swamp, all companies want more drilling.  More oil means cheaper everything.  You must know at least that much about the real world no?

Like Lesliechow says individual corporations buy votes for their causes.  The cost of doing business man.  Some decisions arent going to be the best solution for every company out there.  But there will be another bill soon enough that will compensate the insurance companies, you wait and see.  Besides, do you really think that Obamacare really screwed over the ins companies?  they are doing just fine, you dont have to worry about them at all.

tough nut?  Dont you mean impossible nut? 

Posted by greeny9 on 11/4/2010 12:46:00 PM (view original):
swamp, all companies want more drilling.  More oil means cheaper everything.  You must know at least that much about the real world no?

Like Lesliechow says individual corporations buy votes for their causes.  The cost of doing business man.  Some decisions arent going to be the best solution for every company out there.  But there will be another bill soon enough that will compensate the insurance companies, you wait and see.  Besides, do you really think that Obamacare really screwed over the ins companies?  they are doing just fine, you dont have to worry about them at all.

What about the agro Business that wants more ethanol? What about companies that produce wind turbines? Solar panels?

What about a company that gets its oil mostly from landlock wells? Would they support or oppose deep sea drilling?

There are no absolutes!

My point is if one business buys votes to support widget production and another business buys votes to limit widget production they cross each other out.

Also they are supporting people who support them, not paying them to vote for what they want. That is a big difference.

Posted by lesliechow on 11/4/2010 3:54:00 PM (view original):
You're talking micro.  I'm talking macro.  In the aggregate, businesses buy the votes.

Precisely Swamp, you are talking about the little things here.  Big picture is this and if you cant admit it there is something wrong with you:  Big business lobbies governments of all shapes and sizes to pass bills and laws that enhance their bottom line.

All of the BIG picture stuff that shape the way things are done are influenced DIRECTLY by lobbyists.  Whom are obviously hired by the big companies of the world.  Simple fact.

1 Lobbyists dont buy Congressman. They give donations to the people that would support them so they will win.

2 I admit freely that the goal of lobbyists is to get legisaltion passed to support their industries.

3 If you work for GM and a law is passed that makes GM sell more cars did this hurt you or help you?

4 You keep refering to "Big Companies" like they are all 1 thing. That they have the same goals and need the same laws passed. This is not realistic.

5 It doesnt matter if a Congressman gets $1 trillion. He still has to get votes. Jerry Brown proved that you can get elected with much less cash.

So when a lobbyist gives money to a congressman to support them so they will win isnt buying them?  So what is it called in your world?  Leasing?

And isnt it also true that too much of the time those legislations that get passed are not good for the population?  Like when they lower environmental laws?

Considering that GM is a big part of the reason why global warming is such a problem I would say yes making it easier for GM to sell more cars is a problem.

Obviously not every bill being passed is going to help EVERY big business out there!  And yes, they do all have the same goals!  its to maximize profit at the expense of anything and everything!

Yes, Mr Brown got in with a smaller budget then the other guys.  Obviously in this case the exception disproves the rule!  wow Swamp you really are grasping at straws here.  Its a fact that if you have more money to spend on advertising you are much more likely to get what you want then another person who has much less.  How did Mr. Brown do it?  who knows, I guess a bit of luck, and smart spending.

The point is if I was running for Congress Colt might give me a donation because I would oppose restricting 2nd Amendment freedoms. This isnt buying me. I am still doing what I believe is right. They just want a person that thinks like them. Companies dont own the people they support.

So since I think that global warming isnt a serious threat I would support legislation that allows GM to create more jobs.

To say that all businesses are the same because they want profits is simplistic. As I pointed out a company that is involved in agro business may want limits on oil drilling. A national trucking company would oppose limits on drilling.

Obama was very popular, got a lot of people to donate to him and won. Did he win because more people dontated, or did more people donate because he was popular and was going to win.

Do you really believe that anyone with more money would win? Money is just the ability to raise name recognition and define your position. There is a limit. If Whitman had twice as much money she still would have lost to Brown. Every federal candidate now has enough money to get their message out.

Actually Lerch might be the post-modern woaman's dream date.

Tall, quiet, strong and willing to clean up around the house.

<<<Considering that GM is a big part of the reason why global warming is such a problem I would say yes making it easier for GM to sell more cars is a problem.>>>

This is a quote from an earlier post.

At least this enviromental activists admits he wants to stop one of America's largest employers from working!