4 ms·

Another interesting point is that Congress can actually influence outcomes. For example, if you (the congressperson) have a lot of cash invested in the defense

by orijing 15y ago

Another interesting point is that Congress can actually influence outcomes. For example, if you (the congressperson) have a lot of cash invested in the defense department, you'd likely push for as much defense spending as possible, even if it it's against the best interests of the nation. I think it's time to end that. Public officials should not be able to influence their financial portfolio. At the very least, every trade, investment, position by an elected official should be made public so that we are aware of what we're voting for: Not a representative of ourselves, but of industry and their pockets.

einhverfr 15y ago
And all their stock trades should be public, in real time! Or better yet, make them announce all trades an hour in advance!
espeed 15y ago
You can make as much on a financial crisis as you can a bull market if you know in advance or can influence it -- this is a key component in the "Great American Bubble Machine" (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405 http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american...).
andrewfelix 15y ago
That is f*ing remarkable. In Australia there are strict rules governing conflict of interest. If there is even a hint of someone gaining financial benefit through their position they are hounded by the press and their political opposition. Of course parliamentarians find other ways to make money such as fake tenders. But it isn't as flagrant as this. I really feel for you guys over in the US. These are your representatives...they sound like mafioso.
wallflower 15y ago
One thing about corruption in some Asian countries: they give up the pretense of separating politics from business. For example, when I visited Bangkok, I read in the local paper about the Minister of Telecom who also happened to be the owner of the largest telecom interest in Thailand. In Western countries, we seem to cling to a standard that politics and business can be caissoned off. I do not know if this is better but more transparency never hurts.
- matwood 15y ago
  Reminds of the zerohedge disclosure statement. http://www.zerohedge.com/content/zero-hedge-conflictsfull-disclosure-policy http://www.zerohedge.com/content/zero-hedge-conflictsfull-di... It's long, but the most important line: The reality is, critical readers should read analytic posts and the rest of Zero Hedge with the blanket assumption that the author is totally "conflicted."
- andrewfelix 15y ago
  If regulated properly it isn't entirely a pretense. Regulation isn't 100% effective, but it can make a huge difference. Bangkok probably isn't the best example of a transparent and corruption free economy.
cpeterso 15y ago
I think politicians should only be able to hold investments in diversified US stock index funds, like the S&P 500. This avoids conflict of interest involving individual companies (and telegraphs that they "believe in America"). If a US politician's portfolio was 100% invested in international stock funds, I would like to know!

by orijing 15y ago

einhverfr 15y ago

And all their stock trades should be public, in real time! Or better yet, make them announce all trades an hour in advance!

espeed 15y ago

You can make as much on a financial crisis as you can a bull market if you know in advance or can influence it -- this is a key component in the "Great American Bubble Machine" (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american-bubble-machine-20100405 http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-great-american...).

andrewfelix 15y ago

That is f*ing remarkable. In Australia there are strict rules governing conflict of interest. If there is even a hint of someone gaining financial benefit through their position they are hounded by the press and their political opposition. Of course parliamentarians find other ways to make money such as fake tenders. But it isn't as flagrant as this. I really feel for you guys over in the US. These are your representatives...they sound like mafioso.

wallflower 15y ago

One thing about corruption in some Asian countries: they give up the pretense of separating politics from business. For example, when I visited Bangkok, I read in the local paper about the Minister of Telecom who also happened to be the owner of the largest telecom interest in Thailand. In Western countries, we seem to cling to a standard that politics and business can be caissoned off. I do not know if this is better but more transparency never hurts.

matwood 15y ago
Reminds of the zerohedge disclosure statement. http://www.zerohedge.com/content/zero-hedge-conflictsfull-disclosure-policy http://www.zerohedge.com/content/zero-hedge-conflictsfull-di... It's long, but the most important line: The reality is, critical readers should read analytic posts and the rest of Zero Hedge with the blanket assumption that the author is totally "conflicted."
andrewfelix 15y ago
If regulated properly it isn't entirely a pretense. Regulation isn't 100% effective, but it can make a huge difference. Bangkok probably isn't the best example of a transparent and corruption free economy.

cpeterso 15y ago

I think politicians should only be able to hold investments in diversified US stock index funds, like the S&P 500. This avoids conflict of interest involving individual companies (and telegraphs that they "believe in America"). If a US politician's portfolio was 100% invested in international stock funds, I would like to know!