[SleepilyLimping]

> so that automation makes things cost less instead of siphoning the money into the coffers of megacorps

I cannot trust any company with any modicum of success not to immediately exit into the hands of megacorps. I cannot hope that companies have any type of morality/"want to make the world better" anymore.

[ghiculescu]

But you trust governments to have that morality?

[vkou]

You don't need to trust in their morality, you have a direct ability to influence representative democracies.

You have no way to influence the governance of corporations.

[ghiculescu]

Sure you do. You could buy shares.

It won’t give you much influence in isolation, but I challenge you to show more influence over your elected representatives.

[tremon]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-22/exxon-sui...

How's that working out for these people who bought shares?

[vkou]

> Sure you do. You could buy shares.

Oh, yeah, it's a great system if you're someone who has money. Most people don't.

Representatives, on the other hand, can't exist without votes.

Most of the money in politics is spent on convincing voters to vote for a particular rep, that's why money holds sway over politicians. But money in itself isn't actually going to get someone elected.

And isn't it weird how the people who do get elected actually tend to be of at least vaguely similar political leanings to their constituents?

If money was all it took, we'd have no issue electing hard-conservative anti-abortion fundamentalists in, say Chicago, as long as they had policies that their donors found appealing. (Or, conversely, socially progressive, economically regressive 'liberals' in the deep south.)

As it turns out, money in elections can only shift the needle so much, and won't turn black into white.

What it can do is pick a winner out of a lineup of similar candidates, where the margins are close enough that a bigger advertising war chest will move the needle... And even then, all of those campaigns are only possible by ground-canvassing volunteers, who are motivated ideologically, not financially.

[ghiculescu]

If it was that simple then this problem would be solved. Clearly most voters (in your opinion) want a higher minimum wage, UBI, and greater corporate taxation. If elected representatives do what their voters want, why are we discussing this?

[vkou]

> If it was that simple then this problem would be solved.

Only if you see the world in black and white.

My thesis is that money is a corrupting influence in politics, but is not the main driver of it.

Meanwhile, money is the only influence in corporate ownership. Which is, incidentally, why most people with money do everything in their power to try to convince us that the solution to all the problems they cause is to move more power out of democratic institutions, and into corporate ones.

> Clearly most voters (in your opinion) want a higher minimum wage, UBI, and greater corporate taxation.

What on earth made you think this?

I said that the politicians that get elected vaguely, in aggregate, share the views of their constituents, and you're not going to tell me the deep south in aggregate wants any of these things. It does, however, want a lot of people who talk a lot about Jesus in government, and, well, their ballot results definitely deliver them.

If you believe my thesis is wrong, roughly how much money do you think will get someone like AOC elected in a district in rural Oklahoma? Or MTG in NY's 14th district?

[rickydroll]

Study: Politicians listen to rich people, not you

Rich people don't want a higher minimum wage, UBI, and greater corporate taxation.

https://www.vox.com/2014/4/18/5624310/martin-gilens-testing-...