# Corrupt Politicians & Extortion Money



## SG854 (Apr 10, 2019)

Here is a point I don't really see many people bring up. What if some of the buisnesses aren't corrupt. What if it's the politicans that are corrupt and buisness are just defending themselves.


That they tried to get extortion money from buisnesses, like Microsoft. Which Microsoft refused to be involved with politicians. And a few months later the Government hit them with Monopoly anti-trust lawsuits all because Microsoft offered Internet Explorer for free with their opereating system. They said it'll give Microsoft unfair advantage over the competition by offering a free web browser, and attract more customers, which undermined their competitor at the time Netscape, and which will give them more monopoly control over the market.

But it's hardly a monopoly since Linux, OSX and other OS exist. And it may give Microsoft a boost in the short run, but with market competition other competitors may do the same to out compete Microsoft. An example of them not having complete control would be in 2003 the City Governement of Munich switched from using Windows that they used in 14,000 of their computers to using Linux.



So imagine this situation but applied to game consoles game servers. What if the majority charge for internet servers but one big corporation doesn't and offers it for free. Would they then be hit with anti-trust monopoly lawsuits? Is offering free online a gaming business going out of control for monopoly control?

Microsoft refuse to lobby the governement so they were hit with a lawsuit. And now Microsoft has a building in Washington, lawyers, and they lobby the government. What if it's not big business that are corrupt, what if some are victims and only pay politicians extortion money, so that politicians and legislators won't pass legislation and use laws to screw over their business? Give me money and we won't screw you over.


----------



## notimp (Apr 11, 2019)

What a poor man, flogging something on a youtube channel on that video.

Ok, where do we start. There is basically no what if the one side is good, and the other side is bad. They both just "are-".

And they are different "modes" of power (as is the justice system, or the executive branch (police, ..))

The most interesting principal to look into to get the relationship between politics and business is the "revolving door", the second most interesting is professional "lobbying".

Then you also ought to state - that _real_ money is only to be made in business. And with that usually comes a separate tier of influence. Politics is often just seen as sort of a base layer - but then, it depends - there are also more important decisions to be made on the political level, but those usually arent made very often (not every year, not every ten years...).

Theres also the point, that politicians are supposed to be responsible to their electorate, and their parties, while business people are not. Wherever on the good/bad spectrum you'd like to put that. 

Also being "corrupt" is not some absolute "no no" - it just means, that your vote or opinion can be bought. And to be honest, most peoples - can. Not to get into conflict with the law, you have to coat it a little differently - but at its heart its still part of how every system of power works inherently. Imho.

edit: Ah, one more interesting tidbit. In europe, usually we see the "state" as something thats there to set ground rules, to "protect" us all, while in the US they usually are much more positively leaning towards business, and far more often talk about state interference with regulation.

This is situated in the popularity of the neoliberal model, as far as I can tell. Not much else too it.


----------



## Xzi (Apr 11, 2019)

SG854 said:


> Here is a point I don't really see many people bring up. What if some of the buisnesses aren't corrupt. What if it's the politicans that are corrupt and buisness are just defending themselves.


You don't?  People rant about politicians all the time.  And the corrupt ones don't really try to hide their corruption these days, either.



SG854 said:


> Which Microsoft refused to be involved with politicians. And a few months later the Government hit them with Monopoly anti-trust lawsuits all because Microsoft offered Internet Explorer for free with their opereating system. They said it'll give Microsoft unfair advantage over the competition by offering a free web browser, and attract more customers, which undermined their competitor at the time Netscape, and which will give them more monopoly control over the market.


I don't agree with what happened to Microsoft, particularly because nobody has followed through on that precedent with other overly-large corporate entities since it was set.  Disney, Facebook, Apple, Google, and Amazon are all much closer to monopolies now than Microsoft ever was.


----------



## SG854 (Apr 11, 2019)

notimp said:


> Ok, where do we start. There is basically no what if the one side is good, and the other side is bad. They both just "are-".


I did use the word SOME, which implies there is bad actors on both sides of the spectrum.



