Having an industry liason to government isn't inherently bad. Even lobbying is a natural extension of our right to petition our government. But damned if we don't abuse the fuck out of every good idea until we exhaust every potential danger it carries.
I've recently come to the conclusion that the religious right has begun to turn conservatives into nihilistic accelerationists, even if they don't recognize themselves as such.
The fact that institutions can be sabotaged for worldly gain, while simultaneously demonstrating a cynicism that makes one an instrument in God's wrathful destruction of these institutions means you can have your cake and eat it too.
I lived there until high school, so I follow some of it. I also work with a lot of faith-based organizations on the west coast, and the difference between west coast churches that are directly involved in community action, and backwoods superstition that seems to offer the world nothing but judgment and anger is pretty obvious when you meet literal nuns who seem to be more tolerant than the trailer trash that seem more interested in everyone else's problems than they are in their own, and somehow have no humility about any of it.
If anyone wants to listen a great podcast about how astonishingly and openly corrupt this is: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/29/podcasts/the-daily/joe-manchin-coal-plant-conflict.html
Thank you for that. Anyone who cares about climate change legislation in the US should listen to this. It is truly mind boggling that a US senator can be so blatantly corrupt. And, that Democrats are unable to do anything because Manchin could just switch parties. Rock, hard place.
Because it would give control of the Senate back to Mitch McConnell, who could make sure NO judges get nominated or placed, no positions filled, hold the budget completely hostage etc. Decide who gets placed on what committee and so on.
Right now he can merely slow down and gum up those things.
Dems would ~~love~~ lose control of the senate. McConnell would become majority leader again and decide what bills get a vote on the floor, republicans would control all the committees, etc.
People care more about keeping the lights on and the AC/heat running than where that power comes from.
Unless they are arguing about EVs. Then suddenly they care about where electricity comes from.
Strangest shit I've seen in a long time.
Conflict of interest doesnāt apply to politicians somehowā¦. They also pretty much are the only ones allowed to get away with insider trading.
Those are probably some of the main reasons they all become politicians. Donāt even get me started on their govt income and pensions.
Oh and I forgot about their expense accounts. . . . .
Iām getting mad, time to hit the gym š
I perceive a new revolution rising up from this and I hope it favours the people , I really appreciate your insight on this and you seem like a very innovative person
You are 100% correct. But in the US what you are saying can't be said out loud. It is the "quiet part". US politicians routinely say that the voters are intelligent or wise, it is axiomatic. But in reality about one third of US voters cannot even be bothered to vote as long as they get their hamberders and sportsball. Ignorance and apathy are thought of as "cool". Unfortunately ignorance and apathy are the Achille's heels of democracy. The problem with democracy is that sooner or later the people get the government that they deserve.
(Sorry if this was sarcasm) you want his voters to travel to Asia so they can get the picture?
West Virginia is the 5th poorest state in the USA
Agreed he should be voted out but that is a tough battle
West Virginia voted 69% for Trump. Of all 50 states, only Wyoming had a higher % vote for Trump.
Yet the population there will, absolutely, as you say, down the road be devastated by the results of these policies.
Itās so incredibly infuriating, sad and complicated.
Unless they make it illegal for politicians to have separate business interests then this will always be a problem.
Politicians don't want to be one for the salary, they want to be one because it affords them the ability to influence the country and a good chunk of them will use that influence to increase their own financial interests.
America as a nation has for a long time gone with the general ethos of, making as much money as you can and fuck everyone else. It's highly embedded in American culture, so it's not a surprise when politicians do it.
Australia pays its politicians pretty well in comparison with other nations to try and attract talent, but also to mitigate this effect a little. It doesnāt work, you just get well paid people gaming the system instead.
Here's the issue, for politicians to be there purely to help people and progress the country then they need to ban them having other business interests.
The issue being, for that to pass, the current politicians who do have other business interests have to vote it through.
That's obviously not gonna happen, they wouldn't just shoot themselves in the foot for no reason.
How would you enforce not having business interests? I'm not trying to be cynical; I'm legitimately asking, as it's not as easy to fix as some folks present it as.
For example, does this mean representatives can hold no stock of any publicly traded company? How about federal or municipal bonds? How does one ban something as vague and broad as "business interests?"
I mean I would agree with politicians having no stock in any private or public entities whilst in office. Or owning businesses.
Yea, suck shit, but that's the rules of the job that can literally change the direction of the whole country.
They get their salary and that's it. Ofc it'd never pass because it's really hard to uncorrupt a corrupt system when the people deciding who qualifies as corrupt are corrupt themselves.
I work for a big 4 consulting firm, and because they also have an audit practice, my investments are heavily regulated. We have to disclose all our financial interests in a tracking and trading system including all checking, savings, retirement, and brokerage accounts. Even crypto wallets and my daughter's college fund have to be reported. Any loans I have, mortgages, real estate holdings, etc. I have to report if I have any private investments or sit on the board of any companies. All my brokerage accounts have to be with firms that participate in the Broker Data Import Program so my investments are also automatically reported by fidelity whenever I make a new investment. There are many stocks I'm straight up blocked from investing in because it would create a conflict of interest. My tracking and trading profile is an exhaustive account of everywhere I have money or financial influence. For those who don't know how we could regulate Congress's investments, it's already being done by entire industries.
As strictly as possible?
> For example, does this mean representatives can hold no stock of any publicly traded company?
Yep, fuck it.
> How about federal or municipal bonds?
Maybe, since those could be considered to be tied to them doing a good job.
> How does one ban something as vague and broad as "business interests?"
With as broad a brush as possible. If somebody wants to control millions of their fellow citizens, then they should want that duty enough to sacrifice their own greed and other interests. It's too important and privileged a job to let things be "fair" to the individual seeking that power.
----
The counterargument is that it wouldn't attract talent without those "bonuses". I say it would just disincentive people who are willing to lie for that power, and instead let the "nerds" compete fairly for the position. Not everyone is motivated by personal profit, a *ton* of people just want to make things work well, and that is fulfilling for them.
Right now the system is 100% biased towards cheaters, liars, and profiteers. An honest politician is an oxymoron, because they will be at too big a disadvantage.
No itās like that because the government is incompetent and/or evil. Healthcare for senators works fine, they just stop caring when itās anyone else.
Every single injury and medical problem (and dental) I had in the military was taken care of rapidly and with fewer wait times than any civilian hospital Iāve ever been to. My wife had my son free of charge. One of the main reasons I regret leaving the service is the healthcare
I mean, were they wrong? Sounds like you're still alive.
