Ron Paul Folks.....

2»

Comments

  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    absolutely not. I think there should be a cap or limit. not a single "standard" amount.

    Ok. Would you classify that proposal as "unfair". If so, why?
  • lazymoon13
    lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    farfromglorified wrote:
    Ok. Would you classify that proposal as "unfair". If so, why?

    no its not unfair. its unreasonable.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    no its not unfair. its unreasonable.

    Ok. Why is it "unreasonable"?
  • lazymoon13
    lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    farfromglorified wrote:
    Ok. Why is it "unreasonable"?

    because its forcing only 1 choice. 1 amount.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    because its forcing only 1 choice. 1 amount.

    It doesn't force only 1 choice or 1 amount. It forces you to donate equally to all if you're going to donate to one. You have 2 primary choices: donate or don't and you may donate any amount. So it's not just 1 choice and 1 amount.
  • lazymoon13
    lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    farfromglorified wrote:
    It doesn't force only 1 choice or 1 amount. It forces you to donate equally to all if you're going to donate to one. You have 2 primary choices: donate or don't and you may donate any amount. So it's not just 1 choice and 1 amount.

    ok I misunderstood. now that I know what you meant, I'm not really sure. In theory it is fair. but IMO still not reasonable. people/corps should be able to donate any amount they wish to any person/party they wish, but with a cap.
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    ok I misunderstood. now that I know what you meant, I'm not really sure. In theory it is fair. but IMO still not reasonable. people/corps should be able to donate any amount they wish to any person/party they wish, but with a cap.

    Ok. I'm certainly not suggesting this is a good proposal. I'm just trying to get to the root of what you actually think. Considering that you think this proposal is "fair", but still unreasonable, we're left with the fact that your standard is not "a fair standard" nor "a fair standard for campaign finance", but something else altogether. Care to reword?
  • lazymoon13
    lazymoon13 Posts: 838
    farfromglorified wrote:
    Ok. I'm certainly not suggesting this is a good proposal. I'm just trying to get to the root of what you actually think. Considering that you think this proposal is "fair", but still unreasonable, we're left with the fact that your standard is not "a fair standard" nor "a fair standard for campaign finance", but something else altogether. Care to reword?

    I would like to see a limit to donations. a cap if you will. i.e. microsoft can donate $2500 max to any candidate they wish. $2500 to mccain and $10 to hilary if they wish. (just making up numbers)
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    lazymoon13 wrote:
    I would like to see a limit to donations. a cap if you will. i.e. microsoft can donate $2500 max to any candidate they wish. $2500 to mccain and $10 to hilary if they wish. (just making up numbers)

    Ok, so you just want a cap. That's fine, though I certainly disagree. I believe candidates should be able to take donations as large or as small as they'd like and that voters should decide whether or not their behavior is acceptable. I fail to see what the cap has accomplished. Are politicians less corrupt? Less subservient to special interests? Less wasteful?

Categories