View Single Post
  #147  
Old 02-04-16, 01:43 PM
SWMCinci SWMCinci is offline
All Yappi
 
Join Date: 02-20-07
Location: Outside of Ohio..... Now
Posts: 17,634
SWMCinci is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by cabezadecaballo View Post
I think that you underestimate Washington and the strengths of the relationships with select portions of the citizenry, in a statement like that. I do hear what you are saying, though. I'm not saying that all that voted in favor understood the repercussions of what they voted for, but they sure looked like they were trying to do something of value.
Great movie! But what I am talking about is the fact that every-time the government tries one of these populist/social experiments (reigning in executive pay, leveling outcomes, limiting donations, taking even more from the people already paying the most in taxes/fees/etc. and redistributing their money, reigning in Wall Street,......) what we find is that the people don't cooperate, they look for other ways.

When they decided to limit the amount of money that ANY citizen could donate to a candidate, it gave rise to PACs. When they decided to regressively tax salaries, it gave rise to more grants of options. When New York, Illinois, and California raised income tax rates on millionaires, they left those states because they could afford to and when they needed more income the states and cities actually received less than the year before. In the end, money didn't make a difference in the 2008 OR 2012 or 2014 election cycles. Some of the best-backed candidates lost in those years - the difference wasn't really money it was more about whether you were an incumbent and the anger-level of your constituents.

When I look at where we are today, Trump seems to have the inside edge for the GOP and he's spent virtually nothing. No PAC, etc. Bush, with almost limitless funds is almost a nn-starter - we'll know more next week. Sanders, is raising substantial money $30 at a time and no PAC. and in competitive situations is opposing Clinton (who has large backers, the liberal media, and PACs) to a standstill at this point. Has technology and Social Media reached a point that it nullifies some of the problems that some people think need addressing?
Reply With Quote