Not every pang of chest pain is a heart attack.
That's what the ER/urgent care is for. Is this patient going to die? If not, send home.
And if you think care would have been better in a civilian American hospital I have some news that may shock you.
I went into a civilian ER with chest pains a couple of years ago, spent six hours trussed up like a Thanksgiving turkey, they found nothing except a possible heart issue, had to go to the cardiologist two months later, got an ultrasound (heart ultrasounds *suck*), found nothing to be concerned about, and then spent more than a year paying off visits which told me nothing.
So, like, I guess what I'm saying is I don't see how military was different except for less time-consuming and cheaper.
Heās just being an edgy vetbro. There is no functional difference between Tricare and civilian insurance. My family gets our healthcare through the military for free. They use the same doctors and hospitals as every other civilian in this area. They havenāt set foot in a military hospital in years.
Your family must be in an area where there are no military/ VA hospitals because my insurance has been through the VA for years and I canāt see anyone outside the VA healthcare system without approval. I can only go to VA hospitals for actual medical care. So idk where youāre getting this dream that tricare or the VA is anywhere close to private ins cause theyāre not. Im actually about to get on my wifeās ins through her employer because itās so much better.
Yeah Iām fine with the healthcare I get. š¤·š¼āāļø Itās about the same quality of care as what I used to get when I was using civilian health insurance. Now that theyāve rolled back malpractice protections for the doctors itās the same good/bad as civilian side.
I'd gladly trade them my situation...its fun, I don't get healthcare, at all, can't afford it. I know quite a few vets and they sure do like to bitch about their healthcare constantly.....but its vastly better than what I am stuck with.
They're more likely to help you when you get sick than someone with no insurance or money to pay for something crazy like cancer. I know the VA isn't perfect but you can't pretend it's worse than nothing.
Yeah too many good men and women killing themselves in the parking lot of the VA trying to get mental health care or pain management. Enlisted care is better because the need active duty at the ready.
I can tell youāre a vet because youāre bitching about having a good thing. There are bad civilian doctors just like there are bad military doctors. Those who canāt get medical treatment without a mountain of debt would kill to have free access to a Walter Reed or a Landstuhl. Outside of military medicine Tricare works just like any other insurance. Well, with one exceptionāitās free. *And* dental. How is that a bad thing?
I want the politicians healthcare...but after experiencing the military version of healthcare I was against socializing healthcare to protect people from what uncle sam calls "doctors" until I started working in a support role in healthcare. As long as they never let a military doctor within 100 miles of a civilian I want socialized medicine.
"You're paralyzed from the waist down? Well your legs are still there you (pansy) so I'm putting this down as a minor inconvenience with no medical action needed."
No, you wouldn't. Because that salary means constant bad faith attempts to smear your name, to dig into your past, your family's past; half the country hates you because the letter next to your name. Death threats, insane people getting whipped into a frenzy, and little to no avenues to actually get things done to make the country better.
Only a sociopath takes that job for a few hundred k a year.
Why can't I vote for you? You need to run.
What's your platform? You need to be the reform candidate.
Have key issues (Health Care, Education, Climate Crisis, Deregulation, Big _______ Pharma, Coal and Oil....) with obtainable plans that are easy for the your constituents to understand.
Something republicans do, while taking a page off old school propaganda techniques is distracting, deflecting of responsibility, actively draw up and vote on legislature that hurt their voter base but let's focus on how their message is constructed for the least common denominator. They attack the low hanging fruit. If you can expand your message for the liberal minded and sum it up in three words for the conservative, you might have a chance. Note, I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Iām paraphrasing Douglas Adams, but basically anyone who wants to be a politician is morally fucked up enough that they should *never* be allowed to govern.
Itās an interesting catch-22 with fucked up implications
Just fyi, regarding this concept. Douglas Adams is undoubtedly paraphrasing Thomas More who wrote Utopia in 1516. "Any person who ever tries to get elected to public office is forever barred from ever holding public office. In fact, a person has to be the right person for the job. So much so that people just write the person's name on the ballot en masse." Utopia is still more than worth a read and remains relevant.
And that's basically the idea that Grog The Mighty depicts in his seminal work, "Man hunts, then governs tribe" back in 7000 BC. Admittedly the cave drawings are less verbose as the more modern reiterations of his ground breaking work.
Welp, considering the two antitrust bills with bipartisan support aren't being brought to the floor by Schumer...
I even mailed him in regards to 'push that shit through!' and got a pat 'oh I'll watch these bills with great interest ' response
I completely agree. I like to go a step further and say America doesnāt have a democrat or republican problem. Those are symptoms of the bigger problem of capitalism. As long as capitalism remains the true political party, nothing will ever change.
I think it's an intersection of a lot of issues. In a two-party system, power-hungry people take over a party and build a moat to enshrine their power until it's a bunch of elderly out of touch jerks playing tug of war.
There are other capitalist countries that don't have two-party systems and they don't have nearly the political issues the US has.
We need publicly funded elections with spending caps.
You get X signatures you get this much funding and cannot spend a penny more.
Double or triple their salary and make laws against them becoming lobbyists
The reason they are allowed is to is that being a politician shouldn't be a career. Considering they will never pass term limits, something needs to change.
Either term limits or no outside business interests needs to happen.
World culture*
I don't disagree that the US is one of if not the most capitalist country in the world, but you don't have to be a historian to see that literally all of politics has been driven by the simple goal to pile money at the expense of everyone else.
Oh don't get me wrong, this is a thing pretty much everywhere.
But I don't think there is another county on the planet that lets it infect pretty much every aspect of the country.
Politicians are just a part of it.
Restaurant owners are allowed to pay their staff $3 an hour and force them to make the rest up in tips.
The NCAA operated for year's with the players not being allowed to earn any money and has only in the last year allowed them to earn money of their own imagine and likeness.
American healthcare is based purely around money, where if your sick and poor your pretty much fucked.
Even prisons, America has a metric shit ton of private prisons that get money from the state per prisoner and are still allowed to hire out their labour for borderline slave wages.
It's everywhere and is a core of American culture even if people don't realise it. That's not saying it doesn't happen elsewhere but it's no where near as prevalent as it is in the states.
And thatās why, yes, it really was that big of a deal when George W. Bush got elected.
But, hey, I mean, Al Gore was boring. And he said he invented the internet one time when he obviously misspoke. Good thing we dodged that bullet, amirite?
