4 ms·

The innuendo that interests group and congressman switch their allegiance based on who has paid the most is pretty yucky, but also not Ackman's fault. But no,

by frankc 13y ago

The innuendo that interests group and congressman switch their allegiance based on who has paid the most is pretty yucky, but also not Ackman's fault. But no, the general running of a campaign to bring down a terrible company is not a bad thing at all. I was alluding to some other comments here that used the word 'disgusting'.

kkowalczyk 13y ago
Of course it's Ackman's fault - he's the one bribing all those people. He's much bigger problem than people taking the bribes. He's the one trying to exploit the system for financial gain. Of course trying to ruin a company by bribing government officials to begin a witch hunt investigation is wrong if you stand to profit billions of dollars from that witch hunt. Given the enormous profit he'll realize if he's successful in discrediting Herbalife, I can easily discount all of his other arguments as BS. He has no credibility in the matter if billions are at stake. Note that I'm not defending Herbalife. Maybe they are scammy company that should be investigated and regulated more by the government - by that investigation shouldn't happen because a billionaire starts buying politicians, lobbyists and "non-profit" lapdog organizations. US government already has established channel for complaining about unethical companies: Better Business Bureau. They don't need manufactured complaints.
- chrisbennet 13y ago
  I agree with your comments except this part: "US government already has established channel for complaining about unethical companies: Better Business Bureau. They don't need manufactured complaints." The BBB is a private organization with nothing to do with the government. Some would say the BBB is a protection racket.
rayiner 13y ago
The innuendo that congressman switch their allegiance based on who has paid the most is also just that, and mostly a misunderstanding of how the game works. You don't donate to people who don't agree with you: you donate to ones who do agree with you, to make sure they keep getting elected. If you're a coal company, you don't need to pay Congressmen to support strip mining the mountains bare. You can find plenty who believe deep down in their heart it's the God-giving right of people to do that. You then donate to those guys, to ensure they stay in power. Political influence is both more subtle and more shocking than the popular caricature of "bribing a Congressman." American politics is far more sophisticated than that. Here, you don't just write a check to get the decision you want, at least not typically. You do things like convince an entire state that an industry that damages their health and their land is actually a crucial part of their culture, history, and heritage, and that anyone who wants to reign it in are an existential threat to their community. That's the kind of influence that a nosey prosecutor will never be able to pin on anyone.

by frankc 13y ago

kkowalczyk 13y ago

Of course it's Ackman's fault - he's the one bribing all those people. He's much bigger problem than people taking the bribes. He's the one trying to exploit the system for financial gain. Of course trying to ruin a company by bribing government officials to begin a witch hunt investigation is wrong if you stand to profit billions of dollars from that witch hunt. Given the enormous profit he'll realize if he's successful in discrediting Herbalife, I can easily discount all of his other arguments as BS. He has no credibility in the matter if billions are at stake. Note that I'm not defending Herbalife. Maybe they are scammy company that should be investigated and regulated more by the government - by that investigation shouldn't happen because a billionaire starts buying politicians, lobbyists and "non-profit" lapdog organizations. US government already has established channel for complaining about unethical companies: Better Business Bureau. They don't need manufactured complaints.

chrisbennet 13y ago
I agree with your comments except this part: "US government already has established channel for complaining about unethical companies: Better Business Bureau. They don't need manufactured complaints." The BBB is a private organization with nothing to do with the government. Some would say the BBB is a protection racket.

rayiner 13y ago

The innuendo that congressman switch their allegiance based on who has paid the most is also just that, and mostly a misunderstanding of how the game works. You don't donate to people who don't agree with you: you donate to ones who do agree with you, to make sure they keep getting elected. If you're a coal company, you don't need to pay Congressmen to support strip mining the mountains bare. You can find plenty who believe deep down in their heart it's the God-giving right of people to do that. You then donate to those guys, to ensure they stay in power. Political influence is both more subtle and more shocking than the popular caricature of "bribing a Congressman." American politics is far more sophisticated than that. Here, you don't just write a check to get the decision you want, at least not typically. You do things like convince an entire state that an industry that damages their health and their land is actually a crucial part of their culture, history, and heritage, and that anyone who wants to reign it in are an existential threat to their community. That's the kind of influence that a nosey prosecutor will never be able to pin on anyone.