this post was submitted on 20 May 2024
310 points (95.6% liked)

politics

19148 readers
2026 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Omgboom@lemmy.zip 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

government officials and their families should be barred from holding individual stocks

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Why not all stocks? Worried they might become empoverished on those salaries?

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 4 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Yes, because government pensions have been replaced with essentially a 401k. You would force them to invest only in real estate or individual businesses, which would be much easier to hide bribes.

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Oh Justice Alito has quite the retirement ahead of him, guaranteed salary for life https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/371

Real estate as an investment should be outlawed, and operating a business as a government official is already dissuaded, and should also be outlawed. They make enough money.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

That's a recipe for more bribes, not less. Investments need to be disclosed. Gifts are subject to less scrutiny, as we've seen.

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This just isnt reality. In America, government officials can and do invest tons of money while in office, compared to officials in other countries. And also in America, government officials take tons of money from bribes, compared to officials in other countries. The way it actually works is government officials take all the money they can get away with. They take their big salary, they take their investment income, and even then they are not dissuaded in the slightest from taking bribes, its still more money for them. The limiting factor is what they can get away with. So you crack down on what they can legally acquire, you scrutinize their income and spending, you prosecute violations. Their salaries are plenty to live comfortably already.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

in America, government officials take tons of money from bribes, compared to officials in other countries

I assume you have sources for that. List them.

[–] blazera@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago

its kind of hard to look up, because looking up lobbying expenses by country tends to pull up how much other countries are bribing US officials https://www.opensecrets.org/fara

I think it's a pretty uniquely American thing.

[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I mean since we're speculating on rules, they could easily expand an existing pension program

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago

That's not going to happen because they don't have the experience to manage a pension fund. It doesn't manage itself, so they'll have to pay someone to manage it.

Do you want Goldman Sachs to get their hands on a pension fund for the US Government? Does that sound like a good idea?