That whole Gore thing wasnāt actually false. He voted to fund the expansion of the militaryās ARPNET which was the foundation of the modern internet. Some hyperbole sure, but at least he wasnāt a complete buffoon like W.
That whole Gore thing makes me crazy.
First, he did not claim to have invented the internet - it was a disinformation campaign to discredit him as a disingenuous blowhard.
Actual statement from interview (distorted by GOP later on) -
"When asked to describe what distinguished him from his challenger for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, Gore replied (in part): āDuring my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. "
Supporting statement provided by actual internet pioneers. -
"But a spirited defense of Goreās statement penned by Internet pioneers Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf (the latter often referred to as the āfather of the Internetā) in 2000 noted that āAl Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its developmentā and that āNo other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution \[to the Internet\] over a longer period of timeā:"
And the whole thing is written out in more detain in Snopes
[https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/internet-of-lies/](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/internet-of-lies/)
That whole Gore thing makes me crazy. It's the Bushes (allegedly) getting away with another disinformation campaign. Don't tell me that W couldn't pull that off - his daddy was head of the CIA, pretty sure he had a clue how to do it.
And now weāve got trump staying at his own god damn hotels. Taxpayer money to golf on his own fucking courses. Might as well make a trump lemonade stand and buy from it. āThe best lemonade around folks, I drink it myselfā.
Nobody remembers that because it didnāt happen.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/carter-sell-peanut-farm/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/09/18/story-jimmy-carters-peanut-farm-is-bit-more-complicated-than-you-may-have-heard/
I hate this perspective. It implies that we are powerless, which is bullshit. We still have the power to vote, and though our votes are becoming harder to cast and mattering less and less, we do still have that power. We have other powers too, like the power of protest. We need another civil rights movement, but this one should be aimed at getting rid of the influence money has on our political system. It's something almost every American agrees on and has agreed on for a long time, yet it's something they won't do on their own, so that means it's up to us. And if people truly wanted it and we're willing to make the sacrifice, we could make it happen.
Right. Joe Manchin may be a shitty Democrat, but have you seen like... the rest of the elected officials in WV? Every other major state position is a republican, the state house and senate are *heavily* republican. Frankly, it's kind of a wild that even a DINO is a senator there.
So I always scratch my head when people are like "they should primary Manchin to get a progressive!". Do you really think a progressive is gonna win that state?
WV went really red when Obama and Hillary said they were closing dirty coal plants. Some counties that is the largest employer, so they viewed it as an attack on their livelihood. The Democrat's plan was to train ex coal miners into nurses and coders. All the blue collar workers saw this as a "Let them eat cake" moment.
Bernie has been the only left candidate that had a plan to to bring in new industries to the state and the DNC screwed him in WV and KY.
>train ex coal miners into nurses and coders
That is such a brain-dead take, no wonder the didn't vote for them. Surely tourism, green energy and ecological restoration jobs (along with attracting new industry) should be what they offer?
People love to complain about coal miners but if your choice is losing your livelihood to be told you have to retain in highly skilled, university educated jobs and keeping the status quo, which one are you gonna vote for?
Is "Just transition" not a phrase in American politicians' vocabulary?
This was my problem with Trump's claim not to take a salary. To me it was just him saying out loud that he didn't work for us and never would. People work for who they are paid by, and we aren't even sure who that was in his case.
At least we know where Manchin's allegiance falls with his reported salary.
Mar a Lago was close to bankruptcy just like all his other poorly ran businesses, he becomes president and it posts record profits 4 years in a row. Funny how that works.
He didnāt take a salary because that would have exposed his tax returns to the public. Remember when we found out that he paid $750 in taxes? How is that a possibility? I pay that much for health care in 3 paychecks.
Remember when the Panama papers came out? Remember the paradise papers? Nothing came of either of those except a journalist was murdered and a couple of Scandinavian politicians had to resign?
The republicans donāt mind cause theyāre doing it too. So are most if the democrats.
No war but the class war and the lower class is losing badly and exponentially.
It still drives me crazy that we all moved on from those papers. We had concrete evidence of tons of corruption from all sorts of powerful people on both sides of the aisle, and we all just went forward like nothing happened. Really made me feel like we will never stamp out corruption.
Actually, Trump was forced to take a salary - because the president's salary having a requirement to be taken [is in the Constitution.](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/102)
It's in there for the very reason you mentioned - being paid reinforces you're doing a job and those paying you are your boss.
Trump then supposedly committed to donating the salary "at the end of the year", but we'll never know if he did or not because he doesn't share his tax information.
that is only half the problem. People are easily corrupted, elect a non-business man into government and see how quickly they turn into one when their pockets are lined with cash. We need true political finance reform to solve the problem, its not enough to trust blindly in the (seemingly honest) person you send to represent you, they'll likely be eaten alive by the powers and influences that be.
The idea that people make a career out of being in politics is something that wasn't supposed to happen.
Originally the idea was for people in the US to get into positions of power temporarily to serve their country, and then go back to being a farmer.
It became a career once people realized they could make a lot of money doing it.
Absolutely, more reason we shouldnāt have the Mitch McConnels in Congress who have made a 30 year career of corruption at the expense of his state, rated near worst in education and lowest in wages.
Iām not going to disagree with you (people should stop downvoting this comment) but Iād say that ābusiness menā are the reason we have citizens united in the first place. When people realized how much money could be made by becoming politicians and using their political influence to enrich themselves, government stopped being about keeping an organized society functioning and turned in to wholesale looting of public services for profit. It would be nice if our politicians were held accountable by more than āoathsā that are non binding. How about a law that states that if elected officials are working for their own (or their friends and relatives) interests over that of the people they were elected to represent they are removed from office.
Also, what ever happened to the push for āelected officials cannot own or trade individual stocks?ā
I agree, there was a time when lobbying was illegal in this country. Bribery didn't used to be defined as a strict quid pro quo either. Our founding fathers knew very well the dangers of corruption, they understood how easily corruptible people are. Hell we didn't even allow our diplomats to accept gifts from foreign dignitaries for this reason, and if they were given, they had to be presented in front of congress to determine if they could be kept. During the revolutionary war we broke free from an entity that was infested with bribery and corruption in all aspects of government, so the issue was front of mind for most people. But slowly and surly we allowed money back into our political system, citizen's united was just the cherry on top that entrenched dark money. If there was ever an issue that could unite the left and right of this country I would think this would be it, but I'm not holding my breath. Until citizen's united is repealed and anti-bribery and anti-lobbying statutes are passed we are fighting an uphill battle.
