How our legislatures have become corrupt

[seanD]

*Jack Sparrow voice and swag*

Welcome to the Caribbean seanD


Until the day comes that legislators actually bother to isolate themselves like Buddhist monks from their own personal ambitions and desires, or their existence is effectively terminated along with their scaliwag counter-parts of the Executive and Judicial Branches, and never to be replaced by any power (I would prefer to the latter. ), you, like me, are going to have to accept the cruel fact that the public is virtually powerless in appealing or strong-arming their representatives in enacting or rejecting public legislative policies of their liking or hating. You will never be able to separate their personal desires from influencing public policies and laws, you may as well ask them to cease to be human.

I don't agree. Yes, I agree the human race is morally bankrupt for the most part, make no mistake about that. But I don't think apathy is the solution. There are ways to keep our public lawmakers accountable and in check. Once again, the Stock Act HR-1148 that they continue to bury and ignore is one way. Since they're public servants chosen and paid handsomely to serve the people, they're obligated to submit to regulated scrutiny of their actions, even if it's financial. Another way is to educate the public about it. The more knowledge the public has about this, the more people will be inclined to closely monitor and investigate their investment activity themselves. This will put pressure on them to watch what they do because then they know their every action is under public scrutiny. Just throwing up your hands and staying apathetic about it and continuing the perpetuate the ignorance of the public works just the opposite and is what they want.

[Andius]

I don't agree. Yes, I agree the human race is morally bankrupt for the most part, make no mistake about that. But I don't think apathy is the solution.

I suppose so. Living in Guatemala though, I have learned that at times, inaction is the best course of action at times.

There are ways to keep our public lawmakers accountable and in check. Once again, the Stock Act HR-1148 that they continue to bury and ignore is one way

Mmhhh, do tell?

Since they're public servants chosen and paid handsomely to serve the people, they're obligated to submit to regulated scrutiny of their actions, even if it's financial.

Mmhhh, well... when you frame it in that paradigm, I suppose that makes sense in it's own internal logic. By rights, the public can invade the Public Servant's private matters to their hearts delight! Whilst where at it, the American Public may as well push for a reform for their "Public Servants" to give up all rights to secrecy!! BRILLIANT!!!

Another way is to educate the public about it. The more knowledge the public has about this, the more people will be inclined to closely monitor and investigate their investment activity themselves. This will put pressure on them to watch what they do because then they know their every action is under public scrutiny

Oh I don't think education is going to help as easily as you'd wish. Because said education is also effectively a war of ideas, competing schools of thought and doctrine seeking triumph over all others (You and I be living proof). And even a more well informed public alone may not be effective, because Statesmen and women are also just as effective in hiding themselves, if not more so (The United States government definitely is one of the most impressive institutions I have ever seen in maintaining and protecting secrets). With all the ease of the world they deny entry to auditories and any schlep dumb enough to attempt an investigation (Unless your Wikileaks, those guys are deadly effective in popping State secrets). United States government is a particular case, because being one of the mightiest States in the world, it's members have little to no reason to practically fear public scrutiny and the public itself (Short of an election that is). What does it tell you about a State that strikes fear into the hearts of most Statesmen and women of other nations around the world?

Just throwing up your hands and staying apathetic about it and continuing the perpetuate the ignorance of the public works just the opposite and is what they want.

Oh I am far from apathetic.... I merely am keen in seeing a useless action that will end in failure, one way or another (Stock Act HR-1148 is a the proposal of absent minded uncreative weaklings that will never give solution). Instead, I champion for the elimination of the criminalization of inside trading in all spheres, which in truth, evens up the market competition (Statesmen would no longer be the sole actors in engaging Inside Trading, merely the most efficient ones at worst). And that is the superior cause that is actually worth passing a bill at.

[seanD]

Andius, I know it sounds like I'm being offensive, but that really isn't my intention. From what I understand, Guatemala is about on the level of Mexico when it comes to a virtual hellhole of crime and corruption. I'm really not sure how you justify your apathy in light of that.

[Andius]

Andius, I know it sounds like I'm being offensive, but that really isn't my intention. From what I understand, Guatemala is about on the level of Mexico when it comes to a virtual hellhole of crime and corruption. I'm really not sure how you justify your apathy in light of that.

Don't worry, I am not going to be offended about that . I am not going to bother to defend the honor of something as vile and decrepit as the State of Guatemala. (I am no nationalistic idiot ).

You are spot on in your observation that the Statesmen of Guatemala match the Mexican ones in their legendary affinity to murder, deceive, manipulate, exploit, steal and pillage in their pursuit for greater wealth and power. The very epitome of lawlessness.

Ill tell you why I am seemingly apathetic.

I am apathetic, but only at seeking means to "regulate the behavior" of statesmen, because I ultimately consider that a fool's errand. I am more interested in eliminating laws that empower the role of statesmen, because in doing so, I am empowering normal people (by attempting to liberate them from terrible taxations of all sorts, myself including). In practice I pursue a minarchist agenda in a land where welfare-statism is the most popular agenda. I constantly feud with my pro-welfare contemporaries. They are convinced under the delusion that more regulations and laws will bring about "better behaved" statesmen and women, and eventually, a State that actively takes care of it's citizenry. I on the other hand, oppose positive legislation of ALL stripes (law that seeks to promote, regulate or prohibit something), because the State and it's members simply cannot and never will have an incentive or reason to follow laws. In a land where my countrymen and women are seeking to strengthen the State in the vain hope that order and law will be insured, I on the other hand fight to weaken the State, in the hope that it will free us from it's burdensome taxes and regulations (it be difficult to be corrupt when tax incomes are abysmally low.... something that occurred in 2010, which sent the Guatemalan government into an unprecedented panic, much to my delight ^^). That is why I favor negative legislations (abolishments of laws).

I no longer believe that statesmen and women, the pinnacle of lawlessness in these lands, have any hope of ever being consistent with the laws they themselves impose. I gave up on that proposition a long time ago (especially as I steadily embraced the teachings of the Austrian School about two years ago). Instead, I now pursue the elimination of the greatest amount of laws possible (I intend to BURN that wretched 1993 Constitution that is currently in effect). Eliminating as many roles and powers of State as I can is my agenda (henceforth, why I am an anarchist at heart).

That is why consistently oppose the proposition of the bill of this nature (I prefer to be consistent with my postures). Those who advance said bill are under the delusion that passing said bill will eliminate a problem, all part of the bigger delusion that "more laws are the solution". I maintain my consistency of opposing as many legislative processes as I can (Including the so called laws that seek to regulate State behavior, they are nothing but vain and rubbish laws), all part of a bigger picture in diminishing State roles and powers.

I have no love for those who are in the State, they are a lost cause. I would rather see the State burn, and with it's wretched members die along with it (Although I do affirm the existence of a few men and women who truly are interested in the common good and with noble hearts, and I would actually prefer to see them get out instead). That's why I am intent in cutting as many of it's powers, instead of trying to reform it, or reform it's behavior. Why bother to waste your time fixing something that is impossible to fix.

[seanD]

Well, then, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.