« Not just newspapers |
| Race to the bottom »
Mar 06, 2013 at 04:40 PM | Permalink
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I find this interesting at 17:15...
Seriously, are we a third world nation... a third-world nation... you sit there and plead to private people to fund what is an essential public policy because there is no other way to imagine this public policy being supported except if a bunch of rich people get together and pay for it?
What exactly is wrong with legitimizing one's pet project with private dollars voluntarily contributed?
The assumption seems to be that there is something inherently wrong with having to go directly to the citizen's pocket to fund one's pet projects, that it would be best if we forced those same citizens to fund those pet projects through highly progressive tax rates.
That is nothing but the removal of the voluntary element.
Frankly, projects legitimized by voluntarily donated private dollars via the many citizens are not indicative of third-world nations, but rather, of healthy nations. It is in fact those nations in which the only path to fund a project is through the few in government that we find the social atrophy this fellow laments.
He summarizes that lament and offers a solution at 18:45.
That solution is to, make politicians beholden to government for having funded their campaigns at a ratio of 9 government dollars to every 1 private dollar.
Really? The best government for the citizens is the one in which government is legally bound to bribe politicians at a rate 9 times greater than private citizens can bribe them?
How in the hell would this transfer power to the people?
I truly love listening to Marxists and their Marxist musings; they are true artists in delusion. But sadly my guess is that you, Ed, enjoy him for the agreement.
Mar 07, 2013 at 12:06 PM
I really enjoyed the video and am a big fan of Lawrence Lessig. In this particular case, he really is striking at the root of all the problems we are faced with and offering ideas for how to fix them. They may not be the best ideas but they are a start. Of course you have to see that there is a problem. When 132 people make up 60% of the financing for an election I think there is a problem or when politicians have to spend 80% of their time fundraising I'd say there is a problem. Is that the best government for the citizens?
Polifrog, as an opinionated blog poster I would imagine you would want your opinion to reach more than just Ed Cone. Lessig is talking about ways to make that more possible than today. Surely, there was something in that presentation you liked. Or maybe you are one of the 132 people whose voices are always heard, in which case there is no problem with the election system.
Mar 08, 2013 at 05:16 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.