2 words. Living Trust.
Elizabeth Warren proposes a bill banning politicians from owning stock
- Thread starter LS1Z28
- Start date
2 words. Living Trust.
I think this is unnecessary. The sort of people who run for office in the US will not be influenced one bit just because their husband (Sen. "China" Feinstein) or in laws ( Sen. "Rich" McConnell) make hundreds of millions from being in the good graces of a hostile foreign power.
It would also be an unfair burden to subject them to the same restrictions and laws ordinary plebeians must follow. Do we want to risk losing public servants like Maxine Waters over some silly banking regulations? I think not.
It would also be an unfair burden to subject them to the same restrictions and laws ordinary plebeians must follow. Do we want to risk losing public servants like Maxine Waters over some silly banking regulations? I think not.
You don’t pay capital gains if you sell to serve your country. That’s one reason Paulson took the job as secy if treasury. 700mm of Goldman stock tax free.
Secondly there are many jobs where you can’t own individual stocks. Law firms,investment firms, regulatory bodies often don’t let you hold any single stock.
I didn't know that law existed. I'm still not in love with the idea of forcing someone to sell something they might've owned for decades, but that exception makes this proposal much more reasonable.
Well they have a choice. They don’t have to take the government job.
Full disclosure with a ban on insider trading based on insider congressional knowledge is all we need. If they are invested in slave trading stocks or something then they can answer to the public on it.
The socialists want to criminalize capitalism and make sure that we do not have anyone in washington who has a direct stake in the success of the economy or the impact of government on the economy. That is not pretty either.
Meanwhile, their ilk set up all these bogus foundations and rob the country and the world blind but is all for "the public good."
The socialists want to criminalize capitalism and make sure that we do not have anyone in washington who has a direct stake in the success of the economy or the impact of government on the economy. That is not pretty either.
Meanwhile, their ilk set up all these bogus foundations and rob the country and the world blind but is all for "the public good."
Difficult to endorse when the president doesn’t have to release his tax returns, no?
Yes it is. There is a tradeoff here. On the one hand, I don't want a government run by ex-school teachers and government bureaucrats who don't have any financial resources to speak of. On the other, it is called public service for a reason and the public has the right to expect both the absence of conflicts of interest and the highest level of integrity.
Trading publicly held stocks is probably the smallest part of the problem. Many pols, eg Harry Reid, got filthy rich off insider real estate deals. If you're a developer, your whole business depends on getting government on board with your projects. What better way to do that than have a powerful insider as part of your group?
Then there are the sweetheart deals pols' families get. One of the sleaziest was Chelsea Clinton getting a $600k per year internship with NBC I think it was.
Running campaigns is another rich source of funds. A pol has a campaign committee and a finance committee with paid personnel. These committees hire consultants. There are zero rules against nepotism. A lot of money flows through. Not all of it is spent. Rep. Duncan Hunter was charged with misusing it, but this smacks of a political prosecution because they all use these funds one way or another. His main crime was being a republican in California.