Lobbying.
ITT: people so used to lobbying that they got convinced it’s a necessary evil so that minorities and common folks can lobby as well.
It’s clearly absurd. Many places call lobbying with its real name: corruption. And there are laws in place to fight it. Are they perfect? No. Is it then more effective to legalyze corruption? OF COURSE NOT ARE YOU INSANE?!?
Lobbying isn’t the same as corruption.
Lobbying is informing politicians about an issue while pushing your agenda.
Corruption is giving a politician an incentive to vote as you want.
In what universe a politician does not have, nevermind intrinsecally in its raise to popularity, but explicitly active tools and relationships that keeps him up to date with the issues and needs of his community?
I guess in a monarchy.
Very few politicians have the time get down and understand the issues enough to make an informed decision, which they have aids and use lobbyists to learn about the subject.
A decision about deciding about subsidiaries for specific crops for instance, lets say that a farmer used to farm wheat, but then realized that he could get more money by farming tobacco, ok, so he switches to tobacco, but the nation still needs a stable supply of wheat, so wheat needs to be subsidized by the government to make it worth it for farmer to farm wheat, most politicians won’t know if there is a need for this or how large it needs to be.
This is where lobbyists come in, they inform politicians about what they believe is needed, show reports and other data, to influence the politician about how to vote and what to argue for. Wheat farmers and baker advocacy groups will argue for high subsidies, tobacco farmers and cigarette companies will argue against it.
Is that a government for ants?!?
No dude there’s experts, specialists, entire departments within any (?) human government that knows shit, talks with experts, calculate and runs stuff.
They don’t just wait for farmers to walk up and explain what vegetables are.
And why would you think it’s normal that cigarette companies are at this whymsical table? Why put cancer inducing products in a debate with food with baby politicians that knows nothing and wait for the “debate” to play out?
Is that a government for ants?!?
No this is normal.
No dude there’s experts, specialists, entire departments within any (?) human government that knows shit, talks with experts, calculate and runs stuff.
Yes there are departments for healthcare, having reports full of stats, that no politician will ever read, lobbying can bring attention to demetia and bring some context to the data.
They don’t just wait for farmers to walk up and explain what vegetables are.
Correct, but they want farmers to come up and talk to them about problems that they see that might be missed, for example, how young people can be encouraged to go into farming, or if there is something killing the crops that they can see faster than the governments experts can write a report about.
And why would you think it’s normal that cigarette companies are at this whymsical table?
Because they are a huge industry.
Why put cancer inducing products in a debate with food with baby politicians that knows nothing and wait for the “debate” to play out
Because farmers need money, and if tobacco pays more than wheat, then the farmer will farm tobacco.
You are blind to so many options…
They ignore the reports? So why would they not ignore the “people”? Because money? Then it’s just corruption and the policy won’t reflect any genuine need.
Why being a “huge industry” has any political weight? Drugs cartel move tons of money, do they get a say in the matter too?
I get what you mean, but that would backfire increadibly quickly.
Civil rights organizations would no longer be able to talk with politicians directly, possibly never, as demonstrations and manifestations could be classified as lobbying depending on how strict it would be enforced.
Environmental groups could no longer invite politicians to important conferences.
Lobbying isn’t just something that monolithic companies do, take it away, and it will only be something the bad guys does.
Yup, a late friend of mine was a lobbyist at the state level for a mental health lobbying group. His daughter has schizophrenia and that was his way to give back in his retirement. Without lobbying, it’s hard for politicians to know when there is a problem they need to fix. They have a small staff and they don’t just magically know when there is a problem. The problem is when a politician either can’t sniff out unethical lobbyists or just doesn’t care.
Please what’s the power of NGOs compared to corporations?
Just make an exception for charities and non-profit.
I’d accept such an outcome.
You’d accept possibly loosing the right to demonstrate or to hold a manifestation or protest.
That is not the world I want to live in.
Wut? It is supremely American to think you can only talk to politicians if you have money… and only because so many other people are willing to purchase a slice of their time.
I can just walk to Peter Julian’s office and, assuming I’m not rude, talk to him about something that matters to me. I’ve had conversations with Peter Welch and Bernie Sanders - I used to board game with a state senator. It it might be hard to get a lunch date with Joe Biden but politicians spend the majority of their time just talking to folks… it’s only when the rich can use their money to monopolize time that shit breaks down.
