House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#311

Post by tmp_anon_22 » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:56 PM UTC

hayst4ck wrote: post #105

Lawrence Lessig (Harvard law professor famous for fighting for sane copyright law) does a great presentation on the root cause of Americas problems. He also ran for president in 2016. It can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates…

> The test for democracy is whether elected politicians pass legislation that the public at large wishes to be passed.

What happens if the majority of Americans want to pass laws against their best interest?

What happens if the majority of Americans want to pass laws that are deeply immoral?

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#312

Post by ckosidows » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:58 PM UTC

mrandish wrote: post #307

wkimeria wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm originally from Kenya. We used to have a joke "If it happens in Africa it is called corruption. If it happens in the US it is called lobbying". I remember seeing a chart of how much money a Senator had to raise every week for their next race and it was stark bonkers (and this was in the 90s, before Citizens United). I just checked and the figure is even worse now. https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/02/state-of…

> Money in politics is the root of most of what ails the U.S political system I disagree that money is the root . Money is still one level above the true root, which is what the money is needed to buy: "Re-election." Thus, an alternative, though unconventional, solution is single-term limits. Once elected to any national public office, you can never run for that or any other elected office again. One and done. This i…

Why would someone elected to office, who knows they can't run again, have any concern about the will of the people? At best you would have the same outcome that you get from politicians at the end of their terms, and it's not like these politicians are solving all of society's ailments.

If they can still get lobbying money by operating on the will of corporations, they could spend their whole term making money for themselves with no concern about re-election.

This solution just seems like hoping and praying the politicians we elect have higher regard for their legacy than their wallet.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#313

Post by jonnybgood » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 9:59 PM UTC

hayst4ck wrote: post #105

Lawrence Lessig (Harvard law professor famous for fighting for sane copyright law) does a great presentation on the root cause of Americas problems. He also ran for president in 2016. It can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates…

> The test for democracy is whether elected politicians pass legislation that the public at large wishes to be passed.

Isn’t that just rule of the majority? Since when has that been a test of a republic?

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#314

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 10:00 PM UTC

tmp_anon_22 wrote: post #311

hayst4ck wrote: post #105

Lawrence Lessig (Harvard law professor famous for fighting for sane copyright law) does a great presentation on the root cause of Americas problems. He also ran for president in 2016. It can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates…

> The test for democracy is whether elected politicians pass legislation that the public at large wishes to be passed. What happens if the majority of Americans want to pass laws against their best interest? What happens if the majority of Americans want to pass laws that are deeply immoral?

> What happens if the majority of Americans want to pass laws against their best interest?

Democracy and good judgment are orthogonal concerns.

> What happens if the majority of Americans want to pass laws that are deeply immoral?

Democracy and morality of policy are orthogonal concerns.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#315

Post by dr_dshiv » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 10:08 PM UTC

JamesBarney wrote: post #276

hayst4ck wrote: post #105

Lawrence Lessig (Harvard law professor famous for fighting for sane copyright law) does a great presentation on the root cause of Americas problems. He also ran for president in 2016. It can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates…

That study has a lot of problems, and several subsequent problems pointed out the holes. Here's a good summary of subsequent research that debunked it. https://www.vox.com/2016/5/9/11502464/gilens-page-oligarchy-... Even if the study were true it shows that when economic elites (150k+) disagree with the middle class they get there way more often. (Btw it showed that the middle class and the rich agreed like 80-90% of…

How much are politicians paid —and how does their salary affect corruption?

It might not be a popular opinion, but perhaps we should double the wages of US Representatives (they currently make $175k—not a lot in Washington DC). Is paying US representatives $350k worth the money?

First, a bigger financial cushion for representatives might reduce financial corruption. Second, a bigger salary might attract more talented leaders. Potentially, paying higher salaries would increase the quality of US governance. God, imagine if we could just pay for increased quality in government leaders!

TIL that in 1789, the US president made $25k—- worth $800k in 2022. But today, the US president makes $400k. Why try to save money on presidents and politicians?

