Money in politics

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

Money in politics

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Money in politics

Page: [1]

[Poll]

Money in politics

Unlimited donations should be in politics

11% (2)

Unlimited donations should not be in politics

5% (1)

Limited donations should be in politics

22% (4)

Limited donations should not be in politics

0% (0)

Dont know

0% (0)

No opinion

0% (0)

Dont care

5% (1)

No one should be able to donate

27% (5)

Companies should not be able to donate

16% (3)

People should not be able to donate

0% (0)

Only federal money should go towards politics

11% (2)

Total Votes : 18

(last vote on : 7/9/2014 8:31:37 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Money in politics - 7/8/2014 4:48:08 PM

Tkman117

Posts: 1353
Joined: 5/21/2012
Status: offline

Was just wondering what your opinions on it are so see if it's a partisan or bi-partisan issue for people.

With the options above, I say unlimited and limited donations I mean donations to political parties and/or candidates either from a company and/or individual people. Just want to clarify that first of all.

Also please voice your opinions if they dont fall under any of the options

< Message edited by Tkman117 -- 7/8/2014 4:49:19 PM >

Profile

Post #: 1

RE: Money in politics - 7/8/2014 5:01:24 PM

deathtothepixies

Posts: 683
Joined: 2/19/2012
Status: offline

how much did the last US election cost?

(in reply to Tkman117)

Profile

Post #: 2

RE: Money in politics - 7/8/2014 5:40:26 PM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: deathtothepixies

how much did the last US election cost?

I think it was $2 billion or thereabouts.

Forgotten in your poll is federal money only and allocated by so much per either registered voter or by primary votes. This gives a demographic edge to the dems but one could argue that's ok because they 'won' the registrants.

For primaries, that would eliminate primary voters crossing party lines. This could be from Jan. 1st or March 1st of any election year starting in 2016. (9-11 mos, prior)

Pacs would continue but we end the argument and IRS involvement by eliminating ALL tax deductability for political elections at all levels as there is no reason for any tax code to subsidize elections.

Put the IRS wasting their time on that to work auditing non-profits at a higher level than they do now. Money would be required to be for areal charitable cause.

Contributions to any political party or party message would not be tax deductible. Most of the party and Pac money is spent in the election year and much of it would dry up. Besides, while message money can finance lies, it doesn't buy influence or votes.

(in reply to deathtothepixies)

Profile

Post #: 3

RE: Money in politics - 7/8/2014 5:57:16 PM

Tkman117

Posts: 1353
Joined: 5/21/2012
Status: offline

I'll see if I can add that, thanks!

There we go, fixed!

< Message edited by Tkman117 -- 7/8/2014 5:59:27 PM >

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Profile

Post #: 4

RE: Money in politics - 7/8/2014 7:25:57 PM

DesideriScuri

Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117
Was just wondering what your opinions on it are so see if it's a partisan or bi-partisan issue for people.
With the options above, I say unlimited and limited donations I mean donations to political parties and/or candidates either from a company and/or individual people. Just want to clarify that first of all.
Also please voice your opinions if they dont fall under any of the options

I'd like to see it limited, across the board.

_____________________________

What I support:

A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
Personal Responsibility
Help for the truly needy
Limited Government
Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Tkman117)

Profile

Post #: 5

RE: Money in politics - 7/8/2014 7:29:37 PM

TheHeretic

Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline

Anyone who isn't afraid of facts that might conflict with the spoonfed opinions they have been given to regurgitate should check with Meg Whitman about the importance of being able to outspend your opponent.

I've gone knocking on doors as a volunteer, gone knocking on doors for a check, and donated money to candidates I like. It's all First Amendment protected participation in the process.

< Message edited by TheHeretic -- 7/8/2014 7:30:25 PM >

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.

(in reply to Tkman117)

Profile

Post #: 6

RE: Money in politics - 7/8/2014 7:29:51 PM

Sanity

Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

Money is speech now, on account of the way we depend on mass media for our information

No one travels the country by rail any more giving speeches at each whistle stop, its all mass media, and if people can't buy access they are effectively silenced

Like speech, political money should be unlimited (and the people should be educated well enough to be discerning)

_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Tkman117)

Profile

Post #: 7

RE: Money in politics - 7/8/2014 8:14:59 PM

joether

Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

I would agree with DS in it being very limited. Say, 1/10th the year's salary of the public office. You can devote it all to your own election campaign, give it to others, or none at all. Would quickly allow middle class folks the chance to run for public office. Since we see what happens when millionaires get into Congress (what is this, the 2nd least productive Congress in 238 years?). Most of them wanted to be elected for their egos rather than that silly notion of 'serving the good people of their district/state'. Corporations, organizations of every stripe are disallowed from donating. Since that would mean a person could 'donate' over the 1/10th limit (and that would be not allowed). And would like all those organizations to give a full disclosure on who has donated. After all, wouldn't it be amusing to find China has been bankrolling the GOP?

When you have to pick between just two cars when looking for new wheels, how much freedom do you have in overlooking the quirks or problems? Not much of any. Compare that to hundreds of cars, makes, models, colors and features? It would force those seeking office to show us actual concrete plans rather than 'a pie in the sky of an idea'. Those up for re-election would have to show they have 'brought home the bacon' for their district/State.

Right now, those people up for election really have no competition. So should any of us be surprised at the 'quality' of our Congress? What is their approval rating these days? 5-12%?

(in reply to Sanity)

Profile

Post #: 8