4 ms·

I think that the bailing out of corporations during the 2008 crisis was in a large part the result of corporate lobbying; which is a natural byproduct of capita

I think that the bailing out of corporations during the 2008 crisis was in a large part the result of corporate lobbying; which is a natural byproduct of capitalism. Capitalist moralists love to point out that 'bailing out' is anti-capitalist but at the same time they seem to ignore to the fact that that government manipulation by corporations is an integral part of capitalism in the first place. So you end up with two sets of capitalists; moral capitalists and immoral capitalists unwittingly collaborating with one another. It was very convenient for a lot of passive 'moral' shareholders that the government just happened to step in to bail out their favourite stocks.

humanrebar 9y ago
> ...government manipulation by corporations is an integral part of capitalism in the first place. I don't think regulatory capture is an ideological phenomenon. To put it another way, how would one design a system where central authorities are not susceptible to this kind of lobbying? I don't think I've heard a credible plan along these lines. The usual tactic is to centrally control decisions but make sure "good" leaders hold that power. As recent political outcomes have illustrated (yet again), it's more or less inevitable that someone untrustworthy or even odious will be in charge of these decisions at some point.
gremlinsinc 9y ago
capitalism might actually ... work ... if it was untethered from government..and didn't manipulate governments. I.e. get rid of lobbying, and make it universally illegal to influence politicians even on the level of a Geneva war-crime. Not that - that will ever happen.. Politics lately seems to just be legal Mafia.
- humanrebar 9y ago
  Lobbying is free speech. School teachers writing their school board about school supplies are lobbying. And that action is constitutionally protected as freedom of petition, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly. But I agree about the cronyism. But I think the solution is to simplify everything and make it more transparent. So regulatory capture, for instance, has fewer places to thrive.
  - gremlinsinc 9y ago
    One single person writing a letter--is acceptable.. But money is power, one single person writing a letter backed by 2 million in funding... that's extortion..and should NOT be free speech. Each person should have EQUAL weight on their 'freedom of speech' abilities... Lobbyism as it works now is flawed. Corporations are not human entities and should have no protections under the constitution of free speech either... The CEO sure--but they should just be able to send the letter, without any money backing and be barred from giving more than what a normal person could afford to a politician -- i.e. something like $500/year per politician..or something.
  - jondubois 9y ago
    I don't think it's free speech. There was a story not so long ago about an academic who was working for a big lobby who got fired because their corporate sponsor Google did not like what that person said about Google's monopolistic practices. This guy's livelihood was put in jeopardy because of his so called "free speech". People should have free speech, institutions should not. Lobbies are institutions.

humanrebar 9y ago

> ...government manipulation by corporations is an integral part of capitalism in the first place. I don't think regulatory capture is an ideological phenomenon. To put it another way, how would one design a system where central authorities are not susceptible to this kind of lobbying? I don't think I've heard a credible plan along these lines. The usual tactic is to centrally control decisions but make sure "good" leaders hold that power. As recent political outcomes have illustrated (yet again), it's more or less inevitable that someone untrustworthy or even odious will be in charge of these decisions at some point.

gremlinsinc 9y ago

capitalism might actually ... work ... if it was untethered from government..and didn't manipulate governments. I.e. get rid of lobbying, and make it universally illegal to influence politicians even on the level of a Geneva war-crime. Not that - that will ever happen.. Politics lately seems to just be legal Mafia.

humanrebar 9y ago
Lobbying is free speech. School teachers writing their school board about school supplies are lobbying. And that action is constitutionally protected as freedom of petition, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly. But I agree about the cronyism. But I think the solution is to simplify everything and make it more transparent. So regulatory capture, for instance, has fewer places to thrive.
- gremlinsinc 9y ago
  One single person writing a letter--is acceptable.. But money is power, one single person writing a letter backed by 2 million in funding... that's extortion..and should NOT be free speech. Each person should have EQUAL weight on their 'freedom of speech' abilities... Lobbyism as it works now is flawed. Corporations are not human entities and should have no protections under the constitution of free speech either... The CEO sure--but they should just be able to send the letter, without any money backing and be barred from giving more than what a normal person could afford to a politician -- i.e. something like $500/year per politician..or something.
- jondubois 9y ago
  I don't think it's free speech. There was a story not so long ago about an academic who was working for a big lobby who got fired because their corporate sponsor Google did not like what that person said about Google's monopolistic practices. This guy's livelihood was put in jeopardy because of his so called "free speech". People should have free speech, institutions should not. Lobbies are institutions.