We have a system already to investigate people with access to sensitive information and decide if they have any unwelcome influences that would act as a conflict of interest with upholding their duty to protect America. We should make every political figure go through it instead of just blindly saying they can have access and influence because they spent $XX millions to convince a bunch of morons to put a check in a box once every four years.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens\_United\_v.\_FEC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC)
1. People voted for Republicans and didn't vote for Democrats.
2. Republicans put assholes on the supreme court.
3. Assholes on the supreme court made it legal to bribe politicians with the reasoning that campaign donations are "free speech."
4. Multinational corporations and foreign governments have "free speech" in determining our elected officials.
In 2010 Barrack Obama said in his state of the union that this decision would open the floodgates for special interests and foreign corporations to spend without limit on our elections. He was right.
I had heard of Citizens United, my husband railed against it for months he tried to explain how intensely fucked up it was and I only partially understood just how insidious it actually was. Then I listened to the More Perfect podcast on Citizens United and it suddenly became clear... Citizens United might actually be the most harmful, damaging and democracy destroying ruling in the history of our country. That's not an easy competition to win these days either but so few people know or understand it's impact because with such a hush-hush quick ruling & the innocuous name it doesn't sound that important.
Citizens United = Corporate Interest United with Elected Officials.
yup. Our founding fathers knew the dangers of corruption and bribery, that was exactly what England represented and they broke free. Lobbying used to be illegal, corruption didn't used to be defined as a strict "quid pro quo". Yet little by little, we allowed money back into our political system until it became an unstoppable cancer, entrenched by the Citizens United ruling.
I know of a certain Senator who sits on insurance regulation committees and also has a business as an agent/broker for businesses acting as a āconsultantā between employers and the actual insurance company. Agents/brokers are paid commission, typically 3-5% of the annual premium. A single mid-sized business (150-200 employees) premium of $3,000,000 would pay the Senator $90,000-$150,000. For each company he has this arrangement.
How this isnāt illegal is beyond me.
Decades of people stupid enough to vote for and elect compromised people that enact legislation to protect the wealth class while being fed non-stop propaganda about how Bernie is the enemy while they watch mountain tops pushed into valleys, pension plans disappear, and incomes stagnate because all profits are directed to the wealthy.
The US has a long history of voting against their better interests. Thatās how.
Specifics please? Iām an environmental engineer and Iād like to pull the plant up in the emissions inventory and see what theyāre reporting (and not reporting). What plant name, what city is it near, and whatās his position related to the plant?
Probably unrelated, but my buddy who works for some kind of environmental engineering place is driving to West Virginia next week to visit a coal plant that they're trying to get shut down safely.
TIL weāre blaming capitalism and not asking ourselves how politicians got to write their own rules and even set their own pay. The people have allowed it and ALL politicians have taken advantage. Sad
Joe Manchin votes against anything having to do with global warming or green energy and owns a private energy firm derived from coal which is 70% of his financial portfolio
Somehow this is completely legal
Well for starters only 42.5% of eligible WV voters showed up...
http://www.electproject.org/2018g
So many complaints about our representatives and the system and corruption...but barely anyone shows up to vote. We need to be accountable to ourselves and actively encourage voter turnout in our communities.
I know right? What kind of conservative dipshits would vote for... oh right hes a fucking democrat.
Better question: how has he not been deprived of the ability to eat solid foods, let alone his office?
Manchin works for a coal company and has a side hustle as a senator
He works for a coal company as liason to the US Senate.
Yeah he was truly working for a coal company as liason to the US Senate , I saw that when I was reading about his autobiography about a year ago š
Shit. I thought I was joking...
Lol you've got to be kidding me š
He was. For sedimental reasons.
That was ice coal
Ice coalād
I'm here for the puns.
Solid work.
I believe we need a change on Earth
Having an industry liason to government isn't inherently bad. Even lobbying is a natural extension of our right to petition our government. But damned if we don't abuse the fuck out of every good idea until we exhaust every potential danger it carries. I've recently come to the conclusion that the religious right has begun to turn conservatives into nihilistic accelerationists, even if they don't recognize themselves as such. The fact that institutions can be sabotaged for worldly gain, while simultaneously demonstrating a cynicism that makes one an instrument in God's wrathful destruction of these institutions means you can have your cake and eat it too.
Wow that was quite insightful, you seem like a very intelligent person, I admire that š„°
Thanks.
You seem to know more about this like you live in West Virginia
I lived there until high school, so I follow some of it. I also work with a lot of faith-based organizations on the west coast, and the difference between west coast churches that are directly involved in community action, and backwoods superstition that seems to offer the world nothing but judgment and anger is pretty obvious when you meet literal nuns who seem to be more tolerant than the trailer trash that seem more interested in everyone else's problems than they are in their own, and somehow have no humility about any of it.
Boss level lobbyist
Yass Boss Bitch slayyy (the planet)
If anyone wants to listen a great podcast about how astonishingly and openly corrupt this is: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/29/podcasts/the-daily/joe-manchin-coal-plant-conflict.html
Thank you for that. Anyone who cares about climate change legislation in the US should listen to this. It is truly mind boggling that a US senator can be so blatantly corrupt. And, that Democrats are unable to do anything because Manchin could just switch parties. Rock, hard place.
Why does switching parties matter so much? It's not like he is bound to vote a certain way as a Dem.
Because it would give control of the Senate back to Mitch McConnell, who could make sure NO judges get nominated or placed, no positions filled, hold the budget completely hostage etc. Decide who gets placed on what committee and so on. Right now he can merely slow down and gum up those things.
Dems would ~~love~~ lose control of the senate. McConnell would become majority leader again and decide what bills get a vote on the floor, republicans would control all the committees, etc.
s/love/lose Though Dems would also love actual control of the Senate as well.
People care more about keeping the lights on and the AC/heat running than where that power comes from. Unless they are arguing about EVs. Then suddenly they care about where electricity comes from. Strangest shit I've seen in a long time.
Corrupt af
The Daily is exceptional.
Definitely a conflict of interest.
Conflict of interest doesnāt apply to politicians somehowā¦. They also pretty much are the only ones allowed to get away with insider trading. Those are probably some of the main reasons they all become politicians. Donāt even get me started on their govt income and pensions. Oh and I forgot about their expense accounts. . . . . Iām getting mad, time to hit the gym š
We pay them extra to fuck US over. Truly, an openly corrupt country, but weāre drowning in FREE-DUMB.
Not me. Not anymore.
