3 ms·
The point is that greed is dependable and stable. If you can depend on something that won't ruin the economy or society, then at least that works as a guarantee
by iwwr 15y ago
The point is that greed is dependable and stable. If you can depend on something that won't ruin the economy or society, then at least that works as a guarantee against worse excesses. And let's face it, even large corporations have a stake in maintaining a veneer of free enterprise (even though they tend toward cronyism).
Consider that idealistic politicians are also capable of more damage than corrupt self-interested ones.
The solution is not to seek for selfless idealists (who may be dangerous), but to remove power from politicians (to the extent possible) or at least to move decision making as close/locally as possible to the areas affected.
In a way, those interested in politics to make money would be less interested in it for the pure sake of having (then preserving) political power.
Here's one way to start: remove direct elections of senators. It makes lobbyists having to deal with 50 separate state legislatures rather than 100 individuals.
- william42 15y ago"Here's one way to start: remove direct elections of senators. It makes lobbyists having to deal with 50 separate state legislatures rather than 100 individuals." Lobbyists hear this and think "Oh boy! I get to deal with a set of elections that the average voter cares even less about than Congressional ones!" Personally, I'd go the other way around, and switch to a Westminster system where you only have one vote for federal office, meaning that plans like Obama's small-donor system would be more feasible for the elections that really matter: legislative ones.
- cobrausn 15y ago'It makes lobbyists having to deal with 50 separate state legislatures rather than 100 individuals.' This is precisely why I tend to be very libertarian at a federal level and not so much at the state level. I consider having a powerful single point of failure a flaw in the system, one I think the founders were well aware of.
- Florin_Andrei 15y ago> The point is that greed is dependable and stable. If you can depend on something that won't ruin the economy or society That statement shows exactly why "libertarianism" and all associated doctrines are built on a solid foundation of ignorance of human nature. There's nothing you could argue, really, when the other party is not even aware of the basic axioms.
- iwwr 15y agoJust in this context of a political system, having a self-interested politician is less dangerous than having an idealistic one. Mind you, there are good and bad idealists, but their impact is greater; and since politicians generally are negative, it's better their impact be restrained at least by that narrow sentiment.