4 ms·

Did i mention party? Finance reform will solve nothing. You can't stop a billionaire from investing in himself.

• jjoonathan 11y ago
  > Did i mention party? Blaming the standing president for systematic problems is a fairly reliable sign that someone is a member of the opposite party (or an independent that always votes one way, natch). Even if that somehow happens to not be the case for you, there's the little problem that we have a FPTP voting system which effectively means that elections always boil down to two options (assuming that you're a rational actor who understands vote splitting). Claiming that voting for one option shows "bad judgement" implies that the alternative (remember, FPTP => only one rational alternative) is better, so it really is a partisan statement. Sanity check: would a statement of the form "Obama is bad because x,y,z" be necessarily partisan by this logic? No. > Finance reform will solve nothing. You can't stop a billionaire from investing in himself. Sure you can, but for now that's a largely speculative failure mode. First let's solve the problem that our system effectively imposes a mandatory bribe quota on the candidates and see if that doesn't improve matters. If the problem you propose becomes an issue afterwards then we can fight over the whole "money is speech" argument.