House Democrats to propose ban on lawmaker stock trading

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

#141

Post by ryandvm » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 6:02 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…

Getting money out of politics would be a great reform (removing lobbyists, campaign finance reform, etc.). It also strikes me as almost impossible to implement. It's like getting the president of a company to switch to system whereby leadership is elected by the workers. It's all risk and low reward for them.

However, another political reform I've toyed with in my head is secret voting in the House and the Senate.

Who cares if Raytheon or Disney "owns" a given representative if those corporate sponsors can't actually be sure that they're getting the votes they paid for. It would also neutralize a lot of the petty party line votes and manipulation. Every issue would ostensibly be decided based on the representatives' actual value system.

Obviously the downside would be that the public at large would be unable to hold their representative accountable for a particular vote, but that seems like the lesser concern compared to the very obvious corporate vote buying and party-line bullshit that happens today.

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

#142

Post by lprd » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 6:03 PM UTC

TameAntelope wrote: post #80

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let's get real...term limits This is a proven strategy for tanking legislation. Ten lawmakers on a linear political spectrum. Compromise is at 5. 1, 2, 9 and 10 said no; 3 and 8 grudgingly accepted. The measure looks poised to pass with six votes. What can you do to tank it? Propose a sizzling 3½. 3 can't help but demand it at all costs. It's so juicy! And so close to the real intent behind 5! 8, meanwhile, horrifi…

Good, then we tank legislation. Fewer laws seems fine by me, and the laws that do pass will be based on a groundswell of support that comes in waves.

Agreed. We have way too many laws already.

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

#143

Post by tootallgavin » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 6:03 PM UTC

burkaman wrote: post #110

tootallgavin wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just to stop trading individual stocks Why? Is buying a particular car not an investment? what about a house? Buying and selling assets should not be criminalized. Having privileged knowledge is part of the game. Someone who cannot read and write is going to have a tough time in life. Insider trading is already illegal. Also, investing in a publicly traded company is a weird way of violating public trust. Its as if…

The goal is to remove an incentive to pass bad laws that benefit someone's personal finances. You're looking at this from the wrong direction - instead of asking "why shouldn't they be able to invest based on their knowledge", ask "why shouldn't they be able to pass laws based on their investments?"

> The goal is to remove an incentive to pass bad laws

that will happen regardless of the monetary incentive

> that benefit someone's personal finances.

I don't know how to contextualize this. There should be no slaves.

> "why shouldn't they be able to pass laws based on their investments?"

Hopefully, they are invested in their community, their city, their county, their state, their country. I don't know where you want to go with this. Obviously some people are... invested differently. Don't vote for these people

> You're looking at this from the wrong direction

we have different viewpoints, this why it seems this way

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

#144

Post by pessimizer » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 6:03 PM UTC

matt3210 wrote: post #2

Lol this win never happen. Politicians will never vote to bankrupt themselves

Maybe there's a hope if they carefully time the debates and votes to happen while Pelosi is on the plane to Taiwan.

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

#145

Post by jwkane » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 6:04 PM UTC

yndoendo wrote: post #62

munk-a wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it becomes a big enough liability that prominent representatives are concerned about their reelection due to it then it will happen. Yes, Congress is reluctant to specifically legislate against itself, so to make it happens a stink must be raised.

Binding resolution allows for We the People to force the legislative body to enact legislation that they oppose. This is now cannibals become legal in Colorado. Unfortunately not all states have binding resolution nor are legislative body willing to empower the people. Binding resolution also needs to be bound at a Federal level, which it is not, to bring in true balance of power and laws that have true accountabilit…

Cannibals are legal in Colorado? Can't wait for the next Top Chef -- Denver edition.

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

#146

Post by ayngg » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 6:04 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…

I have heard that same argument elsewhere too, it would also explain why it took a populist outsider like Trump to break through that system while someone like Bernie on the other side couldn't.

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

#147

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 6:04 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…

[deleted]

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

#148

Post by runarberg » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 6:05 PM UTC

seibelj wrote: post #124

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…

I prefer those with more resources to have more say over the running of our country. On average in a free market those with more resources are better organized and know what’s best for the country. Furthermore the structure of society should be organized to help those that know what they are doing. An unpopular opinion however.

There is a sibling comment explaining why you might not actually want to live in an oligarchy, but regardless of your preference, there are a couple of flaws in your logic.

First. The greatest predictor of individual wealth is their parents’ wealth. This undermines the whole notion of the free market (or at least in its current state) giving rise to a meritocracy.

Second. Statistically, in a completely free and fair economy where all trade is zero-sum and every player will either loose or gain from a trade is up to pure chance, the money in the economy will accumulate to fewer and fewer hands as the number of trades increase. This is a pure statistical phenomena, meaning that as long as some players have more wealth then others, those players have an upper hand in any future trades for that reason only.

The meritocracy of capitalism is a pretty well debunked theory at this point.

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

#149

Post by philosopher1234 » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 6:05 PM UTC

ryandvm wrote: post #141

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…

Getting money out of politics would be a great reform (removing lobbyists, campaign finance reform, etc.). It also strikes me as almost impossible to implement. It's like getting the president of a company to switch to system whereby leadership is elected by the workers. It's all risk and low reward for them . However, another political reform I've toyed with in my head is secret voting in the House and the Senate. W…

How is that a lesser concern? How can the public have any influence over their politicians this way? You're saying corporations can choose who gets into power becasuse they finance them, and the public cant even tell what they're voting for to punish them. It seems all around worse.

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

#150

Post by idiotsecant » Thu, Jul 28, 2022, 6:06 PM UTC

seibelj wrote: post #124

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…

I prefer those with more resources to have more say over the running of our country. On average in a free market those with more resources are better organized and know what’s best for the country. Furthermore the structure of society should be organized to help those that know what they are doing. An unpopular opinion however.

fortunately there are hundreds of countries already in existence for you to choose from that use this exact system!