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#316

Post by alkonaut » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 10:13 PM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #51

Hear me out... few people want to run for federal office already. The pay isn't great and it's hard work. If the US was a company, there'd be no question that we'd need to pay our leadership much better to attract top talent. We pay senators $170k a year to manage our country with a $20 trillion economy. So what we end up with is activists who crave power and elites from rich families for whom $170k a year is a round…

Why would paying more help? You want representatives that represent the public well. Sure you might not want all of congress to be welders, but I also don’t think parliaments around the world should be filled with people who chose between being high rate lawyers or business leaders and holding public office.

The current pay is more than enough. If anything, it could be extended beyond the term to guarantee quarantine periods between office and businesses.

Allowing stock trading is insane. Allowing the amount of campaign money currently circulating is also insane. Provide candidates with campaign funds and limit spending, so they can’t be indebted to corporations once in office.

Basically: just look at some country where politicians aren’t just racing around raising money, and ask “what’s done there and can the same be done in the US?”. This is the that-would-never-work-here thing again.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#317

Post by lexber » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 10:17 PM UTC

They will never pass this

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#318

Post by jonnybgood » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 10:17 PM UTC

lambert_ wrote: post #245

plainnoodles wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes I'm sure China or Russia would be *thrilled* if their citizens wanted workers to own the means of production. Definitely would not involve tanks or squares or soon-to-be iconic historical photography at all.

China is called the CCP… if Russia and China aren’t communists or communist friendly then who is? And why won’t you accept the proposition that americas problems might be due to a poor implementation of capitalism but then call all unattractive communist countries just “poor implementations of communism?”

China isn’t communist. China is a one-party state with state-controlled capitalism. The name CCP is only historical and fuels propaganda. Instead of looking at names, look at the actual economics of the country.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#319

Post by rayiner » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 10:17 PM UTC

hayst4ck wrote: post #105

Lawrence Lessig (Harvard law professor famous for fighting for sane copyright law) does a great presentation on the root cause of Americas problems. He also ran for president in 2016. It can be watched here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJy8vTu66tE The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates…

> The short version is that to win primaries you need money. Money mainly comes from corporations and rich people. Taking money from corporations and rich people creates a relationship where you have some loyalty to them or they can punish you if you don't act how they want.

If this was ever correct, it’s certainly wrong today. Trump, for example, was primarily funded by small donors: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/04/us/politics/trump-fundrai...

That’s arguably a major force that’s destabilizing politics today. Technology makes it super easy to raise hundreds of millions from small donors. But the Act Blue and Win Red donors represent the most ideological segment of their respective parties. That creates a huge incentive to try and play to try Twitter audience by taking extreme positions. Going viral can be worth millions of dollars.

Re: House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading – report

#320

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 10:21 PM UTC

alkonaut wrote: post #316

nostromo wrote: post #51

Hear me out... few people want to run for federal office already. The pay isn't great and it's hard work. If the US was a company, there'd be no question that we'd need to pay our leadership much better to attract top talent. We pay senators $170k a year to manage our country with a $20 trillion economy. So what we end up with is activists who crave power and elites from rich families for whom $170k a year is a round…

Why would paying more help? You want representatives that represent the public well. Sure you might not want all of congress to be welders, but I also don’t think parliaments around the world should be filled with people who chose between being high rate lawyers or business leaders and holding public office. The current pay is more than enough. If anything, it could be extended beyond the term to guarantee quarantine…

> I also don’t think parliaments around the world should be filled with people who chose between being high rate lawyers or business leaders and holding public office.

I think that the people I pay to write laws and run a large organization should have...substantial understanding and skill concerning the relation of the structure and content of law to it's pragmatic effects and the practicalities of running large organizations.

Why would I want anything else?

Do I want more diversity of choices? Sure, I want diversity of meaningful policy preference options that would result from having an electoral system that favored proportionality (which is pretty much the best pragmatic definition of representative democracy) rather than duopoly.