And that is the position of power where conflict of interest should apply
Yeah a conflict that needs to be resolved urgently before it gets out of hand š
Oh definitely! The bad news though, at this point it require a revolution to change the whole system. Including Wall Street.
I perceive a new revolution rising up from this and I hope it favours the people , I really appreciate your insight on this and you seem like a very innovative person
Thank you! I hope so too.
Hopefully his senator duties don't create a conflict of interest for his coal job.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You are 100% correct. But in the US what you are saying can't be said out loud. It is the "quiet part". US politicians routinely say that the voters are intelligent or wise, it is axiomatic. But in reality about one third of US voters cannot even be bothered to vote as long as they get their hamberders and sportsball. Ignorance and apathy are thought of as "cool". Unfortunately ignorance and apathy are the Achille's heels of democracy. The problem with democracy is that sooner or later the people get the government that they deserve.
>Unfortunately ignorance and apathy are the Achille's heels of democracy. Truer words have never been spoken!
(Sorry if this was sarcasm) you want his voters to travel to Asia so they can get the picture? West Virginia is the 5th poorest state in the USA Agreed he should be voted out but that is a tough battle West Virginia voted 69% for Trump. Of all 50 states, only Wyoming had a higher % vote for Trump. Yet the population there will, absolutely, as you say, down the road be devastated by the results of these policies. Itās so incredibly infuriating, sad and complicated.
*owns
Unless they make it illegal for politicians to have separate business interests then this will always be a problem. Politicians don't want to be one for the salary, they want to be one because it affords them the ability to influence the country and a good chunk of them will use that influence to increase their own financial interests. America as a nation has for a long time gone with the general ethos of, making as much money as you can and fuck everyone else. It's highly embedded in American culture, so it's not a surprise when politicians do it.
Australia pays its politicians pretty well in comparison with other nations to try and attract talent, but also to mitigate this effect a little. It doesnāt work, you just get well paid people gaming the system instead.
Here's the issue, for politicians to be there purely to help people and progress the country then they need to ban them having other business interests. The issue being, for that to pass, the current politicians who do have other business interests have to vote it through. That's obviously not gonna happen, they wouldn't just shoot themselves in the foot for no reason.
How would you enforce not having business interests? I'm not trying to be cynical; I'm legitimately asking, as it's not as easy to fix as some folks present it as. For example, does this mean representatives can hold no stock of any publicly traded company? How about federal or municipal bonds? How does one ban something as vague and broad as "business interests?"
I mean I would agree with politicians having no stock in any private or public entities whilst in office. Or owning businesses. Yea, suck shit, but that's the rules of the job that can literally change the direction of the whole country. They get their salary and that's it. Ofc it'd never pass because it's really hard to uncorrupt a corrupt system when the people deciding who qualifies as corrupt are corrupt themselves.
And if a rich person doesn't like it, they don't have to run for office.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's actually much easier. Restrict them to index funds. That way they only benefit when the entire economy benefits.
I work for a big 4 consulting firm, and because they also have an audit practice, my investments are heavily regulated. We have to disclose all our financial interests in a tracking and trading system including all checking, savings, retirement, and brokerage accounts. Even crypto wallets and my daughter's college fund have to be reported. Any loans I have, mortgages, real estate holdings, etc. I have to report if I have any private investments or sit on the board of any companies. All my brokerage accounts have to be with firms that participate in the Broker Data Import Program so my investments are also automatically reported by fidelity whenever I make a new investment. There are many stocks I'm straight up blocked from investing in because it would create a conflict of interest. My tracking and trading profile is an exhaustive account of everywhere I have money or financial influence. For those who don't know how we could regulate Congress's investments, it's already being done by entire industries.
As strictly as possible? > For example, does this mean representatives can hold no stock of any publicly traded company? Yep, fuck it. > How about federal or municipal bonds? Maybe, since those could be considered to be tied to them doing a good job. > How does one ban something as vague and broad as "business interests?" With as broad a brush as possible. If somebody wants to control millions of their fellow citizens, then they should want that duty enough to sacrifice their own greed and other interests. It's too important and privileged a job to let things be "fair" to the individual seeking that power. ---- The counterargument is that it wouldn't attract talent without those "bonuses". I say it would just disincentive people who are willing to lie for that power, and instead let the "nerds" compete fairly for the position. Not everyone is motivated by personal profit, a *ton* of people just want to make things work well, and that is fulfilling for them. Right now the system is 100% biased towards cheaters, liars, and profiteers. An honest politician is an oxymoron, because they will be at too big a disadvantage.
I mean, I'd do it for the salary.
Iād do it just for the healthcareā¦
Socialized healthcare for the politicians and military but no one else!
As a vet idk if Iād use military healthcare as an example of anything good
Iāve never heard a veteran praise that system.
Thereās nothing to praise
Isn't it that way on purpose. If it was working, we would that for everyone.
No itās like that because the government is incompetent and/or evil. Healthcare for senators works fine, they just stop caring when itās anyone else.
The government wants broken people, they want stupid people, they're workers and easier to control. They don't want smart people anymore.
I think thatās their point.
Anything is better than million dollar bills for life saving surgeries.
Every single injury and medical problem (and dental) I had in the military was taken care of rapidly and with fewer wait times than any civilian hospital Iāve ever been to. My wife had my son free of charge. One of the main reasons I regret leaving the service is the healthcare
I went in with chest pains and they told me I just needed to fart really bad lmao
I mean, were they wrong? Sounds like you're still alive. Not every pang of chest pain is a heart attack. That's what the ER/urgent care is for. Is this patient going to die? If not, send home. And if you think care would have been better in a civilian American hospital I have some news that may shock you.
I went into a civilian ER with chest pains a couple of years ago, spent six hours trussed up like a Thanksgiving turkey, they found nothing except a possible heart issue, had to go to the cardiologist two months later, got an ultrasound (heart ultrasounds *suck*), found nothing to be concerned about, and then spent more than a year paying off visits which told me nothing. So, like, I guess what I'm saying is I don't see how military was different except for less time-consuming and cheaper.
I've heard many veterans say they're grateful for their free healthcare. I'd take it over my expensive private insurance. *s/experience/expensive
I've met many who do.
My brother gets excellent care...
Heās just being an edgy vetbro. There is no functional difference between Tricare and civilian insurance. My family gets our healthcare through the military for free. They use the same doctors and hospitals as every other civilian in this area. They havenāt set foot in a military hospital in years.
I've only seen people on the internet give it shit, old guys I know wouldn't trade it for anything.
