3 ms·
Anyone who thinks that people (on either side of the political aisle) are not influenced by big-money payouts, does not understand human nature. Corporations wo
by didgetmaster 4y ago
Anyone who thinks that people (on either side of the political aisle) are not influenced by big-money payouts, does not understand human nature. Corporations would not offer these kinds of payments in the form of 'speaking fees' if they didn't think it would influence decision makers.
- sbaiddn 4y agoI think he was being facetious. What the OP alleges [1] Hillary did is crooked and corrupted by any reasonable standard, if not illegal; which says more about out laws than or does redeem the corrupt. [1] "alleges" because I don't want to start something. Everyone on the forum knows where they stand on the Clintons.
- wahern 4y ago> Corporations would not offer these kinds of payments in the form of 'speaking fees' if they didn't think it would influence decision makers. You underestimate the prestige value in securing these speaking engagements. To know whether these companies believe that they're buying (or rewarding) regulators, it would be helpful to compare all the speakers they pay. If they're also paying huge fees to Hollywood actors or other celebrities--people who clearly cannot offer quid pro quo--than that augurs in favor of these companies merely buying prestige. From a quick Google Search, Warren Buffet, for example, supposedly charges $100k-$200k for a speaking engagement. (EDIT: I'm dubious that this is factual--looking through results it seems booking agencies might be including well-known personalities in their databases as a sales tactic, even if they have no relationship. In any event, celebrities are expensive, and top regulators and political appointees are celebrities even outside their field.)