Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Feb 2013 22:28 UTC, submitted by bowkota
In the News "The last time we looked at Silicon Valley's lobbying efforts, Google was the big spender and Apple the piker. That hasn't changed much in the past nine months. In fact, Google increased its political spending in 2012 - a Presidential election year - by nearly 90%, while Apple reduced its by 13%." Anti-SOPA or no, that's a hell of a lot of money. This should be illegal - it's thinly veiled corruption.
Thread beginning with comment 552863
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Corruption
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Mon 18th Feb 2013 23:25 UTC in reply to "Corruption"
Bill Shooter of Bul
Member since:
2006-07-14

No corruption is actually buying their votes. Lobbying ( if done in a legal manner) is just supposed to be arguing for a policy position with only the carrot/stick of re-election. It is a bit unfair, in that the wealthy are heard much louder than those without the means.

Real corruption is more quid pro quo. Hey, you! Vote my way and I'll drop an envelop of unmarked bills on your doorstep.

Sadly, that's only slightly worse than what is really legal now. Hey, you! vote my way and I'll set up a super pac to support your next election, fueled by unlimited cash to make up slanderous claims against your opponent! Its really citizens united that needs to be repealed more than anything else right now.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Corruption
by kwan_e on Tue 19th Feb 2013 01:37 in reply to "RE: Corruption"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

No corruption is actually buying their votes. Lobbying ( if done in a legal manner) is just supposed to be arguing for a policy position with only the carrot/stick of re-election. It is a bit unfair, in that the wealthy are heard much louder than those without the means.

Real corruption is more quid pro quo.


As a society, we should be evolving towards better government, which means raising the standard for what is considered "uncorrupted".

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Corruption
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 19th Feb 2013 04:16 in reply to "RE[2]: Corruption"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Unfortuantly, the tide is headed out the other direction. If we could just get back to the level of corruption we had 20 years ago, it would be a vast improvement.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Corruption
by WorknMan on Tue 19th Feb 2013 05:39 in reply to "RE[2]: Corruption"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

As a society, we should be evolving towards better government, which means raising the standard for what is considered "uncorrupted".


Do you think that's possible? What you're asking for are people who are qualified to be in the government, who cannot be bought. That seems like a tall order, since there aren't many people like that. And even if we could find some, we'd have to get them elected without using the media, because the media is owned by those who would never allow such a thing to take place under their watch.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Corruption
by l3v1 on Tue 19th Feb 2013 10:09 in reply to "RE: Corruption"
l3v1 Member since:
2005-07-06

arguing for a policy


Yeah, I don't think they originally intended arguing to mean that the argument with the more money backing should win.

Reply Parent Score: 3