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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (352073)	3/5/2010 2:17:46 AM
From: bruwin	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794298

As a non-US citizen, looking at the USA from the outside, I’ve long been an admirer of its political structure. There are a lot of built in checks and balances. In addition, the heads of governmental offices can be experts in their fields as opposed to elected politicians who then must rely on permanent administrators who remain in place irrespective of which party is in power. If I could think of one “drawback” it’s the virtual two-party state which exists. In other words it’s either Democrat or Republican. Yes, there have been attempts over the years by some to provide alternative parties but it seems extremely difficult and expensive to buck the system. It also seems extremely difficult for political candidates to get to be known by the electorate unless they have access to a considerable amount of finance with which to buy television time, newspaper ads., etc. Normally, I’d say, the individual cannot come up with that sort of money, so he or she is reliant on a third party sponsor, in much the same way that the two main parties rely on funding. And here we come to the situation where there’s “no such thing as a free lunch”. The size of political party and candidate funding usually means that it’s provided by corporations, business and the like. Probably there are those who expect nothing in return. But there’s bound to be those who do expect something once their chosen candidate or party comes into power or occupies a position of influence. So when I see politicians, be they US or others, carrying on in stark contradiction to what many of the electorate would prefer to be done, then I have to wonder what it is that’s motivating their actions. Are they genuinely acting in the best interest of those who voted them into their privileged positions, or are they constantly being “prodded with a sharp stick” by those who now wish to be paid for that pre-election “lunch” ?