a reply to: AlaskanDad
The interests of economics and the interests of the people are united. Whatever causes an increase in production lowers the cost of living. Whatever
causes an increase in jobs lowers the unemployment rate, which raises the cost of labor.
Each of these economic forces are beneficial to all people, not just those living here on this continent. The problem is not so much workers,
consumers and corporations as it has been special interests and government, although the corporations do have a lot of blame too and some are just
immoral as can be imagined.
Trying to blame all corporations for what companies like Monsanto have done is insane. Trying to blame the wealthy for what men like George Soros have
done is insane. Trying to blame credit unions for what the federal reserve has done is insane.
We do need corrections to our laws, no doubt about that. Firstly, it makes no sense for people outside of a jurisdiction to be donating to the
political campaigns of a local politician whatsoever. Money in campaigning has essentially given the wealthy citizens a disproportionate level of
control over the types of candidates we get to vote on; however, that can be solved easily.
If we simply had all people donate to a centralized campaign fund which distributed out to candidates based on their popular support, then that would
effectively take the money out of campaigning, or at least level the playing field for grassroots candidates.
If we abolished corporate personhood, that would greatly reduce the amount of money in politics to begin with.
If we made it illegal to donate to a campaign outside of the area you live, that would reduce campaign funds even further.
If we outlawed superpacs, that would reduce campaign funds.
If we abolished political parties, that would reduce the likelihood of absolute corruption leaving us with only two choices.
If we created a multiparty system like Germany has, that would also lead towards that end.
If we instituted a voting system similar to Australia's, that could solve some of our problems.
There are dozens of things we could try to do that do not require increasing the size or power of government.
Our government is spending something like $7 trillion dollars a year at this point, most of that on warfare and you want to give them more money? Why?
I'd rather have the wealthy guy down the road have it, he might spend it on a rolls royce or a boob job for his wife, but I can be sure he's not
buying a F-4 phantom to donate to the Saudis, which is what our government is doing with it.
edit on 11 23 2014 by Nechash because: (no reason