6 ms·

Lobbying is a fact of life in a democracy. For any government regulation, law, program, etc. there are multitudes of lobby groups on all sides of each issue. Wh

Lobbying is a fact of life in a democracy. For any government regulation, law, program, etc. there are multitudes of lobby groups on all sides of each issue. Why in this case is this such a big unethical crime? Lots of government programs are inefficient and expensive due to interest groups - that will never ever change. Welcome to Democracy.

xboxnolifes 5y ago
Lobbying is bad when it creates outcomes I don't like.
- Falling3 5y ago
  Lobbying is bad when it helps a single company at the expense of tens of millions of citizens. The situation is far more objective than you're pretending.
oneplane 5y ago
No it's not a fact of life, it's a known quantity but not a fact and not life-related. And you can definitely ban it as well. It's not a requirement, and it's not the best, only or 'current' way. It's just a weak side-effect of the status quo (yes, technically that means 'weak' and 'current' but that is besides the point).
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  > It's just a weak side-effect Isn't it literally a constitutional right? It's not a side-effect of anything - it's a right by itself.
  - oneplane 5y ago
    Perhaps from a US-centric perspective. I don't know for a fact if a company or non-person is universally allowed to direct the facility that is the government to do something or not do something everywhere in the world.
    - chrisseaton 5y ago
      Lobbying isn't directing the government. It's presenting your point of view to the government. What the government does with the information you give them is then up to them but sometimes they're obligated to show they've considered it. It's a super-basic part of democracy everywhere. It's usually a right and also actively encouraged through consultation periods while legislation is drafted. I can't understand anyone suggesting that we should not be allowed to present our opinions to the government. What are you in favour of? Just voting once every four years or so and never saying anything else the rest of the time? Bizarre.
      - CRConrad 5y ago
        > I can't understand anyone suggesting that we should not be allowed to present our opinions to the government. What are you in favour of? Just voting once every four years or so and never saying anything else the rest of the time? Bizarre. It's not the "saying anything else", it's the listening: Sure, anyone has the right to say anything they want. The difference is that the government doesn't listen to most people -- how could they? Where would they take the time to listen to everyone; when would they get anything else done? It's not as if there's any constitutional right to be heard -- but some people and organisations, they do somehow magically find the time to listen to. Pretending that this is just "a super-basic part of democracy everywhere" in stead of highly correlated with how much money the ones who get heard have contributed to the campaigns of the ones doing the sympathetic listening is disingenuous in the extreme.
      - oneplane 5y ago
        I think you have missed the point so many times it's hard to come up with a number... Intuit isn't a person, it didn't vote and it has no place telling the government what to do for the people. A company has no opinions, only a bottom line and in many lobbying cases a bunch a shareholders. A government isn't a company and doesn't need to have financial gain, it needs to support the collective people of the country it governs.
        chrisseaton 5y ago
treeman79 5y ago
What form of government is not going to have lobbying? Even an absolute monarch is going to have have various people/groups petitioning. For reasons both good and selfish.

xboxnolifes 5y ago

Lobbying is bad when it creates outcomes I don't like.

Falling3 5y ago
Lobbying is bad when it helps a single company at the expense of tens of millions of citizens. The situation is far more objective than you're pretending.

oneplane 5y ago

No it's not a fact of life, it's a known quantity but not a fact and not life-related. And you can definitely ban it as well. It's not a requirement, and it's not the best, only or 'current' way. It's just a weak side-effect of the status quo (yes, technically that means 'weak' and 'current' but that is besides the point).

chrisseaton 5y ago
> It's just a weak side-effect Isn't it literally a constitutional right? It's not a side-effect of anything - it's a right by itself.
- oneplane 5y ago
  Perhaps from a US-centric perspective. I don't know for a fact if a company or non-person is universally allowed to direct the facility that is the government to do something or not do something everywhere in the world.
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    Lobbying isn't directing the government. It's presenting your point of view to the government. What the government does with the information you give them is then up to them but sometimes they're obligated to show they've considered it. It's a super-basic part of democracy everywhere. It's usually a right and also actively encouraged through consultation periods while legislation is drafted. I can't understand anyone suggesting that we should not be allowed to present our opinions to the government. What are you in favour of? Just voting once every four years or so and never saying anything else the rest of the time? Bizarre.
    - CRConrad 5y ago
      > I can't understand anyone suggesting that we should not be allowed to present our opinions to the government. What are you in favour of? Just voting once every four years or so and never saying anything else the rest of the time? Bizarre. It's not the "saying anything else", it's the listening: Sure, anyone has the right to say anything they want. The difference is that the government doesn't listen to most people -- how could they? Where would they take the time to listen to everyone; when would they get anything else done? It's not as if there's any constitutional right to be heard -- but some people and organisations, they do somehow magically find the time to listen to. Pretending that this is just "a super-basic part of democracy everywhere" in stead of highly correlated with how much money the ones who get heard have contributed to the campaigns of the ones doing the sympathetic listening is disingenuous in the extreme.
    - oneplane 5y ago
      I think you have missed the point so many times it's hard to come up with a number... Intuit isn't a person, it didn't vote and it has no place telling the government what to do for the people. A company has no opinions, only a bottom line and in many lobbying cases a bunch a shareholders. A government isn't a company and doesn't need to have financial gain, it needs to support the collective people of the country it governs.
      - chrisseaton 5y ago

treeman79 5y ago

What form of government is not going to have lobbying? Even an absolute monarch is going to have have various people/groups petitioning. For reasons both good and selfish.