"[I] didn't watch the Ted talk, sorry. Too long to make a point for me."

Then you missed the entire argument.

Everything you said is moot in the face of Lawrence Lessig's talk.

This kind of thinking: "Granted, neither choice is usually good, but one is definitely less bad....and far more sane and rational."Is completely missing the point.

If you are continuing to see this this as a partisan problem, you do not grok this issue.

You should not be choosing between "terrible and slightly less terrible." You should be choosing between "good and better."

I reiterate: The roots of this issue in the US go deeper than partisan "Dems vs. Reps" politics. This issue is money in politics.

"I want you to take hold, to grab the issue you care the most about. Climate change is mine, but it might be financial reform or a simpler tax system or inequality. Grab that issue, sit it down in front of you, look straight in its eyes, and tell it there is no Christmas this year. There will never be a Christmas. We will never get your issue solved until we fix this issue first."

Here's a video referencing a Princeton study that backs up Lessig's arguments pretty well.



As an aside, Lawrence Lessig tried to run for president last year...

Not at all surprised by this.

This kind of corruption is going to keep happening as long as there is money in politics. The Moneyed Powers of Wall Street and Corporate America will continue to decide who sits in the White House.

Let Lawrence Lessig explain:

Also this problem might never be solved until money is out of politics....

https://videosift.com/video/lawrence-lessig-2016-will-have-two-elections-TED-talk

Lawrence Lessig: We The People and our Broken Democracy.

@shagen454, You're on to something about the nature of the future of economics, and also society through the 1% vs. the 99%. You're not wrong that a lot of *money has made it's way to the top, and is staying there.

But it wasn't always this way.

In his film, Inequality For All, Robert Reich points out that during the time of great prosperity in the US (1947-1977) inequality was low, and taxes on the wealthy were much higher than they are today.

A correlation of the effect this was how marketing was thought of. In CBC's "Under The Influence" episode on The World of Business-To-Business Advertising they point out that B2B marketing used to be the boring place that nobody in advertising really wanted to work, but now B2B marketing is surging.

The CBC radio show doesn't get into asking why that changed, but through the lens of modern economics it isn't hard to see. B2B marketing used to be boring because with low inequality, consumers--*working people*--had all the money. Now, with high inequality, consumers are broke, and all that money is just flowing among corporations, never really trickling more than a few breadcrumbs upon the serfs.

This has deep impacts on society and politics, especially in a land where "money is speech" and all the money is just passed between a few companies and their owners. This means that in the US, there are as few as 144,000 people who have enough "speech" (meaning money) that their voice actually matters, as is pointed out by Lawrence Lessig.


Videos:

--Robert Reich --

If the "Liberal Elite" within the Democratic Party hadn't been so pigheaded and worked against Bernie at every turn, and maybe accepted him as a candidate, then maybe this interview would be with President Sanders.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz being immediately appointed to the head of Clinton's campaign after the Wikileaks revealed how she was undermining Sanders behind the scenes showed just how out of touch the party had become. Without realizing it, the "Liberal Elite" of the Democratic Party chose Trump to become the next president.

Meanwhile, Lawrence Lessig---who was running on the single most important issue facing American Democracy today---couldn't even get on the ballot during the primaries.

If Hillary couldn't beat an unknown socialist in a fair fight, why did the Democratic party think she could beat any Republican front runner?

Did they really think that no one would read the wikileaks? Did they think that none of their backroom shenanigans to keep additional candidates from running (e.g. Lawrence Lessig) and push Clinton to the front of the pile just because it was her turn would be a winning strategy? It backfired, and it turned people off.

Hillary Clinton, and the Democratic Party, basically handed the presidency to Trump.

Absolutely.

The process produces shit-sandwich corrupt candidates.

More info from Lawrence Lessig in his talk: Why Are There Only Shit Sandwiches On The Menu?

lawrence lessig-2016 will have two elections-TED talk has been added as a related post - related requested by notarobot.

@newtboy: Trumps appeal to the LCD is successful mostly because the LCD has been allowed to grow so much in our post-Regan society. With inequality on the rise and decades of trickle-down government-by-the-wealthy-for-the-wealthy, those "left behind" have been growing faster and faster every year.

It Trump fails to win this go around then the pendulum may keep swinging further. My concern is that the next 'protest' candidate will be even worse than he.

@ChaosEngine:

We'll have to agree to disagree about some things. For me, as bad as Trump is, I'm not convinced that he is worse than what Hillary was revealted to be by the DNC Leaks...

...but perhaps instead of arguing about which shit sandwich is worse, it is more productive to work together to find out why there are only shit sandwiches on the menu?

On this:

"But things will never change until you fix your broken political system. You're barely a democracy these days."

I am in complete agreement.

When I first heard of the Brexit vote, I thought it was some nasty xenophobic/racist group that had somehow managed to capture 51% of a nation. But could Britian really be that full of xenophobes? It was in a bit of casual research on the subject when I discovered that J. Pie video I referenced in my earlier comment. I had to revise my first assumption about the group that voted to leave the E.U.. While there may have been an element of xenophobia involved, it was economic factors that was the driving force behind the Brexit vote.

People who have been screwed over by years of government for corporations which has only worsened since Glass–Steagall was repealed by Bill Clinton. The hold the wealthy have on government was tightened after Citizen's United.

Much of the support Trump has been able to marshal is a reaction to years of governance-for-the-wealthy-by-the-wealthy.

Lawrence Lessig's does a better job unpacking this quagmire in his talk: "We The People: the Republic We Must Reclaim" which has far too few views on YT or votes on the sift, IMO. For anyone who's ever been unhappy with the political system in the past number of years, I consider it a must-watch.


Link here:

http://videosift.com/video/lawrence-lessig-2016-will-have-two-elections-TED-talk

*related=http://videosift.com/video/lawrence-lessig-we-the-people-the-republic-we-must-reclaim

lawrence lessig-we the people the republic we must reclaim has been added as a related post - related requested by notarobot.

lawrence lessig-we the people the republic we must reclaim has been added as a related post - related requested by notarobot.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/lawrence-lessig-we-the-people-the-republic-we-must-reclaim