- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Are Lobbyist Good Or Bad For Government?
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:27 pm to Sneaky__Sally
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:27 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
Again, I didnt ban lobbying, it now has a mechanism for you to give money to whatever politician you think best fights for your personal ideas
You already have this ability. But right now it’s not fricking taxed and regulated and controlled by self
Interested government bureaucrats
And I also just realized something. You know want a lobbyist for every single group for every single politician. Again, this is a massive expenditure of resources and expansion of government. No
This post was edited on 1/5/20 at 9:28 pm
0
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:27 pm to Oddibe
quote:
When a lobbyist representing the insurance industry works in DC......he is not representing the consumer (us) he is representing the insurance companies.
And there's lobby representing all sides of the issue.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:29 pm to ShortyRob
Yes, my ground up idea has faith that with massive restructuring in lobbying, campaign finance and other institutions - politicians that actually are looking out for the well being of their constituents can arise.
And no, I dont want each politican to have thousands of staff to inform them.
And no, I dont want each politican to have thousands of staff to inform them.
This post was edited on 1/5/20 at 9:30 pm
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:29 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
He is reporting to the politician he reports to. He only has a job because the politician can't be up to date on everything they oversee.
His job is to educate himself and present the facts as he sees them. Hopefully his only bias is to be factually correct because he isn't paid by a party on either side of whatever hypothetical topic
Do you have any idea how many issues a congressperson needs to be fully informed about? This would be a job for dozens of staffers. Anyone qualified to fully advise a congressperson on an issue would go work in private industry. This is so incredibly stupid.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:31 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
Yes, my ground up idea
Lobby is ground up. Without it you have less educated politicians and no voice for the little guy.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:32 pm to RogerTheShrubber
That isnt what I meant by ground up - just meant "completely restructured system starting from nothing"
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:33 pm to tigercross
That isnt how it would play out - many resources can be shared by all. Just was trying to respond to a scenario
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:34 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
just meant "completely restructured system starting from nothing"
Would end up extremely corrupt. Lobby is extremely regulated.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:37 pm to RogerTheShrubber
It very well could be. But I have zero confidence in the way it currently works (but that is also true of most of our institutions) - so that would just be more of the same.
ETA: Seems to be a good place to end it with some common understanding. Have a good night
ETA: Seems to be a good place to end it with some common understanding. Have a good night
This post was edited on 1/5/20 at 9:39 pm
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:41 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
, my ground up idea has faith that with massive restructuring in lobbying, campaign finance and other institutions
For your idea to work it requires something that literally doesn't even exist and can't exist. That's kind of a big deal.
quote:
And no, I dont want each politican to have thousands of staff to inform them.
Well. Um. How many
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:42 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
But I have zero confidence in the way it currently works
I think the issue is you (and millions of voters) don't understand how it works. You're just going by what you've been told.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:43 pm to tigercross
quote:dozens is being extremely conservative. And remember they all have to be unicorns with no naturally occurring human bias who can also research something by not talking to a single other person with naturally occurring human bias!!!!
Do you have any idea how many issues a congressperson needs to be fully informed about? This would be a job for dozens of staffers
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:44 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
That isnt how it would play out - many resources can be shared by all.
Oh even better. You imagine an entity responsible for informing all of the congressman!!!!
My God your stupidity is on a level maybe never seen on this board before
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:50 pm to ShortyRob
And hey since we are going to have an entity of human unicorns responsible for informing all congressmen on an issue and what the right thing to do is, and presumably we expect congressman to listen to these people...........disband Congress!!!!!
I wonder if this moron realizes this form of government he advocates has already existed before?
I wonder if this moron realizes this form of government he advocates has already existed before?
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:54 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
And hey since we are going to have an entity of human unicorns responsible for informing all congressmen on an issue and what the right thing to do is, and presumably we expect congressman to listen to these people...........disband Congress!!!!!
A monarchy supported by "experts".
When you get down to it, most people really hate democracy, unless it favors their views.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:57 pm to ShortyRob
Yeesh that isnt at all what I have advocated for. I hope you are just putting forth grotesque forms of this hypothetical entity for the sake of internet argument and dont actually think that is what I proposed
Posted on 1/5/20 at 9:59 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
A monarchy supported by "experts". When you get down to it, most people really hate democracy, unless it favors their views.
This is because people like Sally honestly start with a base assumption that if you created this wonderful entity full of unicorns with no bias, it would come to conclusions almost entirely agreeable to Sally.
It literally never occurs to them that the opposite could occur.
But regardless. The moron advocated for a SINGLE group of shared UNELECTED resources responsible for informing all of congress on the enormous landscape of potential issues.
At that point, why have a congress at all? Hell, why have elections? If there really exists an entity of people capable of researching all issues in an unbiased manner and coming to the "best" conclusions, holding elections would be stupid.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 10:00 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Again, this system helps our democracy have more involvement from the population, not less.
This concept shouldn't be this hard to grasp
This concept shouldn't be this hard to grasp
Posted on 1/5/20 at 10:00 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:
Yeesh that isnt at all what I have advocated for. I hope you are just putting forth grotesque forms of this hypothetical entity
YOU described it as a shared resource of unbiased people who research issues and then tell congress critters what is the best conclusion.
Sorry if you don't like what that actually means.
Posted on 1/5/20 at 10:02 pm to Sneaky__Sally
quote:Why? Why would you want that?
Again, this system helps our democracy have more involvement from the population, not less.
If there really is a such thing as a LARGE group of people capable of researching most issues with no bias and then issuing conclusions, why muck it up by having us vote or influence them?
Page 9 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News