Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by danilocampos 5347 days ago
> They're acting within the bounds of the law.

This strikes me as a non-sequitur.

There's a lot of bad stuff you can do without actually committing a crime. Especially if you have enough money to influence the law.

I like that the final defense of the financial sector's misdeeds is to stammer "Well, it's not strictly illegal!"

2 comments

This strikes me as a non-sequitur. There's a lot of bad stuff you can do without actually committing a crime. Especially if you have enough money to influence the law.

And it's the Government's job to make sure that "bad stuff" (ie stuff that actively and deliberately hurts people, not just standard non-optimal stuff) is illegal.

If a legal moneymaking niche exists, somebody will fill it. Even if it's immoral, because... hey, people are extremely good at convincing themselves that anything is moral if it happens to be in their own interests. The government's job is to prevent any harmful yet legal niches from arising, and the job of the people is to make sure that pressure is put on the government to eradicate said niches... even when they'd much rather take campaign contributions from the people in 'em.

This comment is free of examples, because I don't feel like discussing any specific cases.

I agree, but I was referring to lobbying in particular.

The phrase "if you have enough money to influence the law" indicates not that the corporations did something illegal/unethical (why wouldn't they spend money to get their input heard?), but rather indicates corrupt politicians who would make decisions and laws based on who spent the most money.

The United States was constructed in the shadow of centuries kings and tyrants. The US government was built to be feeble, and thus accountable to its people.

What the founders could not have predicted was that one day, that feebleness could allow the country to be hijacked by powers that make kings look cute by comparison.

Our system isn't built to withstand the manipulation of corporate interests. There's not a lot I can do about that from where I'm sitting. But the fact that the store was left unlocked by a shady employee doesn't exonerate the thieves who made off with its contents.

There's often no distinction between those who spend money and those who make the decisions. The revolving door between Washington and big financial interests is absurd. Healthcare and finance are both in a state of regulatory capture that would be comical were it not so tragic.