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

Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

firstlook.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 89 posts

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#41

Post by ZanyProgrammer »

us0r wrote: post #19
rtpg wrote: post #3

The problem with most of these examples is that all of these "NSA contractors" are just giant multi-billion dollar revenue companies. I'm sure MSFT is an NSA contractor on one level, but most people would find it weird to classify Microsoft as "A NSA contractor". This is just a consequence of powerful people happening to have a lot of money to invest and thus becoming board members for companies in domains in which t…

SAIC, CSC, CACI, Booz, Leidos? These are multi-billion dollar government welfare recipients.

I'd add Palantir.

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#42

Post by mathiasben »

lostcolony wrote: post #22
AnkhMorporkian wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lobbying isn't an inherently dirty thing. It started (and largely remains) a way for people with knowledge of a field outside the politician's bailiwick to inform them of pros/cons to an issue they may not be aware of. Corruption has indeed seeped into the process, but I would prefer experts in a field (on both sides) to inform politicians than have them be clueless on the issues in question. The EFF, the ACLU? Lobby…

The problem is the process is innately corrupt though. If we wanted an uncorrupted process, we would set aside tax money to pay researchers in the field grants solely to study and advise, with laws preventing them from taking subsidies and the like elsewhere. Perhaps with a process to allocate existing researchers to new issues. Corporation feels that we need more spying on our citizens because it makes them profitab…

The congressional research service does this. Unfortunatley over the last two decades it's been crippled by partisian meddling. - http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/januaryfebruary_20...

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#43

Post by PopsiclePete »

cies wrote: post #16

How again is "lobbying" different from "legalized corruption"? [serious]

There's nothing special about lobbying that needs to tie it to corruption. Plenty of countries without legalized lobbying are even more corrupt.

Politics is power, money is power, the two will invariably be linked. It's human nature. Very, very few people are "uncorruptable". Usually, it's just a matter of "how much".

The way to fight this isn't by trying to enforce more unenforceable laws or to make new rules/regulations. It's much simpler than that - voter education.

The problem lies squarely with the voters. Time and time again we elect these people to represent us. They didn't usurp power through a military coup. And our only legal recourse of punishing this behavior is to simply not elect them.

Making lobbying illegal will not make the problem go away - it just won't be in the open.

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#44

Post by AnkhMorporkian »

roc wrote: post #29
AnkhMorporkian wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lobbying isn't an inherently dirty thing. It started (and largely remains) a way for people with knowledge of a field outside the politician's bailiwick to inform them of pros/cons to an issue they may not be aware of. Corruption has indeed seeped into the process, but I would prefer experts in a field (on both sides) to inform politicians than have them be clueless on the issues in question. The EFF, the ACLU? Lobby…

Lobbying is like any other organization of man: government, organized religion, corporations, unions, non-profits, etc. Once they get to a certain size, once people are supported solely by the organization and thus put their need for it to exist and grow and flourish above even its stated purpose, it can (and seemingly inevitably does) become corrupt. Lobbying on Net Neutrality, done by a bunch of technology workers…

I largely agree, though I think professional lobbyists ideally would have a place as a representative of a large group. What needs to be done is campaign finance reform. If we get money out of running for office, most of these soft-corruption problems will disappear.

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#45

Post by sseveran »

ganeumann wrote: post #24

I think the main point here is the one Todd Gitlin makes: "the onus for disclosure ultimately lies with reporters and news programs, who should be asking these experts to reveal potential conflicts of interest and to explain the basis of their assertions about national security." We all have a conflict of interest here (not least because since we are all being spied on by our governments) but that doesn't mean our op…

If you have ever watched CNBC or Bloomberg I am sure you have been whenever an analyst talks about a stock a disclosure screen pops indicating whether the analyst, their family or their firm have an financial stake in the company.

It would be interesting to see that especially for very senior former government officials who often clock themselves in their former agencies and not as board members of x,y, and z. There is certainly more credibility as been former 4 star general than a board member of a government contractor.

