• xmunk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’d accept such an outcome.

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      Keep in mind that the person you reply to isn’t wrong: Big corpos would still be lobbying, as they got the resources to hide it effectively and keep everyone trying to sue them over suspicions of lobbying stuck in litigation hell.

      Anybody less affluent would however find it impossible to do any lobby work. Environmental agencies etc.

      This is one of those situations where just outlawing something does the least affect the very party you would want to hit most.

        • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s a better approach I think, yes. It’ll be difficult to prevent collusion but effectivey capping the size of most companies and maybe their across-border reach would be a good way to keep a tighter leash on them.

    • stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      You’d accept possibly loosing the right to demonstrate or to hold a manifestation or protest?

      That is not the world I want to live in.

      • xmunk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Wut? It is supremely American to think you can only talk to politicians if you have money… and only because so many other people are willing to purchase a slice of their time.

        I can just walk to Peter Julian’s office and, assuming I’m not rude, talk to him about something that matters to me. I’ve had conversations with Peter Welch and Bernie Sanders - I used to board game with a state senator. It it might be hard to get a lunch date with Joe Biden but politicians spend the majority of their time just talking to folks… it’s only when the rich can use their money to monopolize time that shit breaks down.

        • stoy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          4 months ago

          Those meetings you have had with politicians could absolutely be classified as lobbying, and would be made illegal if lobbying was outlawed.

          A company have the resources to make a smokescreen around meetings like that, making it harder to prove lobbyism, the lobbyist just happened to stay at the same hotel as the politician did, they even arrived a week before, and left two days after the politician arrived, it’s not like a meeting was set up on the one overlapping day, that would be crazy…

          • Ziggurat
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            4 months ago

            Those meetings you have had with politicians could absolutely be classified as lobbying, and would be made illegal if lobbying was outlawed.

            It’s not just classified as lobbying, it’s litterally what Lobbying is about. Meeting politician to tell them that the environmental law reforms means that the factory will close or that the consumer need better protection regarding toxic chemical in their food is what Lobbyist do. It’s sometimes get even funnier when they change employer and therefore political side