3 ms·
Oh, look how counter-intuitive this reasoning is! It must therefore be deeply insightful. Except it requires throwing out most normal definitions of "concentra
by leot 14y ago
Oh, look how counter-intuitive this reasoning is! It must therefore be deeply insightful.
Except it requires throwing out most normal definitions of "concentration" and "wealth", and requires the belief that government is the "other" rather than government (in a democracy) being some reasonable approximation of public will (I'm not suggesting that government can't, or hasn't frequently within history become a horrible other -- but one has to adopt a rather extreme anti-government position to subsequently see the current U.S. government as the enemy, and equate accountable government power with unaccountable private power).
Which federal employee can spend 0.5% of their wealth and completely change the outcome of an election to the Senate? Or 0.1% of their wealth and get subtle legislation written at a 10x ROI? Or spend 0.05 % of their wealth and fund three professorships at a university whose primary role is to intellectually buttress their own self-serving ideology?
- sp332 14y agoTrillions of dollars controlled by a few hundred men and women in the lower house of the Congress. And even fewer on the subcommittees that controls each of Pentagon spending, welfare benefits, and salary budgets.
- leot 14y ago... and they can be removed from these positions every two or six years. And they have to glad-hand and defend their positions and votes regularly. And even if you contend that they might be bribed or engage in dubious deals, their compensation for doing so is orders of magnitude less than the kinds of lobbying returns found by industries that generate billions of revenue each year. Seriously, billionaires and those who have ownership and direct control over billion-dollar-enterprises are accountable to no one. History has shown that wealthy interests have repeatedly exploited their advantages politically and financially to the detriment of everyone else (yes, governments fail too, but rarely democratic ones). You are telling me that I should be more concerned about the power society has decided to give to their elected representatives, and relatively less concerned about the influence of an increasingly wealthy elite, who, with every additional dollar at their disposal, render less powerful everyone else?