3 ms·

Doesn't matter to the politicans. They don't work for the American public, they work for the corporations who give them money and high paying jobs later in life

Doesn't matter to the politicans. They don't work for the American public, they work for the corporations who give them money and high paying jobs later in life.

danilocampos 15y ago
The state of regulatory capture in this country makes corrupt Latin American dictatorships look like bastions of ethics and accountability by comparison. edit: Downvote away. At least in Latin America, everyone accepted the corruption was going on. Here we pretend the revolving door between policy enforcement and well-paid private sector jobs in the enforced-upon industries is totally fine and not at all subject to conflicts of interest. Fuck, man, one of the people who approved the NBC/Comcast acquisition later took a very cushy job with... Well, I'll leave it to you to guess. Spoiler: she didn't join a consumer advocacy nonprofit.
- Spyro7 15y ago
  I didn't down-vote you (I think that its lame to ninja down-vote - it defeats the purpose of conversation), but I think that your initial comment was just a bit hyperbolic. I disagree with your edit too though. Who here in the US is pretending that there is no revolving door? I don't think that anyone is ignoring the problem. I just think that most ordinary people are completely ignorant of the problem. Big media has very little interest in reporting on the extent of the problem (for obvious reasons), and most people don't read the kind of news sites that discuss the issue openly. For most ordinary people, the issue isn't ignored so much as it is out of site, out of mind. The problem is that ordinary people make up the majority of the population. It is a real problem, even when the revolving door is a huge issue[1] it is hard to keep the interest of the general public. The general public is kind of like my cat; intent on stalking something for a few seconds then off scampering around after the latest amusements. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/washington/11royalty.html http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/washington/11royalty.html
  - danilocampos 15y ago
    > I don't think that anyone is ignoring the problem. I just think that most ordinary people are completely ignorant of the problem. This is fair – but I've honestly heard apologia for the issue by people who believe this is acceptable. "Only insiders understand the issues at play!" goes the cry. The ignorance is ever more damning, I suppose. Which is more ripe for corruption – apathy or ignorance? Apathy strikes me as the much more mutable of the two. If people know nothing about the potential for corruption, it spreads unchecked. Whether the American people are too lazy or too ignorant, the result is the same. An enormous power can be hijacked by anyone with a big enough bank account.
    - Spyro7 15y ago
      Thinking about the issue some more - maybe I was wrong to disagree with your edited initial comment. I really do think that the American public is both apathetic and ignorant, and the majority of the country's current problems derive from these failings. They are apathetic, but they are not apathetic towards any specific issue. No, they are apathetic to anything that would seem to distract them from the normal course of their daily schedule. I do not think that it would be difficult for "ordinary" people to take a few minutes and become informed about what is going on. If I know, you know, and (probably) most of the people on Hacker News know - well, it can't be impossible to find out. I think that, well, most people content themselves that party affiliation and straight-ticket voting are all that is necessary to ensure a functioning democracy. It just seems strange to me, that in a country where so many people pride themselves on being patriotic, there is so little intellectual curiosity with regards to how it functions. The tyranny of the majority is usually used to refer to the potential for the opinion of the many to disenfranchise the rights of the few. I wonder if there is something more insidious than this though. What could be the side effects of the self-selected nonchalance of the many? I was once told that to talk about a problem without providing a solution is not a good way to advance in society, but, really, I'm completely at a loss. How do you get the majority of people to be interested in something that does not provide immediate economic benefits (without resorting to indoctrination)?
      - 15y ago
marknutter 15y ago
Hacker News is starting to sound like r/politics more and more every day.

Doesn't matter to the politicans. They don't work for the American public, they work for the corporations who give them money and high paying jobs later in life.

danilocampos 15y ago

The state of regulatory capture in this country makes corrupt Latin American dictatorships look like bastions of ethics and accountability by comparison. edit: Downvote away. At least in Latin America, everyone accepted the corruption was going on. Here we pretend the revolving door between policy enforcement and well-paid private sector jobs in the enforced-upon industries is totally fine and not at all subject to conflicts of interest. Fuck, man, one of the people who approved the NBC/Comcast acquisition later took a very cushy job with... Well, I'll leave it to you to guess. Spoiler: she didn't join a consumer advocacy nonprofit.

Spyro7 15y ago
I didn't down-vote you (I think that its lame to ninja down-vote - it defeats the purpose of conversation), but I think that your initial comment was just a bit hyperbolic. I disagree with your edit too though. Who here in the US is pretending that there is no revolving door? I don't think that anyone is ignoring the problem. I just think that most ordinary people are completely ignorant of the problem. Big media has very little interest in reporting on the extent of the problem (for obvious reasons), and most people don't read the kind of news sites that discuss the issue openly. For most ordinary people, the issue isn't ignored so much as it is out of site, out of mind. The problem is that ordinary people make up the majority of the population. It is a real problem, even when the revolving door is a huge issue[1] it is hard to keep the interest of the general public. The general public is kind of like my cat; intent on stalking something for a few seconds then off scampering around after the latest amusements. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/washington/11royalty.html http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/11/washington/11royalty.html
- danilocampos 15y ago
  > I don't think that anyone is ignoring the problem. I just think that most ordinary people are completely ignorant of the problem. This is fair – but I've honestly heard apologia for the issue by people who believe this is acceptable. "Only insiders understand the issues at play!" goes the cry. The ignorance is ever more damning, I suppose. Which is more ripe for corruption – apathy or ignorance? Apathy strikes me as the much more mutable of the two. If people know nothing about the potential for corruption, it spreads unchecked. Whether the American people are too lazy or too ignorant, the result is the same. An enormous power can be hijacked by anyone with a big enough bank account.
  - Spyro7 15y ago
    Thinking about the issue some more - maybe I was wrong to disagree with your edited initial comment. I really do think that the American public is both apathetic and ignorant, and the majority of the country's current problems derive from these failings. They are apathetic, but they are not apathetic towards any specific issue. No, they are apathetic to anything that would seem to distract them from the normal course of their daily schedule. I do not think that it would be difficult for "ordinary" people to take a few minutes and become informed about what is going on. If I know, you know, and (probably) most of the people on Hacker News know - well, it can't be impossible to find out. I think that, well, most people content themselves that party affiliation and straight-ticket voting are all that is necessary to ensure a functioning democracy. It just seems strange to me, that in a country where so many people pride themselves on being patriotic, there is so little intellectual curiosity with regards to how it functions. The tyranny of the majority is usually used to refer to the potential for the opinion of the many to disenfranchise the rights of the few. I wonder if there is something more insidious than this though. What could be the side effects of the self-selected nonchalance of the many? I was once told that to talk about a problem without providing a solution is not a good way to advance in society, but, really, I'm completely at a loss. How do you get the majority of people to be interested in something that does not provide immediate economic benefits (without resorting to indoctrination)?
    - 15y ago

marknutter 15y ago

Hacker News is starting to sound like r/politics more and more every day.