|
| ▲ | helsinkiandrew 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > I don't understand why US weapons manufactures are not lobbying harder It doesn’t really matter if your product is better or cheaper, if the customer thinks that service and spare parts might possibly be withdrawn in the future for political (or whatever) reasons they won’t buy your product. |
| |
| ▲ | tokai an hour ago | parent [-] | | That is what they need the political lobbying for. Obviously not to help their pricing. | | |
| ▲ | hgoel an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | If you mean they need to lobby the US government to be less schizophrenic, I agree. Though I suspect the government would just decide to start more wars. If you mean they need to lobby the other governments, I don't think that'll work, the decreasing trust is associated with the US government's actions, not as related to the arms dealers' actions. | |
| ▲ | shimman an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | So they need lobbying to lie to customers? Why would that help people choose Boeing when it ultimately is up the whims of one single individual that can drastically change moods every four years? There is a reason why imperialism ultimately always fails. | | |
| ▲ | tokai an hour ago | parent [-] | | No. You do understand how lobbying works right? You don't lobby your customers, you lobby that single individual. Which has never been easier as the current one takes bribes almost directly and has no true opinions. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | SecretDreams 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| They're very scared of their boss and the CEOs are short sighted by virtue of their compensation packages. |
|
| ▲ | newtonianrules an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You have to understand that the smartest people in the US didn’t vote for this administration and are just as horrified as everyone else with how inept and pathetic this administration is. Unfortunately we’re a minority, the senate’s design (Wyoming has the same number of senators as California even though a small city in CA may have more people than the whole state) and the US is so ridiculously gerrymandered. Sorry everybody but we just have to wait this stupidity out. |
| |
| ▲ | stouset an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | This stupidity is not going to simply be waited out. It is becoming even further entrenched. | |
| ▲ | ericmay an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | There are a lot of issues in the American political system but the structure of the Senate is not one of those. It was explicitly created as a way to balance sovereignty of the states against populism, such as that enacted by MAGA or leftists. If you are a small state like Vermont, you don’t want to just have California, New York, and Texas dictating all rules and laws for the country by sheer weight of their population sizes. That is expressed in the House, but the Senate serves to balance that and ensure that populists don’t run roughshod over the country. Without such a structure states with less population would either band together and create their own super states - and you can see where this leads, or they wouldn’t have agreed to join the US in the first place. | | |
| ▲ | oscillonoscope 11 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | This might have made sense for the original 13 colonies but after westward expansion, it clearly does not. Most of the western state borders were formed for administrative reasons | |
| ▲ | wolvoleo 24 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > That is expressed in the House, but the Senate serves to balance that and ensure that populists don’t run roughshod over the country. Yet that is exactly what has been happening twice now. | |
| ▲ | boustrophedon an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes, if anything the issue is that the House was capped in seats in 1929 and the population has tripled. Smaller states have an outsized representation in Congress currently. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | spamizbad an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| You can’t lobby the Trump or “America First” crowd to not be themselves. |
