Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (129168)	1/24/2010 3:16:27 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 541977

What I assume is that people should be people, and vote and participate in democracy, and that people's fictitious business entities should not be confused with actual "people". I have no argument with that. I'm just saying that if corporations had to follow the same dollar limits as individuals, as Win suggested, then the impact would not be so onerous. It might not even be noticeable. You assumed I assumed something I did not assume, and never even implied that I assumed. tsk tsk You must have assumed loads and loads of corporations piling on because otherwise, at individual contribution limits, there would not be enough additional money in play to warrant your concern.

To: epicure who wrote (129168)	1/24/2010 5:19:39 PM
From: Jeff Hayden	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541977

"You're assuming that all corporations will jump in and play on the same side of every issue." No. I'm not assuming anything, other than all corporations will desire to "speak"- as they quite obviously do. No only that, corporations will feel they HAVE to speak with their money or they'll get screwed by regulations or by their competitors. This is a very dirty ruling by the Supreme Court and it needs a very aggressive killing!