Forum Post: Get money out of politics--the page
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 14, 2011, 10:46 a.m. EST by SanityScribe
(452)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
There is much going on here in this movement, and much will develop from it. I wanted to give focus for one general idea.
New facebook page. Only one topic, focused maybe it can develop.
Get it started here..
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Get-Money-Out-of-Politics/170454236375392
Here is my comments on your three paragraphs:
1) Agree, however I think it should be ONE 6 term for presidents and senators, and TWO 4 year terms for reps. LIFETIME...not just consecutive.
2) When government has direct control over business and can tax them at whatever rate they want, why don't businesses get a vote/say? Isn't that taxation without representation?
3) I completely disagree with this. The media is NOT "fair and balanced" and never will be.
I only meant for those ideas to be a spark. They are not perfect, all inclusive, nor are they what any type of official propsal would look like.
Your point on number 2, currently corporations do not get a vote, nor should they. You can have representation without donating to candidates. They should still be allowed to address the government, just not with donating money. Lobby groups and etc. should be allowed to petition and persue what they consider to be their best interest, just not by donating to candidates or parties. Does not mean cannot support a candidate or party, just not donate(under organization name). The individuals involved in such organizations, of course could and should donate to any candidate they wish.
Point 3. I understand that the media is not fair or balanced. But with oversite this would be simple to enforce. Matter of fact it is supposed to kind of be that way.
http://www.museum.tv/eotvsection.php?entrycode=equaltimeru
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-time_rule
I understand they aren't perfect, that is why I thought this was here. To debate :D
I understand corporations don't get a vote, not that I agree with this statement, but I think they are justified in saying that if government can directly control their bottom line, that they should be able to back a candidate financially. This is part and parcel with the participatory fascist government right now, and I agree part of the problem.
3) Who oversees the media? The government? Do you see a problem with that? I hope you do.
Yes that is exactly right I was just participating with you, and I do rather enjoy and agree with the points you are making.
3) TOUCHE! But if we can get the government more beholden to the people,(I can hope) that would lead to more honesty.(maybe,kinda,hopefully?)
We can't go by maybe, kinda, hopefully. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of hope, I bought all of its albums, but its purpose is not to guarantee positive outcomes.
I don't know what a good solution for a strong, credible, non-profit media base is. State media is just an awful idea. This is something that we all need to figure out, and not just eventually.
Take a look at those two links I posted. It gives an idea of what is supposed to be happening now, but once again it has been perverted by our public servants.
Insofar as we are concerned with the ideals of and justice for a human society, corporations are not and should not be guaranteed the same rights as human beings.
I think if you want to argue for corporate personhood, you must make the case that we have a moral responsibility to protect corporate entities qua corporate entities. Note that you can not use the argument that corporations are "simply a collection of people," because the people are already guaranteed rights qua people. They do not get two shots at it, once as a person and once as a corporation.
In other words, you need to argue that a hypothetical corporate entity with no human beings connected to it - a shell company with zero employees - is as worthy of protection as human beings and should be granted inalienable rights as human beings are.
I also do not think corporations should be included as individuals, as they are now. I think if a corporation does something illegal the corpoaration and the person(s) repsonsible for the decision(s) for the illeagalities should be penalized. Of course they would be able to defend themselves in court. At one time in this country, corporations had to show a "public good", while that is a broad definition, the meaning of it has been lost. I do not blame this solely on corporations, our public servants have enacted the rules that allow this to happen for far too long. Now it is catching up to us.