Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bernie’s Army of Coders

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–99 of 99 posts

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#91

Post by cmdrfred »

stephenboyd wrote: post #84
rbanffy wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if, as someone who sympathizes with the Sanders campaign, a foreign citizen who is not a US resident, could legally get involved in this. I would, most definitely, not want to create any legal problems to the campaign.

I'm not anyone's attorney, but yes, you can legally volunteer. > The Commission has concluded herein that because uncompensated volunteer services are not considered to be a contribution under the Act, any individual, including a foreign national, may volunteer his or her uncompensated services to a candidate without making a contribution to that candidate. From the PDF linked from here: http://www.fec.gov/pages/broc…

Could you not in theory start up a corporation as a foreigner and then spread your "free speech"¹ around all as you like?

¹https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#92

Post by SilasX »

Zikes wrote: post #27
SilasX wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I disagree with the Citizen's United comparison, since donating time towards a campaign can't be pocketed the same way money is. You can't commoditize already-spent labor in that way. But if it displaces another expense, it causes them to pocket the monetary savings from that expense. >Every candidate's expenditures are diligently recorded and easily audited if necessary, and it creates a level playing field. Even t…

Since the labor is an independent expenditure built on public data and the only thing Sanders did was link to it, the expense displacement is effectively nil.

So then the UK system doesn't address this problem, because there is still potentially unlimited money from interested parties who can independently propagandize for a candidate or issue.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#93

Post by 13thLetter »

zbyte64 wrote: post #29
bmelton wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree 1) that they are, and 2) that they oughtn't be allowed to be for what you're intending. On 1) They aren't persons, but do have a limited degree of personhood. Among other things, that personhood is what allows us to sue them and such. On 2) I don't have a problem with it. If companies have to abide the law, then I can't imagine how it would be that they shouldn't have input into its making. I agree that co…

> better alternative to fixing the problem than limiting people (who form corporations) of their first amendment rights. That's the crux of the problem though. People who form corporations are granted free speech abilities that are beyond the means of everyone else. Those that own a corporation have no legal limit on the amount of cash they can lend to a political cause while those who do not have their allowed contr…

> People who form corporations are granted free speech abilities that are beyond the means of everyone else.

Corporations such as -- to pick an example completely at random -- the New York Times?

One of the many, many problems with advocating limiting corporate speech is that virtually everything larger than complaining on a blog or tacking a sign to an electrical pole is done by a corporate organization. If the New York Times can say what it pleases using its vast financial resources and nationwide distribution networks, it's very hard to argue coherently that, say, General Electric can't.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#94

Post by 13thLetter »

dragonwriter wrote: post #50
gozur88 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations aren't people. They're groups of people. Why is it I lose my right to speak if I'm in a group? In that respect, what makes corporations different from unions or advocacy groups like Greenpeace?

> Why is it I lose my right to speak if I'm in a group? No one has suggested that you should. People have suggested that the corporation acting as such, including through its paid agents should not have the same rights as natural persons, acting alone or collectively, but that various classes of corporations should have constraints appropriate to their class. One of the many reasons offered for this is that corporati…

> but that various classes of corporations should have constraints appropriate to their class.

Who will decide what class a corporation falls into?

I get the uneasy feeling that, practically speaking, corporations expressing certain approved political opinions or supporting approved political candidates will have the least constraints.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#95

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

ck2 wrote: post #89
GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> . Only Maine is whiter. Why is his state like that in the 21st century As someone currently living in Maine, people don't move here for reasons like "there are no jobs" and "have you seen what kind of weather they have".

Except Vermont is no Maine. It literally borders NY and Mass. - there is no excuse why it has near-zero diversity other than it simply doesn't make people welcome who do not fit existing mindsets. That's a horrible model for the USA and would never work. Like I keep saying, if Sander's ideas are so good, prove them on a local, regional and state level. Even Obama's healthcare plan was simply a nationwide attempt at w…

"There are no jobs" and "have you seen what kind of weather they have" apply just as much to Vermont as they do to Maine. (fewer killer clowns or vampires tho).

The "next to NY/MA" is a bit disingenuous; there's hardly anything on the NY side of the border, and even less on the MA side.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#96

Post by specialist »

maxerickson wrote: post #73
specialist wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll believe corporations are people (natural persons) when Texas executes one.

Is bankruptcy just dealing with the already dead body? I bet there is at least some corner case where an action of the state government made a company give up operating (like pulling a liquor license or whatever).

Bankruptcy is an accountant assisted suicide attempt.

Executing a corporation would be more akin to seizing all the assets, throwing the board and execs in jail, shredding any and all contracts, some high profile perp walks.

Now that I'm describing it... It'd look like a RICO case.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#97

Post by specialist »

bmelton wrote: post #78
maxerickson wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is bankruptcy just dealing with the already dead body? I bet there is at least some corner case where an action of the state government made a company give up operating (like pulling a liquor license or whatever).

Trust-busting also comes to mind.

Name one corporation that is now no more because of trust busting, either partially or wholly.

Re: Bernie’s Army of Coders

#98

Post by specialist »

uxp wrote: post #47
gozur88 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Corporations aren't people. They're groups of people. Why is it I lose my right to speak if I'm in a group? In that respect, what makes corporations different from unions or advocacy groups like Greenpeace?

You shouldn't lose your right to anything when you're in a group, but you shouldn't have more rights solely because you're in a group. The group should have rights, You should have rights, and everyone else should have rights. There's a distinction there.

you shouldn't have more rights solely because you're in a group.

So no more collective bargaining?

Post reply on HN