Those meetings you have had with politicians could absolutely be classified as lobbying, and would be made illegal if lobbying was outlawed.
A company have the resources to make a smokescreen around meetings like that, making it harder to prove lobbyism, the lobbyist just happened to stay at the same hotel as the politician did, they even arrived a week before, and left two days after the politician arrived, it’s not like a meeting was set up on the one overlapping day, that would be crazy…
Those meetings you have had with politicians could absolutely be classified as lobbying, and would be made illegal if lobbying was outlawed.
It’s not just classified as lobbying, it’s litterally what Lobbying is about. Meeting politician to tell them that the environmental law reforms means that the factory will close or that the consumer need better protection regarding toxic chemical in their food is what Lobbyist do. It’s sometimes get even funnier when they change employer and therefore political side
Keep in mind that the person you reply to isn’t wrong: Big corpos would still be lobbying, as they got the resources to hide it effectively and keep everyone trying to sue them over suspicions of lobbying stuck in litigation hell.
Anybody less affluent would however find it impossible to do any lobby work. Environmental agencies etc.
This is one of those situations where just outlawing something does the least affect the very party you would want to hit most.
Then break them down
Lobbying is fine. Lobbying with money should be illegal.
Eating animals
MlM’s. They’re predatory.
Guns
They shouldn’t be illegal, but heavily regulated.
I mean, hunting and harvesting meat is far more ethical to the normal meat industry.
Most people in countries where guns are regulated would not get access to a gun for hunting, mind you. Unless your job is to be a forester, which over here includes selectively shooting animations to balance populations if something goes out of balance.
“I want to get my own deer meat from the forest” is not a valid reason to get a gun. Or even a bow!
I like the theory of gun laws in Sweden.
You can only get a gun if you are actively in need of one, there are only two legal way to be in need of one, hunting and competition.
You need to get a hunting license from a school, join a hunting society and be an active member to get a permit for gun, or you need to actively compete in a shooting club to get a competition permit. You also need to demonstrate competence and skill before you get a permit regardless of if you are a hunter or a competitor.
Getting a gun for personal safety is not permitted, and to be frank, it isn’t really needed here, we have few dangerous animals, and despite the rise of gang violence, Sweden is still a safe country.
Yes. Every hunter is ethical and will absolutely nail every shot to make sure the animal doesn’t suffer and die a slow death. A hunter missing the killshot and instead wounding the animal? Never happens.
/s
Of course it happens, but for the absolute majority of it’s life, even a wounded animal has lived a life in freedom and nature, a proper hunter would absolutely track and deal with a wounded animal to reduce suffering and preserve the meat.
Already illegal (without proper licence) in most first world countries. Or at least not as unregulated as as in Murica
easily accessible and affordable Psychedelics and dissociatives for depression and getting out of ruts
Are you saying what should be legal but isnt?
Whoops my bad, curse this episodic dyslexia
Minor being member of religious (or political) organization
They’re basically the same. I’d extent that to outright banning of any religion. Believe whatever you want, but the moment people gather and share the same “true faith”, things get ugly.
That’s not necessary. What’s needed is to treat religious beliefs as a personal choice, and no more. You can get protection from being discriminated against based on your beliefs so long as it doesn’t extend past actual disadvantage (so yes to not being disadvantaged in your workplace for being religious, but no to not wanting to bake a cake for gay people). Other than that, your religion buys you nothing. No ‘medical exemptions’, no special treatment, and especially no influence on other people’s lifestyle choices. True freedom of religion also means freedom from religion. It stays in your home and place of worship. In public, in government, in education and healthcare, religion does not exist.
I would also specify that your religion doesn’t get to negatively (and of there’s any confusion about what is negative, err on the side of caution) impact their children in any way. Otherwise, as children are a very vulnerable group that will grow into an adult, it’s just a loophole for religious people to continue to propagate their religion without arguing against an opponent qualified to actually think sceptically, or commit harms against minors unable to protect themselves.
First step to achieving that is banning homeschooling - way too many people use that as a way to avoid their children getting educated about stuff they don’t want them to know.