Now having spent some time earlier in my life working around the DC establishment I know that being a general is now basically a political position even though it is accorded the same respect that generals garnered 70 years ago. So I just expect that former senior government officials are now trading on their connections to government...since that is the most valuable asset to have. And this goes for everything, not just the military and intelligence agencies. When there is as much money as there is in Washington being connected to the people who hand it out is extremely valuable.

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#46

Post by AngrySkillzz »

MadManE wrote: post #38
us0r wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SAIC, CSC, CACI, Booz, Leidos? These are multi-billion dollar government welfare recipients.

Is corporate welfare somehow worse than individual welfare? I gather from the tone of your comment that you think it is, but this being the internet, tone is easy to confuse.

Individual welfare at least supports the more vulnerable and less well-off elements of our society. Large defense contractors have revenues in the billions of dollars, high level managers are likely millionaires, and they employ an entire army of upper-middle class workers.

The defense sector is mostly about providing welfare to the already rich and privileged.

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#47

Post by istvan__ »

cies wrote: post #16

How again is "lobbying" different from "legalized corruption"? [serious]

It is not. This is why US is not ranked high on any corruption list, while maintaining the highest level if private financial influence not only in the lawmaking but also in national security. These are very dangerous, and as the Princeton study points out it threatens democracy in the long run very much.

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPag...

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#48

Post by sillygoose »

istvan__ wrote: post #47
cies wrote: post #16

How again is "lobbying" different from "legalized corruption"? [serious]

It is not. This is why US is not ranked high on any corruption list, while maintaining the highest level if private financial influence not only in the lawmaking but also in national security. These are very dangerous, and as the Princeton study points out it threatens democracy in the long run very much. http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPag...

You could even argue that lobbying is democracy's way of having "corruption" built-in.

When there's a dictatorship, no one is surprised when the dictator is bribed. In a democracy, you can't just walk into the president's office and drop a bag of money on his desk, but you can lobby the shit out of him.

Either way, you get to bribe someone who's in a position to hand out favours. That's just how political power works.

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#49

Post by aeturnum »

lostcolony wrote: post #22
AnkhMorporkian wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lobbying isn't an inherently dirty thing. It started (and largely remains) a way for people with knowledge of a field outside the politician's bailiwick to inform them of pros/cons to an issue they may not be aware of. Corruption has indeed seeped into the process, but I would prefer experts in a field (on both sides) to inform politicians than have them be clueless on the issues in question. The EFF, the ACLU? Lobby…

The problem is the process is innately corrupt though. If we wanted an uncorrupted process, we would set aside tax money to pay researchers in the field grants solely to study and advise, with laws preventing them from taking subsidies and the like elsewhere. Perhaps with a process to allocate existing researchers to new issues. Corporation feels that we need more spying on our citizens because it makes them profitab…

> we would set aside tax money to pay researchers in the field grants solely to study and advise

Just because someone works for the government does not make them free from political influence. [0]

I'm not happy with our current system, but I'm also dismayed by all the people who think it has a simple solution.

[0] http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-03-08/florid...

Re: Many of the NSA’s Loudest Defenders Have Financial Ties to NSA Contractors

#50

Post by sillygoose »

PopsiclePete wrote: post #43
cies wrote: post #16

How again is "lobbying" different from "legalized corruption"? [serious]

There's nothing special about lobbying that needs to tie it to corruption. Plenty of countries without legalized lobbying are even more corrupt. Politics is power, money is power, the two will invariably be linked. It's human nature. Very, very few people are "uncorruptable". Usually, it's just a matter of "how much". The way to fight this isn't by trying to enforce more unenforceable laws or to make new rules/regula…

If all candidates will be happy to take bribes once in office - which is pretty much guaranteed - how do you think voting could possibly prevent bribery at all?
Post reply on HN