3 ms·

We have observed reality to draw conclusions from. Regardless of political affiliation, would anyone really argue that special interests haven't taken over the

We have observed reality to draw conclusions from. Regardless of political affiliation, would anyone really argue that special interests haven't taken over the political process in the US, and made significant inroads in most if not all of the industrialized democracies throughout the world?

rayiner 8y ago
Sure, I’ll argue that. “Special interests” is just code for “people whose opinions I don’t like.” But at the end of the day, our government very closely reflects what you’d expect. If you account for the fact that likely voters skew richer, older, and more conservative than the population as a whole, what exactly do you think would be different if “special interests” were not in charge? Would we spend less on defense? 1 in 3 Americans say we don’t spend enough. Would we spend less on social security, more, etc?
- bryondowd 8y ago
  Removing wealthy 'special interests would probably have some interesting effects. Off the top of my head, I expect we'd have better regulations on banks and the like. And perhaps Mickey Mouse (and everything else more than 75 years old) would be public domain.
- TooBrokeToBeg 8y ago
  > “Special interests” is just code for “people whose opinions I don’t like.” It's code for above-the-median-wealthy, enough to influence opinion outside of the populist opinion. Why you choose to go partisan over a systemic issue, is beyond me.
  - tlb 8y ago
    "Special interests" includes many powerful groups that aren't especially wealthy: - religious groups wanting faith-based educational programs - farmers wanting crop subsidies (hugely powerful in the US) - internet users wanting net neutrality - conservation groups wanting to preserve parks or endangered species - unions wanting occupational safety regulations - retirees wanting increased social security You might even agree with some of these.
    - theseatoms 8y ago
      The common theme here is "concentrated benefits and diffuse costs".
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- rectang 8y ago
  For the quote of mine being referenced, I'm content with the dictionary.com definition of "special interest group": http://www.dictionary.com/browse/special-interest-group http://www.dictionary.com/browse/special-interest-group a body of persons, corporation, or industry that seeks or receives benefits or privileged treatment, especially through legislation.
- knieveltech 8y ago
  The guilty flee where none pursueth. You'll note my original post was carefully non-partisan. Your rush to bring conservative talking points into the discussion suggests some kind of bias, or perhaps a guilty conscience.

rayiner 8y ago

Sure, I’ll argue that. “Special interests” is just code for “people whose opinions I don’t like.” But at the end of the day, our government very closely reflects what you’d expect. If you account for the fact that likely voters skew richer, older, and more conservative than the population as a whole, what exactly do you think would be different if “special interests” were not in charge? Would we spend less on defense? 1 in 3 Americans say we don’t spend enough. Would we spend less on social security, more, etc?

bryondowd 8y ago
Removing wealthy 'special interests would probably have some interesting effects. Off the top of my head, I expect we'd have better regulations on banks and the like. And perhaps Mickey Mouse (and everything else more than 75 years old) would be public domain.
TooBrokeToBeg 8y ago
> “Special interests” is just code for “people whose opinions I don’t like.” It's code for above-the-median-wealthy, enough to influence opinion outside of the populist opinion. Why you choose to go partisan over a systemic issue, is beyond me.
- tlb 8y ago
  "Special interests" includes many powerful groups that aren't especially wealthy: - religious groups wanting faith-based educational programs - farmers wanting crop subsidies (hugely powerful in the US) - internet users wanting net neutrality - conservation groups wanting to preserve parks or endangered species - unions wanting occupational safety regulations - retirees wanting increased social security You might even agree with some of these.
  - theseatoms 8y ago
    The common theme here is "concentrated benefits and diffuse costs".
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
rectang 8y ago
For the quote of mine being referenced, I'm content with the dictionary.com definition of "special interest group": http://www.dictionary.com/browse/special-interest-group http://www.dictionary.com/browse/special-interest-group a body of persons, corporation, or industry that seeks or receives benefits or privileged treatment, especially through legislation.
knieveltech 8y ago
The guilty flee where none pursueth. You'll note my original post was carefully non-partisan. Your rush to bring conservative talking points into the discussion suggests some kind of bias, or perhaps a guilty conscience.