lobbyists.

No thanks, I would never want everything subject to the will of the herd.

Originally Posted by LAM

Mitt is not only a fucking liar but a total douche-bag.

No kidding.

Here's an idea: Take corporations out of politics completely. They can no longer lobby or make campaign donations. Individuals can only make $1 campaign contributions per election cycle.

Completely removes the influence of money and if a politician wants the job he's really got to want it.

Originally Posted by troubador

No thanks, I would never want everything subject to the will of the herd.

it works in other country's. people would have to get more involved in the community. I used to watch zoning board hearings on the local cable channel then one day decided that I needed to at least go to a couple just to get more familiar with the procedures and atmosphere. just like with PTA, Neighborhood Watch, etc. people would have to actually put an effort into deciding what's best for the community.

for the past 30+ years our elected representatives have only been doing the bidding of the markets and those at the top of the food chain. if things are ever going to get batter in 50 or 100 years from now this has to stop.

I remember eating the school food in elementary school and saying how nasty this is back in the mid 70's. here we are 40 years later in 2011 still serving our children nasty school lunches. but if somebody at the top of the food chain needs some legislation passed to increase their market-share, profits, etc. it gets handled no problem.

Originally Posted by LAM

I remember eating the school food in elementary school and saying how nasty this is back in the mid 70's. here we are 40 years later in 2011 still serving our children nasty school lunches.

Well maybe that highlights the difference between us. When I was in school I brought my lunch and it didn't matter how nasty the food was. I don't need the government to feed me. If it were up to liberals, kids probably wouldn't be allowed to bring their lunch, they'd have to eat the government mandated food.

I'd much rather live under the constitution, than the mindless majority.

Originally Posted by troubador

Well maybe that highlights the difference between us. When I was in school I brought my lunch and it didn't matter how nasty the food was. I don't need the government to feed me. If it were up to liberals, kids probably wouldn't be allowed to bring their lunch, they'd have to eat the government mandated food.

I'd much rather live under the constitution, than the mindless majority.

not every mother is a great home maker. my mother was a business woman cooking and cleaning was not on her list so neither was making lunches for anyone so i always had to buy lunch at school from grades 1-12. come to think of it I started cooking my own breakfast in grade 2.

public institutions across the globe have been providing this service in primary education systems for hundreds of years. it's pretty much one of the basic functions of a modern day society.

I used to be a lobbyist for a Fortune 500 company. It was fun wining and dining politicians and giving them money to buy their support... uh, I mean, for us to contribute to candidates' campaigns that agreed with our point of view. We made some long lasting friends in both state legislatures and in the Congress.

I agree people have to have more responsibility for their country. Not just work and go home. We should work less and get involved more. But most people don't want responsibility even if it meant their freedom.

We need to lock into the freedom flame. Our founders had it, some of them gave up their whole live, family, to pursue it. We have it within us.

What one has done many can do.

Originally Posted by LAM

not every mother is a great home maker. my mother was a business woman cooking and cleaning was not on her list so neither was making lunches for anyone so i always had to buy lunch at school from grades 1-12. come to think of it I started cooking my own breakfast in grade 2.

public institutions across the globe have been providing this service in primary education systems for hundreds of years. it's pretty much one of the basic functions of a modern day society.

This is wonderful, I find this argument to be fascinating. In one sentence you say public institutions have been providing the service for hundreds of years and the next you claim it's modern. You've really covered both your basis there. Of course both of these facts are irrelevant and even have their own name(argumentum ad antiquitatem,argumentum ad novitatem). I'm just amazed you had the balls to use both in one argument and for that I salute you.

As to "not every mother is a great home maker."...
Providing food is one of the most basic responsibilities a parent can have, if they can't do that they're a shitty parent. The state taking up that slack literally makes them a nanny state. Reliance equals control and therefore is adverse to perhaps the most important principle of humanity - liberty.