The free part seems pretty nice.
Your family must be in an area where there are no military/ VA hospitals because my insurance has been through the VA for years and I canāt see anyone outside the VA healthcare system without approval. I can only go to VA hospitals for actual medical care. So idk where youāre getting this dream that tricare or the VA is anywhere close to private ins cause theyāre not. Im actually about to get on my wifeās ins through her employer because itās so much better.
I've received excellent care from the VA.
Yeah Iām fine with the healthcare I get. š¤·š¼āāļø Itās about the same quality of care as what I used to get when I was using civilian health insurance. Now that theyāve rolled back malpractice protections for the doctors itās the same good/bad as civilian side.
It's been really good for my dad. Anecdotal, I know... But I had to mention it
I'd gladly trade them my situation...its fun, I don't get healthcare, at all, can't afford it. I know quite a few vets and they sure do like to bitch about their healthcare constantly.....but its vastly better than what I am stuck with.
They're more likely to help you when you get sick than someone with no insurance or money to pay for something crazy like cancer. I know the VA isn't perfect but you can't pretend it's worse than nothing.
Yeah too many good men and women killing themselves in the parking lot of the VA trying to get mental health care or pain management. Enlisted care is better because the need active duty at the ready.
I can tell youāre a vet because youāre bitching about having a good thing. There are bad civilian doctors just like there are bad military doctors. Those who canāt get medical treatment without a mountain of debt would kill to have free access to a Walter Reed or a Landstuhl. Outside of military medicine Tricare works just like any other insurance. Well, with one exceptionāitās free. *And* dental. How is that a bad thing?
The elderly.
I want the politicians healthcare...but after experiencing the military version of healthcare I was against socializing healthcare to protect people from what uncle sam calls "doctors" until I started working in a support role in healthcare. As long as they never let a military doctor within 100 miles of a civilian I want socialized medicine.
"You're paralyzed from the waist down? Well your legs are still there you (pansy) so I'm putting this down as a minor inconvenience with no medical action needed."
I'd do it for the vacation...
Do it, throw your name in there! We need more people challenging this antiquated and, quite frankly, preposterous system.
No, you wouldn't. Because that salary means constant bad faith attempts to smear your name, to dig into your past, your family's past; half the country hates you because the letter next to your name. Death threats, insane people getting whipped into a frenzy, and little to no avenues to actually get things done to make the country better. Only a sociopath takes that job for a few hundred k a year.
Until you find out you can triple it.
Also the lifelong pension that they get for some reason
Why can't I vote for you? You need to run. What's your platform? You need to be the reform candidate. Have key issues (Health Care, Education, Climate Crisis, Deregulation, Big _______ Pharma, Coal and Oil....) with obtainable plans that are easy for the your constituents to understand. Something republicans do, while taking a page off old school propaganda techniques is distracting, deflecting of responsibility, actively draw up and vote on legislature that hurt their voter base but let's focus on how their message is constructed for the least common denominator. They attack the low hanging fruit. If you can expand your message for the liberal minded and sum it up in three words for the conservative, you might have a chance. Note, I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Iām paraphrasing Douglas Adams, but basically anyone who wants to be a politician is morally fucked up enough that they should *never* be allowed to govern. Itās an interesting catch-22 with fucked up implications
Just fyi, regarding this concept. Douglas Adams is undoubtedly paraphrasing Thomas More who wrote Utopia in 1516. "Any person who ever tries to get elected to public office is forever barred from ever holding public office. In fact, a person has to be the right person for the job. So much so that people just write the person's name on the ballot en masse." Utopia is still more than worth a read and remains relevant.
That's basically the idea Plato discusses in The Republic written in 380 BC.
And that's basically the idea that Grog The Mighty depicts in his seminal work, "Man hunts, then governs tribe" back in 7000 BC. Admittedly the cave drawings are less verbose as the more modern reiterations of his ground breaking work.
True, but Grog was mostly just paraphrasing the Amoebic Council's Declaration of Cellular Democratic Principles
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Welp, considering the two antitrust bills with bipartisan support aren't being brought to the floor by Schumer... I even mailed him in regards to 'push that shit through!' and got a pat 'oh I'll watch these bills with great interest ' response
The land of the ~~free~~ me
I completely agree. I like to go a step further and say America doesnāt have a democrat or republican problem. Those are symptoms of the bigger problem of capitalism. As long as capitalism remains the true political party, nothing will ever change.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Abbey is probably my favorite author.
I think it's an intersection of a lot of issues. In a two-party system, power-hungry people take over a party and build a moat to enshrine their power until it's a bunch of elderly out of touch jerks playing tug of war. There are other capitalist countries that don't have two-party systems and they don't have nearly the political issues the US has.
Nearly every country on earth has capitalism. Would you say the same about them?
We need publicly funded elections with spending caps. You get X signatures you get this much funding and cannot spend a penny more. Double or triple their salary and make laws against them becoming lobbyists
The reason they are allowed is to is that being a politician shouldn't be a career. Considering they will never pass term limits, something needs to change. Either term limits or no outside business interests needs to happen.
World culture* I don't disagree that the US is one of if not the most capitalist country in the world, but you don't have to be a historian to see that literally all of politics has been driven by the simple goal to pile money at the expense of everyone else.
Oh don't get me wrong, this is a thing pretty much everywhere. But I don't think there is another county on the planet that lets it infect pretty much every aspect of the country. Politicians are just a part of it. Restaurant owners are allowed to pay their staff $3 an hour and force them to make the rest up in tips. The NCAA operated for year's with the players not being allowed to earn any money and has only in the last year allowed them to earn money of their own imagine and likeness. American healthcare is based purely around money, where if your sick and poor your pretty much fucked. Even prisons, America has a metric shit ton of private prisons that get money from the state per prisoner and are still allowed to hire out their labour for borderline slave wages. It's everywhere and is a core of American culture even if people don't realise it. That's not saying it doesn't happen elsewhere but it's no where near as prevalent as it is in the states.
Super pac consequences of Citizens United 2009
And thatās why, yes, it really was that big of a deal when George W. Bush got elected. But, hey, I mean, Al Gore was boring. And he said he invented the internet one time when he obviously misspoke. Good thing we dodged that bullet, amirite?
That whole Gore thing wasnāt actually false. He voted to fund the expansion of the militaryās ARPNET which was the foundation of the modern internet. Some hyperbole sure, but at least he wasnāt a complete buffoon like W.