And religious schools in general, banning the private school exemption.
Qualified immunity for police officers. Prosecutors and judges basically get qualified immunity, too-- in that they can be caught engaging in all sorts of inappropriate and illegal activity without facing punishment because like police, it usually doesn’t even get to the extent of being charged.
I don’t even understand how qualified immunity could even be implemented without massive social unrest
Maybe fix the social issues as well so there’s no need to riot
When you are in a political position you are not allowed to lie.
We have to develop the technology to perfectly detect lies and give everyone who wants to be in office a collar which gives them seizures when lying.
Every Parlament around the world would look like a Harlem shake gone wrong.
Being noisy in public.
Ugh yes, and ban scooters and motors as well, they make such a ridiculous amount of noise compared to their speed.
Also ban talking on the street, public transport, and trees. All of these can be very noisy, and I can’t stand it! Oh and bikes too, their bells are very infuriating, especially when it’s bad and rings all the time… and better not let your kids play in the front of the yard!
Seriously, I have seen loud motors, but haven’t any loud scooters. Which one do you think is loud?
In my experience cars and newborns are louder, not by a little margin, just to give a few examples.That’s why I said compared to their speed. I don’t know any brands or example models, all of them are obnoxiously loud and driven by simple minded fools imho. Cars make relatively little noise, and newborns and trees do not belong in this comparison in my opinion.
Edit: tried to find a picture, seems these are not universally called scooters even though they are where I live. I mean models like this: https://www.scooterforyou.nl/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/34_G7_99_KISBEESPORTLINE-1.jpg
Oh I see, about those, I can agree that they are relatively loud. I was thinking about the “rolling metal posts” at first.
Sorry for being rude
Yeah, I think many people thought you were talking about those electric scooters, which are, well pretty damn silent and good to make cities less car focused (like in the US). I mean things like this.
Yes please. People should shut up in public transportat and other crammed public places.
“Disturbing the peace” you mean?
Lies and exaggerated advertising.
No, it’s not “best in the world” or “lightning fast”, it’s an entry level $200 GPU!
No, it doesn’t have “crystal clear high-res screen”, it’s just a budget phone!
No, that tampon will not change my lifestyle!
No, that perfume will not make guys drooling over me!
I’m ok with “it’s decent quality with an affordable price”.
I’m ok with “it’s the best budget-friendly option”.
I’m ok with “it’s not the best in the world, but it’s definitely worth a try”.
I personally think “how good is it” part of “advertising” should literally just a percentage value of “how many existing customers say it was worth it”.
But even that would get gamed the way 5/5 amazon reviews can be bought today already.
So maybe it should really just be “it’s a insert thing made out of insert material produced in inserts country by insert labour conditions and it costs instert price”.
Private cars in cities.
They’re noisy, unhealthy, cause massive damage to infrastructure, transport one person at a time while taking up enough space for ~10 in the road, fill open spaces for parking, sometimes while being completely unusable, endanger everyone else on the roads…Unlimited political spending, particularly by corporations - see Citizen’s United.
Campaign financing in general. If you get enough signatures you’ll get a fixed amount of money from tax payers for your campaign. If you accept money from anyone else you’re barred from public office for life. End of corruption right there.
- not having the day off to vote
- FPTP
- unlimited funding from unrestricted sources in politics
- impunity for blatantly corrupt unelected political appointees
Etc.
not having the day off to vote
Most crountries have elections on thw weekend…
Lots of people work on weekends.
Yep?
But less people work on weekends than on weekdays.
There is no universal day for everyone to make it, which is why Sweden offers pre-election voting and voting by mail, plenty of other countries does as well.
Small print, excessive legalese and outright deceptive language in ads, agreements and such. All the “free” (not really free) trials, “unlimited” (not really unlimited) plans, “best value” (according to the producer and their mum) deals and shit like that.
There really should be a law prohibiting that - if reading through terms and conditions for using a damn website or a toothbrush or whatever requires 4 hours of free time, a magnifyibg glass and degree in law, such t&cs should be illegal. Same for disclaimers and such in ads - any 4pt text displayed for 2 seconds on screen should automatically result in a massive fine.
Forced arbitration clauses.
