We're in the money, we're in the money....

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thomas Veil, Apr 10, 2007.

  1. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #1
    ...we've got a lot of what it takes to get along! :D

    US News & World Report

    Of course, it's still absolutely appalling that that kind of money is being spent on campaigns, especially since 95% of these people won't be in the running 15 months from now.

    Nevertheless, it's good (and rather amusing) to see the Dems greatly outpacing the Republicans. Never thought I'd see that in my lifetime...but then again I've seen a lot of things the last six years that I never thought I'd see in my lifetime.
     
  2. princealfie macrumors 68030

    princealfie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Location:
    Salt Lake City UT
    #2
    Yeah but I don't trust either side when the corporations own both political parties. Amen. :mad:
     
  3. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #3
    It's ridiculous that the estimated total campaign cost for the winning candidate in 2008 will be somewhere around $150 million (according to the 6 o'clock BBC news last night). Still, if it keeps another $500 billion from going to the Iraq war it doesn't sound quite as ludicrous...
     
  4. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #4
    Why? It goes to pay salaries of people working in the advertising, broadcasting and consulting services industries, Americans all.
     
  5. princealfie macrumors 68030

    princealfie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Location:
    Salt Lake City UT
    #5
    Hmm... sounds like the people in the 8th and 9th circles of Dante's inferno get paid a lot.
     
  6. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #6
    Because in the end, nothing is produced, so no economic benefit results.
     
  7. princealfie macrumors 68030

    princealfie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Location:
    Salt Lake City UT
    #7
    Yeah advertising doesn't produce a visible product that I know of. And billboards don't count.
     
  8. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #8
    Nothing tangible. But an image of a presidential candidate emerges.
     
  9. atszyman macrumors 68020

    atszyman

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    Location:
    The Dallas 'burbs
    #9
    But wouldn't it be an even better image if you could force all the candidates to run their campaign on the same amount of money? How do they handle limited funds, can they be effective on a shoestring or are they only effective because they can throw money around like candy?

    A good system that put candidates on equal financial footing would show us more about how well they can run an operation than the schmoozing free-for-all we have now where the most money can pull ahead regardless of competence.
     
  10. johnee macrumors 6502a

    johnee

    #10
    With the monetary bar so high, you have to either sell your soul to corp america or have a serendipitous moment (like obama at the DNC) to be a player.

    This is how we determine our president?
     
  11. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #11
    i'm not so sure. i'm finding obama's grassroots fundraising efforts (and let's give some props to howard dean here) refreshing. and i bet a decent sized chunk of it can also be attributed to the bush administration: everyday people are mad, and they've found their guy who they think can change the tone in washington.

    from what i understand, it's ms clinton who's going after the big money contributors. i'm holding out hope this will be a different kind of race.
     
  12. princealfie macrumors 68030

    princealfie

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    Location:
    Salt Lake City UT
    #12
    Yeah, well I can do it a lot cheaper using Class III lasers to produce a hologram of a presidential candidate. No need to spend $150 million on that.
     
  13. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #13
    The point being, moving money from one pocket to another is not an economically productive activity. Spending $1 billion on a presidential campaign is a lot like paying farmers $1 billion to grow crops that will be plowed under. A lot of money changes hands, but nothing is produced.
     
  14. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #14
    Sounds like we're talking about the IRS and the millions involved in supporting the current tax code. If only the same thinking were used to move to the Fair Tax and eliminate these nonproductive jobs.
     
  15. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #15
    Not really (and the "fair tax," isn't). What I'm describing is sort of a variation on the classic "guns and butter" model. No matter how much we spend on a presidential campaign, the product is still the same: one president. It can't be argued that spending more and more to produce the same one president is an economically productive activity. Some people make money, sure. Even in the scenario where billions are spent to pay farmers to grow crops that nobody will ever eat, some people make money. The bottom line is that, in the end, nothing is produced, consequently little or no economic growth results.
     
  16. Thomas Veil thread starter macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #16
    No, nothing is produced. The constantly rising amounts of money are nothing more than an arms race by both sides.
     
  17. it5five macrumors 65816

    it5five

    Joined:
    May 31, 2006
    Location:
    New York
    #17
    I had heard on NPR (and I don't have the exact figure) that Obama had twice as many donors as Clinton. Most of Hillary's money comes from big donors, most of Obamas from small online donations.
     
  18. MongoTheGeek macrumors 68040

    MongoTheGeek

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Location:
    Its not so much where you are as when you are.
    #18
    What is produced is Television shows. The $150 million dollars pays for such things as Lost or Battlestar Galactica.
     
  19. Thomas Veil thread starter macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
  20. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #20
    And in order for the corporations to donate, they need to increase their prices even more and gouge the American consumer.

    What's needed is a reversal of corporate personhood.
     
  21. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #21
    I second that emotion.
     
  22. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #22
    It's not so much that we like the Dems. We just really, really, really hate the neocons. Really. Like, a lot. Can you blame us? Took the liberals decades to get all fat and lazy and corrupt, and they still didn't come anywhere close to as bad as the other side has been the last few years. New lows not seen since Nixon. Nixon!

    Best exchange during the '06 elections while I was getting my oil changed after voting:

    Mechanic: Did you vote?
    Customer: Oh yeah.
    Mechanic: Who for?
    Customer: Dems, all the way.
    Mechanic: I didn't know you were a Democrat.
    Customer: I'm not.
     
  23. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #23
    That sounds like the response I get when I write grant proposals to fund archaeological work. :rolleyes: ;)

    I don't like the Democrats much, but they are the lesser of two evils at the moment. I was just reading about Newt Gingrich's academic background yesterday - what a complete and utter tool. He turned out to be a very sloppy historian, but since history scholars didn't buy his BS, he ran for Congress instead and foisted his revisionism on the nation.
     
  24. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #24
    If money is all it takes then Bill Gates or George Soros or Saudi Princes should have no problem putting someone in office.
     
  25. MongoTheGeek macrumors 68040

    MongoTheGeek

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2003
    Location:
    Its not so much where you are as when you are.
    #25
    For anyone who only thinks it takes money I have two words. Ross Perot.

    Then again he did manage to get Bush 41 out of office, (His goal)
     

Share This Page