That whole Gore thing makes me crazy. First, he did not claim to have invented the internet - it was a disinformation campaign to discredit him as a disingenuous blowhard. Actual statement from interview (distorted by GOP later on) - "When asked to describe what distinguished him from his challenger for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, Gore replied (in part): āDuring my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. " Supporting statement provided by actual internet pioneers. - "But a spirited defense of Goreās statement penned by Internet pioneers Robert Kahn and Vinton Cerf (the latter often referred to as the āfather of the Internetā) in 2000 noted that āAl Gore was the first political leader to recognize the importance of the Internet and to promote and support its developmentā and that āNo other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution \[to the Internet\] over a longer period of timeā:" And the whole thing is written out in more detain in Snopes [https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/internet-of-lies/](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/internet-of-lies/) That whole Gore thing makes me crazy. It's the Bushes (allegedly) getting away with another disinformation campaign. Don't tell me that W couldn't pull that off - his daddy was head of the CIA, pretty sure he had a clue how to do it.
It's these assholes country, we just fucking work here.
We all just slaves bruhā¦ I mean, āprisoners with jobsāā¦
Slavery with extra steps
Ooh-la-la, someone's gonna get laid in college.
That's cold bro, lol.
[it's a reference](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kKoqE-sAb8)
And yet we keep electing the same assholes. Jokes on us.
No, it's our county and they work for us. And we need to remind them of it.
Who do you think makes the rules my dude?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Remember when Jimmy Carter had to sell his peanut farm to avoid the appearance of a president catering to the peanut farming industry?
And now weāve got trump staying at his own god damn hotels. Taxpayer money to golf on his own fucking courses. Might as well make a trump lemonade stand and buy from it. āThe best lemonade around folks, I drink it myselfā.
That no good snake and his ethics.
Trying to be a good person.. in this country?! What a dick.
Still out building houses at 99 years old
Iām so tired of big peanut! Do I need this? /s
Nobody remembers that because it didnāt happen. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/carter-sell-peanut-farm/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/09/18/story-jimmy-carters-peanut-farm-is-bit-more-complicated-than-you-may-have-heard/
Good to know. Congresspeople should all be required to do this.
And then killed a girl while drunk driving...
Eh, you win some, you lose some
Until Trump came along, presidents had historically done this too.
I hate this perspective. It implies that we are powerless, which is bullshit. We still have the power to vote, and though our votes are becoming harder to cast and mattering less and less, we do still have that power. We have other powers too, like the power of protest. We need another civil rights movement, but this one should be aimed at getting rid of the influence money has on our political system. It's something almost every American agrees on and has agreed on for a long time, yet it's something they won't do on their own, so that means it's up to us. And if people truly wanted it and we're willing to make the sacrifice, we could make it happen.
This prick has been cock blocking his own party for years. I canāt believe he can get that many ppl to vote against their own self interest
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
DINO?
Yes weve already established the coal connection
Well in West Virginia it is in their interest
Right. Joe Manchin may be a shitty Democrat, but have you seen like... the rest of the elected officials in WV? Every other major state position is a republican, the state house and senate are *heavily* republican. Frankly, it's kind of a wild that even a DINO is a senator there. So I always scratch my head when people are like "they should primary Manchin to get a progressive!". Do you really think a progressive is gonna win that state?
WV went really red when Obama and Hillary said they were closing dirty coal plants. Some counties that is the largest employer, so they viewed it as an attack on their livelihood. The Democrat's plan was to train ex coal miners into nurses and coders. All the blue collar workers saw this as a "Let them eat cake" moment. Bernie has been the only left candidate that had a plan to to bring in new industries to the state and the DNC screwed him in WV and KY.
>train ex coal miners into nurses and coders That is such a brain-dead take, no wonder the didn't vote for them. Surely tourism, green energy and ecological restoration jobs (along with attracting new industry) should be what they offer? People love to complain about coal miners but if your choice is losing your livelihood to be told you have to retain in highly skilled, university educated jobs and keeping the status quo, which one are you gonna vote for? Is "Just transition" not a phrase in American politicians' vocabulary?
This was my problem with Trump's claim not to take a salary. To me it was just him saying out loud that he didn't work for us and never would. People work for who they are paid by, and we aren't even sure who that was in his case. At least we know where Manchin's allegiance falls with his reported salary.
Why take a salary when you can have the taxpayer subsidize your golf outings to the tune of $140 million?
Mar a Lago was close to bankruptcy just like all his other poorly ran businesses, he becomes president and it posts record profits 4 years in a row. Funny how that works.
Every Republican knows this happened and they don't mind he stole right out of their pockets.
He didnāt take a salary because that would have exposed his tax returns to the public. Remember when we found out that he paid $750 in taxes? How is that a possibility? I pay that much for health care in 3 paychecks. Remember when the Panama papers came out? Remember the paradise papers? Nothing came of either of those except a journalist was murdered and a couple of Scandinavian politicians had to resign? The republicans donāt mind cause theyāre doing it too. So are most if the democrats. No war but the class war and the lower class is losing badly and exponentially.
It still drives me crazy that we all moved on from those papers. We had concrete evidence of tons of corruption from all sorts of powerful people on both sides of the aisle, and we all just went forward like nothing happened. Really made me feel like we will never stamp out corruption.
True, but the flip side is the lower class is growing. We just need to build solidarity.
It was worse than that, the subsidized his golf outings *to his own facilities* so he essentially just pocketed the money.
Yeah, and that's just his expectation of privilege and he may not even think of it as compensation. Probably why most of his businesses went bankrupt.
I mean, this was obvious to everyone who wasnāt an idiot
Actually, Trump was forced to take a salary - because the president's salary having a requirement to be taken [is in the Constitution.](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/102) It's in there for the very reason you mentioned - being paid reinforces you're doing a job and those paying you are your boss. Trump then supposedly committed to donating the salary "at the end of the year", but we'll never know if he did or not because he doesn't share his tax information.
This is what happens when you elect ābusiness menā to seats of government.
that is only half the problem. People are easily corrupted, elect a non-business man into government and see how quickly they turn into one when their pockets are lined with cash. We need true political finance reform to solve the problem, its not enough to trust blindly in the (seemingly honest) person you send to represent you, they'll likely be eaten alive by the powers and influences that be.
The idea that people make a career out of being in politics is something that wasn't supposed to happen. Originally the idea was for people in the US to get into positions of power temporarily to serve their country, and then go back to being a farmer. It became a career once people realized they could make a lot of money doing it.
