Article

2016-11-15 Government

Donald Trump On D.C.: ‘The Whole Place is One Big Lobbyist’

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2016-11-15 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11 views ] Top

#1 Trump indicated he would need politically connected people to help him know the system, even if they were lobbyists.

Set a thief ...?

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2016-11-15 06:04|| 2016-11-15 06:04|| Front Page Top

#2 “Rouse him, and learn the principle of his activity or inactivity. Force him to reveal himself, so as to find out his vulnerable spots.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Posted by GORT 2016-11-15 07:53|| 2016-11-15 07:53|| Front Page Top

#3 #2 “Rouse him, and learn the principle of his activity or inactivity.

As in "poke him with a stick?"

Posted by JohnQC 2016-11-15 07:56|| 2016-11-15 07:56|| Front Page Top

#4 Yes, it is. However, the real lobbyists, congresscritters, are suppose to represent the people who choose to elect them, not the money people or special interest groups that have overrun the place. Dear Donald, please stay at Trump Towers, and make the vermin come to you. Move the 'flag pole'. How many Department and agency minions want to be constantly on the train, plane, automobile to NYC every day? Let alone lobbyists who have homes in the DC suburbs.

Posted by Procopius2k 2016-11-15 08:03|| 2016-11-15 08:03|| Front Page Top

#5 http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/01/28/revolving-door-government-ethics/1868597/
"In short, I propose putting a 50% surtax -- or maybe it should be 75%, I'm open to discussion -- on the post-government earnings of government officials. So if you work at a cabinet level job and make $196,700 a year, and you leave for a job that pays a million a year, you'll pay 50% of the difference -- just over $400,000 -- to the Treasury right off the top. So as not to be greedy, we'll limit it to your first five years of post-government earnings; after that, you'll just pay whatever standard income tax applies.
This seems fair. After all, when it comes to your value as an ex-government official, it really is a case of "you didn't build that." Your value to a future employer comes from having held a taxpayer-funded position and from having wielded taxpayer-conferred power. Why shouldn't the taxpayers get a cut?
More significantly, it is a principle of economics that when you tax something, you get less of it. So if we're worried about revolving-door government, we should tax it, so as to get less of it.

Posted by Glenmore 2016-11-15 11:29|| 2016-11-15 11:29|| Front Page Top

22:48 newc
22:08 JohnQC
22:03 SteveS
21:56 Chomorong Hapsburg7051
21:43 newc
21:33 Albemarle Angeger2060
20:52 Barbara
20:45 Barbara
20:44 Barbara
20:40 Bright Pebbles
20:33 Barbara
20:30 Barbara
20:24 newc
20:22 Zenobia Floger6220
20:18 Pappy
20:17 newc
20:16 Pappy
20:04 trailing wife
19:59 trailing wife
19:53 trailing wife
19:49 Injun Bucket8891
19:46 Zenobia Floger6220
19:46 Injun Bucket8891
19:39 trailing wife