Homer <usenet@xxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> Verily I say unto thee, that Ian Hilliard spake thusly:
>> Ezekiel wrote:
>
>>> FYI - It's not illegal to lobby the governement. Just ask IBM or
>>> Google... they know.
>>
>> Lobbying buys voting decisions in favor of the company for which the
>> lobbying is being done. This decisions are often not in the best
>> interest of the voters. Hence lobbying can be deemed as a legally
>> acceptable form of corruption.
>
> Regardless of who is doing it, lobbying is nothing more than legalised
> bribery. IMHO the same can be said of out of court settlements, which is
> just a way of circumventing the law with money.
>
> Of course there is lobbying in the more altruistic sense, petitioning
> for justice, but that usually doesn't involve bribery, since the parties
> involved are usually not petitioning for financial gain.
>
> If you think about all these various (or rather *nefarious*) extra
> curricula activities that companies engage in, they're clearly part of a
> business strategy from the outset, rather than the pleadings of innocent
> victims merely defending themselves ... an all-out battle to pillage
> every last penny from society using every means possible.
>
> It isn't enough to just make a product and sell it ... no, these
> companies must form protection rackets with copyrights; patents; trade
> secrets; trademarks; and (just for good measure) a big dollop of
> legalised bribery, just to ensure they wreak total annihilation on their
> competition with complete impunity, and pervert the law to force
> citizens' money in their direction. And all this gets the big red seal
> of approval from the boys on Capitol Hill, primarily because it is those
> boys on Capitol Hill whose pockets are being lined by lobbyists, in
> campaign funds and other "benefits".
>
> What a wonderful world.
>
One of the major problems with this kind of behaviour is that once one
company starts doing these things successfully, then it becomes almost
inevitable that the others will feel compelled to follow as a defensive
measure. It's like any cycle of crime or arms race, the likely loser is
the one who arms least quickly. Unless, of course, us citizens can find
a way to put a stop to the race by changing the law in some way in order
to prevent those things which appear to be morally unacceptable.
--
| mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |
|
|