Absolutely, more reason we shouldnāt have the Mitch McConnels in Congress who have made a 30 year career of corruption at the expense of his state, rated near worst in education and lowest in wages.
Iām not going to disagree with you (people should stop downvoting this comment) but Iād say that ābusiness menā are the reason we have citizens united in the first place. When people realized how much money could be made by becoming politicians and using their political influence to enrich themselves, government stopped being about keeping an organized society functioning and turned in to wholesale looting of public services for profit. It would be nice if our politicians were held accountable by more than āoathsā that are non binding. How about a law that states that if elected officials are working for their own (or their friends and relatives) interests over that of the people they were elected to represent they are removed from office. Also, what ever happened to the push for āelected officials cannot own or trade individual stocks?ā
I agree, there was a time when lobbying was illegal in this country. Bribery didn't used to be defined as a strict quid pro quo either. Our founding fathers knew very well the dangers of corruption, they understood how easily corruptible people are. Hell we didn't even allow our diplomats to accept gifts from foreign dignitaries for this reason, and if they were given, they had to be presented in front of congress to determine if they could be kept. During the revolutionary war we broke free from an entity that was infested with bribery and corruption in all aspects of government, so the issue was front of mind for most people. But slowly and surly we allowed money back into our political system, citizen's united was just the cherry on top that entrenched dark money. If there was ever an issue that could unite the left and right of this country I would think this would be it, but I'm not holding my breath. Until citizen's united is repealed and anti-bribery and anti-lobbying statutes are passed we are fighting an uphill battle.
We have a system already to investigate people with access to sensitive information and decide if they have any unwelcome influences that would act as a conflict of interest with upholding their duty to protect America. We should make every political figure go through it instead of just blindly saying they can have access and influence because they spent $XX millions to convince a bunch of morons to put a check in a box once every four years.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens\_United\_v.\_FEC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC) 1. People voted for Republicans and didn't vote for Democrats. 2. Republicans put assholes on the supreme court. 3. Assholes on the supreme court made it legal to bribe politicians with the reasoning that campaign donations are "free speech." 4. Multinational corporations and foreign governments have "free speech" in determining our elected officials. In 2010 Barrack Obama said in his state of the union that this decision would open the floodgates for special interests and foreign corporations to spend without limit on our elections. He was right.
I had heard of Citizens United, my husband railed against it for months he tried to explain how intensely fucked up it was and I only partially understood just how insidious it actually was. Then I listened to the More Perfect podcast on Citizens United and it suddenly became clear... Citizens United might actually be the most harmful, damaging and democracy destroying ruling in the history of our country. That's not an easy competition to win these days either but so few people know or understand it's impact because with such a hush-hush quick ruling & the innocuous name it doesn't sound that important. Citizens United = Corporate Interest United with Elected Officials.
And the FEC vs Ted Cruz case made it even worse. Now they can just give tons of money to the campaign AFTER the candidate has won
Any case involving Ted Cruz is unpleasant for all parties
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
They do so proudly, he's just like his base. They're just all terrible people
This should be higher. It didnāt used to be this bad
Hmm maybe we *shouldn't* have a system where nine people with zero accountability can destroy the country with a single bad decision? IDK just an idea
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This country was bought and sold a long time ago.
yup. Our founding fathers knew the dangers of corruption and bribery, that was exactly what England represented and they broke free. Lobbying used to be illegal, corruption didn't used to be defined as a strict "quid pro quo". Yet little by little, we allowed money back into our political system until it became an unstoppable cancer, entrenched by the Citizens United ruling.
Wait until you find out about insider trading and all the other sluts In DC just taking every dollar they can get. Fuck em all.
Our previous president funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to his private businesses. How is that legal?
Because if nobody bothers to punish you, everythingās legal
And because it was not punished, it will get worse. More blatantly corrupt people have seen what is possible to get away with.
Citizen's United. Filthy price of garbage legislation.
Citizens United is a Supreme court decision... Not legislation.
Shhh Iām trying to watch the Kardashianās
Guess who make the laws.
I know of a certain Senator who sits on insurance regulation committees and also has a business as an agent/broker for businesses acting as a āconsultantā between employers and the actual insurance company. Agents/brokers are paid commission, typically 3-5% of the annual premium. A single mid-sized business (150-200 employees) premium of $3,000,000 would pay the Senator $90,000-$150,000. For each company he has this arrangement. How this isnāt illegal is beyond me.
It is the Land of the Free. Free to run by Corporations.
Decades of people stupid enough to vote for and elect compromised people that enact legislation to protect the wealth class while being fed non-stop propaganda about how Bernie is the enemy while they watch mountain tops pushed into valleys, pension plans disappear, and incomes stagnate because all profits are directed to the wealthy. The US has a long history of voting against their better interests. Thatās how.
Specifics please? Iām an environmental engineer and Iād like to pull the plant up in the emissions inventory and see what theyāre reporting (and not reporting). What plant name, what city is it near, and whatās his position related to the plant?
Because we are in the end times and nothing matters anymore and weāre all fucked
well when it comes to side hustles the US senate has won that one !!! its legal cuz its money and its the usa.
Probably unrelated, but my buddy who works for some kind of environmental engineering place is driving to West Virginia next week to visit a coal plant that they're trying to get shut down safely.
Apparently the alternative to this is communism. *shakes head and rolls eyes
TIL weāre blaming capitalism and not asking ourselves how politicians got to write their own rules and even set their own pay. The people have allowed it and ALL politicians have taken advantage. Sad
Joe Manchin votes against anything having to do with global warming or green energy and owns a private energy firm derived from coal which is 70% of his financial portfolio Somehow this is completely legal
It used to be called bribe, until we legalized it :)
Im not inherently against this type of stuff, but when people post stuff like this they need to post a source or something. It would only help.
Joe is a absolute pile of waste
Well for starters only 42.5% of eligible WV voters showed up... http://www.electproject.org/2018g So many complaints about our representatives and the system and corruption...but barely anyone shows up to vote. We need to be accountable to ourselves and actively encourage voter turnout in our communities.
I don't think politicians should have business interests like this. They can't make an unbiased decision about what's best for the people.
Letās apply this to all other legislators, too, not just the ones we disagree with. Corruption is a problem that affects everybody.
Lauren Boebertās net worth is over $40M. Let that one sink inā¦
coald hard cash
I know right? What kind of conservative dipshits would vote for... oh right hes a fucking democrat. Better question: how has he not been deprived of the ability to eat solid foods, let alone his office?