3 ms·

So what you are saying is that we should allow people with bad intentions the ability to influence politicians monetarily (literally bribery), so the few morsel

So what you are saying is that we should allow people with bad intentions the ability to influence politicians monetarily (literally bribery), so the few morsels of good money that can buy any influence may have a chance to also be considered for inclusion? Edit: I see your point wrt alternative bribery schemes existing, and isn't the solution perhaps for those schemes to also be shut down, instead of allowing it because some good might come of it? Hmmmm, it's difficult not to assume you are yourself a lobbyist or politician if you take this position, given that the coffers of those with ill intent are vastly more lined than the alternative...

tough 3y ago
Thanks for putting words on what was rubbing me wrong. We need something better than this fake democracy we inherited.
kuhewa 3y ago
> Hmmmm, it's difficult not to assume you are yourself a lobbyist or politician Well, it probably is difficult if one is not very good at thinking. Regarding your edit, sure, but that's not the content of the post I replied to. That was about banning lobbying and I'm making the point that consequences of that could be counterproductive and make for an even less level playing field.