Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: OzmO on August 16, 2011, 09:19:36 PM
-
I vote yes!
-
I've been screaming this for years, good to see other people waking up to it.
-
there's some serious lines of thought around this. In the direction that brings back a vote for a candidate that reflects the people's wishes. But as you've stated it, it's way to simplified and open to a billion attacks. Can you detail it a bit for more serious comment? what do you have in mind? As stated now, if you just ban all money, you just open it up for the richest candidate to win most of the time... That would not be cool either.
-
Not sure about details. This Dylan Ratican supposedly has some congressman who is going to write a bill on it. Of course it won't pass. But the crux of his assertion was that banks control our county'spolitics and the amendment would end that. I will look into it more and get more details. It was the first time I ever watched his show. He seemed pretty non-party neutral attacking repubs and democrats alike, but really he was just attacking our woefully fucked up hijacked government.
You wanna take money completely out of it preventing rich from uinsg their money I think it's possible to come up with a fair system.
Might should add term limits to congressman too.
He went at Obama pretty good too, surprising for the network his show is on.
-
Not sure about details. This Dylan Ratican supposedly has some congressman who is going to write a bill on it. Of course it won't pass. But the crux of his assertion was that banks control our county'spolitics and the amendment would end that. I will look into it more and get more details. It was the first time I ever watched his show. He seemed pretty non-party neutral attacking repubs and democrats alike, but really he was just attacking our woefully fucked up hijacked government.
You wanna take money completely out of it preventing rich from uinsg their money I think it's possible to come up with a fair system.
Might should add term limits to congressman too.
He went at Obama pretty good too, surprising for the network his show is on.
The only reason I ask for details is because the general idea behind it is good and also the general idea behind it means that it will be the most attacked idea in the history of American politics for obvious reasons.
It's a good issue imo..
On term limits, I've always been a bit leary about supporting that. It does great for making corruption harder but it also screws the population when that once in a while honest guy comes along and does a good job. If the people want to re-elect them, they should kinda have that option to do so imo...
-
I can not fully view this website because I am on my iPad but heres the link to the story on the show. It's about the "central bank" aka the fed.
http://www.dylanratigan.com/2011/08/16/limiting-the-central-banks/ (http://www.dylanratigan.com/2011/08/16/limiting-the-central-banks/)
-
On term limits, I've always been a bit leary about supporting that. It does great for making corruption harder but it also screws the population when that once in a while honest guy comes along and does a good job. If the people want to re-elect them, they should kinda have that option to do so imo...
If money and incentives are removed, corruption will fall dramitically. Not to say there won't be any corruption, there will always be at some level, but without money or other incentives which are the main driving factors in corruption, term limits make even more sense.
-
If money and incentives are removed, corruption will fall dramitically. Not to say there won't be any corruption, there will always be at some level, but without money or other incentives which are the main driving factors in corruption, term limits make even more sense.
that still doesn't change the basic fact that if the people want to re-elect a person, they should have that right. Term limits get past in a fury of anger over what's happening at the time but 10 years later they may regret it watching a person leave office that both he and they want to stay.
I'm just saying, term limits sounds great but will not always work out to a good outcome and that's something to think about.
as far as corruption, they have found a way for hundreds of years, they'll do the same no matter what gets passed.
-
Brilliant idea
-
Yes.
Specifically, what do you mean? To ban lobbying interests?
-
Our founding fathers were genius, so why didn't they include something like this? ???
-
Our founding fathers were genius, so why didn't they include something like this? ???
they couldn't divine the future? lol...
-
Our founding fathers were genius, so why didn't they include something like this? ???
The world was different back then thats why candidates like Bachmann is laughable
-
Yeah, but candidates were bought and sold back then too...
-
I don't agree w such a generic term like this. Infringed on the first amendment way to much.
-
Ban it.. politicians are bought and sold way to easy.
-
-
here's where he talks about "banning money from politics"
-
But as you've stated it, it's way to simplified and open to a billion attacks. Can you detail it a bit for more serious comment? what do you have in mind? As stated now, if you just ban all money, you just open it up for the richest candidate to win most of the time... That would not be cool either.
Pretty much sums it up right there.
-
Pretty much sums it up right there.
Ban lobbying...that is the solution.
-
Ban lobbying...that is the solution.
Nope. Same can of worms Hugo is referring to.
-
Ban lobbying...that is the solution.
Why? I like that I can donate 25 dollars along with millions of others to groups like the NRA to protect my rights.