5 ms·
It’s a mistake if you believe that the government acts or should act in the interests of its citizens. If however you think the governments purpose is to furth
by hguhghuff 7y ago
It’s a mistake if you believe that the government acts or should act in the interests of its citizens.
If however you think the governments purpose is to further the interests of corporations, then it’s the opposite of a mistake.
- JauntyHatAngle 7y ago>It’s a mistake if you believe that the government ... should act in the interests of its citizens. I disagree here. I think a government should act in the interests of its citizens, and there are countries where this still occurs. The argument you are making is whether the US still does this is fair, but they absolutely SHOULD be doing it.
- gdulli 7y agoThey're saying the subject of the headline is a mistake. Not that the mistake is believing that's the purpose of government.
- dnautics 7y agoWhat exactly is the purpose of government?
- sdenton4 7y agoI'm pretty sure it has something to do with caves. Someone wrote a book about it once. http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.html http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/republic.html (Less sarcastically, the Republic transitions pretty quickly from a discussing of "what's a good life" to "how can we structure society (and government) to help people live well?" It's a good book, even if the conclusions are a bit suspect.)
- qmanjamz 7y agoCorporations are owned by citizens, so it's not necessarily a mistake either way you slice it.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- crashedsnow 7y agoOnly if they're incorporated in the citizen's country. Many (many) are not
- 2xlbuds 7y agoWhich category is bigger? 1. Citizens who want to invest their money 2. Citizens who work in the financial services industry It's #1, by several orders of magnitude. I would still argue that it's not a mistake, but that's because a mistake would mean they didn't intend to help category #2.
- PopeDotNinja 7y agoI once asked a friend, who works for a lesser known government agency, what his agency does. He said that like any good bureaucracy, its first job was to perpetuate itself. I found that statement both amusing and insightful.
- inflatableDodo 7y agoIs also why large bureaucracies are seemingly able to run in the air for ages after they leave the cliff edge. Bureaucratic inertia, especially once it reaches the scale of a country, should not be underestimated lightly.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- todipa 7y agoYou should definitively watch "Yes Minister" It is one of the funniest political (timeless wisdom) shows that people have forgotten.
- Arbalest 7y agoOr more likely, never familiar with in the first place.
- JetSpiegel 7y agoThe Thick of It is more recent (Blair era), but it can be thought of as a spiritual successor, and it has no laugh track.
- acjohnson55 7y agoIncidentally, this is also what helps sustain societies through times of failing leadership.
- Fomite 7y agoPersonally, I'm rather grateful for the inertia of the civil service in recent years.
- rgbrenner 7y agoCorporations use a lot of banking services and they're victims who could be helped by this rule too, just like consumers. They may have bigger pockets, but when Goldman steals millions from some company by violating their fiduciary duty... that company suffers. That's money they could use to lower prices, hire more people, etc. It makes it harder for them to compete. So let's not overstate it. It's the financial industry that benefits from removing it. I doubt non-financial companies are in favor of letting banks take advantage of them.
- raverbashing 7y agoI wonder if there was a recent case where companies lost a significant amount of savings or liquidity due to some banking closing down or something similar beyond the limits of FDIC