sapphi_snake said:
Kasz216 said:
Which is just a convinent way to blame Reagan. There has never been a time where companies weren't rich or powerful enough to influence the government.
Though their tactics are a lot less direct then most people make them out to be with outright claims of bribes and the like.
Whether or not you can blame their influence is really hard to say, since like I said, it was basically something that was really good, that could end up really bad, if something that I don't think has ever happened before. Except possibly due to the great depression.... though oddly there isn't much info on that... because i guess they just didn't record this stuff.
In case of another great depression, everyone would be scerwed anyway, and the same thing basically woulda happened even without it. The government found a way to increase it.
|
I wonder why.
Anyways, corporations' influence in the Government started growing very much during the 20th century, thanks to things like lobbying (which should be illegal IMO), donations to candidates and parties (which should also be illegal IMO), financing political campaigns (which should be state financed). They're pretty much the new dictators.
|
That's overly dramatic.
Corporations influence governments but rarely in the "direct bribe" way that people like to popularize.
The power of lobbying is MUCH less pronounced then that, though still fairly powerful. I mean, say you have two points of view that you are fairly undecided on, and then you know a guy who has one point of view and he's a great guy and he's going out to dinner with you and argeing why this is a good idea while there is noone argueing the other side.
That's pretty effective. Lobbiests value isn't in outright bribing or demanding or anything like that like we like to imagine for entertainment value. It's the power of framing... and they've pretty much ALWAYS had this power. It's just the 20th century is more recent.
As for this in particular. It should be noted that basically everyone thought it was a good idea, because basically nobody thought the government would create a universal downmarket. That's why the movie you watched went out of their way to attack proffessors as well. Because nearly all the experts had said "Hey this is a great Idea." or at least said parts of it were.
Even the usual pocket democrat economists like Krugman who take a position then come up with a justifiction after the fact.
Lobbying is an issue because framing is pretty powerful, but honestly... there are bigger issues with corporations. Microsoft couldn't get new anti-piracy laws passed, so it's trying by a state by state basis... but even then in action the laws will probably be canceled after the legislators realize what the laws are. (They're trying to make it so that if you receive products from companies that use pirated software, you can't sell them. So if you make radios, and you buy radio antenaes from a company that uses a pirated version of excel... you cant't sell your radios. Considering something like 40-60% of buisnesses use pirated software....)
Like Corporations ability to game the legal system and basically force people who are innocent to settle because they can bring to bear their entire finanical pressure against a single dude. See Sony V Hotz... had Hotz not opened up a defense fund he would of already had to settle a case that has no legal standing to even be held in California.
