8 ms·

> Because even if the politician wants to repay it, new donors want their money going to re-election activities, not going to repay FTX. After a period of time,

> Because even if the politician wants to repay it, new donors want their money going to re-election activities, not going to repay FTX. After a period of time, you might as well be asking the television stations to return the money they received for running the campaign ads, which... isn't gonna happen. Politicians should be made to pay out of their own pockets or have an insurance for this type of situation.

wongarsu 3y ago
> Politicians should be made to pay out of their own pockets We don't want to create a system where only the rich can afford to be politicians ... or at least we don't want to make that any worse than it already is
- lacrimacida 3y ago
  Well, they should know their sources and assume some responsibility, which they mostly lack these days.
  - threeseed 3y ago
    Easy to say it now but there was a period there when FTX was a reputable company. But I would be all for labelling the entire crypto industry as illegal and ensuring any donations are immediately returned. Maybe just to be safe we should add anything AI related to the list as well.
- l33t7332273 3y ago
  Would that make it worse? The median net worth in the senate is north of 40 million.
newaccount74 3y ago
> Politicians should be made to pay out of their own pockets or have an insurance for this type of situation. Why stop at politicians, though? Shouldn't everyone who accepts large sums of money be held accountable if it turns out the money was stolen? At least to some degree?
- hunson_abadeer 3y ago
  Does this include line employees who worked at Google or Facebook or Microsoft if the company is found liable for doing something sketchy? The sums sure are substantial. You can argue they know their employer was no angel, too. OK to claw back paychecks, or do we draw the line somewhere closer to actually participating in a criminal act?
- BoxFour 3y ago
  Does that not hold true at present? As a straightforward instance that arises periodically, if a bank were to erroneously deposit funds into your account you’re under obligation to return the funds.
- tcmart14 3y ago
  I think it depends on what we mean by 'held accountable.' If it means, make best effort to return the money sure. If it means more than that, probably not. If someone robbed a bank, evaded the police and donated all that money to the Salvation Army in the next county, the Salvation Army has no way of knowing the money was stolen. So the only fair thing to expect the Salvation Army to do in this situation is, make a best effort to return what they can.

wongarsu 3y ago

> Politicians should be made to pay out of their own pockets We don't want to create a system where only the rich can afford to be politicians ... or at least we don't want to make that any worse than it already is

lacrimacida 3y ago
Well, they should know their sources and assume some responsibility, which they mostly lack these days.
- threeseed 3y ago
  Easy to say it now but there was a period there when FTX was a reputable company. But I would be all for labelling the entire crypto industry as illegal and ensuring any donations are immediately returned. Maybe just to be safe we should add anything AI related to the list as well.
l33t7332273 3y ago
Would that make it worse? The median net worth in the senate is north of 40 million.

newaccount74 3y ago

> Politicians should be made to pay out of their own pockets or have an insurance for this type of situation. Why stop at politicians, though? Shouldn't everyone who accepts large sums of money be held accountable if it turns out the money was stolen? At least to some degree?

hunson_abadeer 3y ago
Does this include line employees who worked at Google or Facebook or Microsoft if the company is found liable for doing something sketchy? The sums sure are substantial. You can argue they know their employer was no angel, too. OK to claw back paychecks, or do we draw the line somewhere closer to actually participating in a criminal act?
BoxFour 3y ago
Does that not hold true at present? As a straightforward instance that arises periodically, if a bank were to erroneously deposit funds into your account you’re under obligation to return the funds.
tcmart14 3y ago
I think it depends on what we mean by 'held accountable.' If it means, make best effort to return the money sure. If it means more than that, probably not. If someone robbed a bank, evaded the police and donated all that money to the Salvation Army in the next county, the Salvation Army has no way of knowing the money was stolen. So the only fair thing to expect the Salvation Army to do in this situation is, make a best effort to return what they can.