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

FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–226 of 226 posts

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#221

Post by pksebben »

bloomingeek wrote: post #173
watwut wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money matter in campaign. Politicians accepting these have massive advantage over those who don't- so they end up more winning.

In my opinion, this is the voters fault. Read up on the candidates, talk to other voters, if the candidate's ad is all fluff and no substance, don't vote for them. STOP believing non-journalistic cable TV channels who only profit from eyeballs and not the facts.

your expectations of voters are unrealistic. not everyone has the time or the education to sift through all that and effectively parse it's meaning. Madison avenue figured this out a long time ago and it's been downhill ever since

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#222

Post by rosnd »

skrebbel wrote: post #214
rosnd wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These aren't bribes. This isn't corruption either.

I don't understand that. What's the difference between "bribing" and "buying influence"? Is it about the time difference between when you give a politician money and when you expect something back?

It's the nature of the transaction. You are paying for a specific official act, that would be outright corruption.

Generally the money does not get you anything but an opportunity to pitch stuff to the politician, it's just an expensive way to become golf buddies.

There's a lot of things the politicians can help you with outside of their official duties. A senator chasing after your business partners visa issue is going to get it resolved within a day, without needing to wield any official power. This isn't corruption, corruption would be paying off the person making the visa decisions.

I get that if you come from a country with little actual corruption, this might seem like a distinction without a difference. It really isn't though, real corruption places a price tag on government officials doing (or not doing) their jobs.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#224

Post by bloomingeek »

DangitBobby wrote: post #218
bloomingeek wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion, this is the voters fault. Read up on the candidates, talk to other voters, if the candidate's ad is all fluff and no substance, don't vote for them. STOP believing non-journalistic cable TV channels who only profit from eyeballs and not the facts.

Advertising is very effective. There's no point in blaming people for it, especially since they are the victims in this scenario.

"Victims", really?!?

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#225

Post by skrebbel »

rosnd wrote: post #222
skrebbel wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand that. What's the difference between "bribing" and "buying influence"? Is it about the time difference between when you give a politician money and when you expect something back?

It's the nature of the transaction. You are paying for a specific official act, that would be outright corruption. Generally the money does not get you anything but an opportunity to pitch stuff to the politician, it's just an expensive way to become golf buddies. There's a lot of things the politicians can help you with outside of their official duties. A senator chasing after your business partners visa issue is go…

I don't mean this in a dismissive way, because I appreciate your comment and you carefully set out a distinction, but it very much underlines what I'm worried about: that Americans are totally a-ok with corruption as long as it's done on a high enough level, to the point that it's openly discussed in the media and on internet forums and people do effort to explain to one another that it's not really real corruption at all.

Re: FTX’s ownership of a U.S. bank raises questions

#226

Post by DangitBobby »

bloomingeek wrote: post #224
DangitBobby wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advertising is very effective. There's no point in blaming people for it, especially since they are the victims in this scenario.

"Victims", really?!?

Yes, people being fooled into electing corrupt government officials are victims. What's your objection? If I lie to you and steal from you, are you not a victim?
Post reply on HN