Xzi said:


> You don't?  People rant about politicians all the time.  And the corrupt ones don't really try to hide their corruption these days, either.
> 
> 
> I don't agree with what happened to Microsoft, particularly because nobody has followed through on that precedent with other overly-large corporate entities since it was set.  Disney, Facebook, Apple, Google, and Amazon are all much closer to monopolies now than Microsoft ever was.


Not specifically about extortion money though and the way I described it.

I wouldn't call apple a monopoly because Samsung exists, and other competitors exist. The moment they slip up and sell a horribly bad product they will be over run. They have to keep improving their iphone yearly to compete. 

Netflix is a huge competitor to Disney and Anime can give them a major advantage. They are re-dubbing Neon Genesis Evangelion. Disney is offering their own streaming service to compete. And have to keep improving to compete with them. There are tons of others not owned by Disney, and even if they own a good chunk still not a full monopoly. 

They had the same fears of Microsoft saying they will become a Monopoly, leave few choices, raised costs and stifle innovation. But computers are a lot better now then they were in the 90's. People have lots of choices with web browsers, many are free. And you're paying cheaper/same price for more advanced hardware then what you can get in the 90's. And peoples standard of living has raised with more advanced faster computers now. Our lives now highly revolve around them, especially to get information, watch video's and communicate with people world wide.


----------



## Xzi (Apr 11, 2019)

SG854 said:


> I wouldn't call apple a monopoly because Samsung exists, and other competitors exist.


Well, they're a duopoly.  Which is why I also mentioned Google.  Owning half, or nearly half, of the cell phone market is still ridiculous.  Not to mention they own just as much on the software side with the curation of the app store.



SG854 said:


> Netflix is a huge competitor to Disney and Anime can give them a major advantage.


It's not about whether they have _any_ competitors left or not.  Disney still owns a ridiculous portion of the entertainment industry overall, including a majority of Hulu.  I'm sure by now this infographic isn't even up to date, and they already needed a resolution greater than 4K to make it all readable.


----------



## notimp (Apr 11, 2019)

I absolutely disagree on Microsoft.

Also, talking about corruption?

Accenture was the "independent" consultant, that ADVISED the city of munich to get out out Linux - and even made them a handy step by step plan to switch over to Windows. At the cost of a few million.
src: https://www.heise.de/newsticker/mel...len-Ausstieg-aus-LiMux-auf-Raten-3463100.html (german)

Fast forward to 2019: Accenture and Microsoft are founding a new business group to help wealthy businesses do "digitalisation with azure cloud products" yay!
src: https://www.information-age.com/accenture-microsoft-avanade-business-group-123478888/

This - is corruption.

Also - internet as a platform (what IE explorer was all about) very much was monopolized after the browser wars (by the same company that also owned the monopoly on the OS market at the time), and had to be broken up. The way they did it was laughable to begin with, and not much more than a slap on the wrist. They drew Gates through some overly public hearings, that surely werent fun to sit through (although gates might disagree  :

) - but left the company intact.

The tech sector serves as a great conceptual frame to look at the interaction between politics and business.

Consultant companies, you've just gotten to know (google around PWC to take a look at another one).

Then there was the PR stunt, where all the Big Five silicon valley CEOs were supposed to meet with the US president to talk about future trajectories of the country. That pretty much showed the self image of the entire sector. And the relationship with politics (look up the articles there).

Before that, there was Eric Schmidt's pitch to "take over the US intelligence apparatus" and replacing it with google. Because they would do much better forcasting on the world scale... He even wrote a book about it (How Google Works - A book by Eric Schmidt & Jonathan Rosenberg). Of course that didn't go over too well... You can google around ventures Alphabet is currently involved in as well (which is pretty much this trajectory: https://www.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2019/03/inside-gaos-plan-make-congress-more-tech-savvy/155689/)

Then there are the maniacal ideas to circumvent governments all together. Insert any "low orbit satellite internet" plans, or Project Loon.

Which brings us to the importance of owning transnational infrastructure. See: https://news.microsoft.com/marea/

All interactions between big business and government.

All recent. Draw whatever you want from it. 

On the base politics level (small to medium size contracts), politics is played to no end. But then in return they can hike up fines, whenever they feel like it - which brings us to the concept of "digitalization tax".

Which is under acute debate on the EU level. And if you think about it - rightly so. Ever heard of "digitalization" being a disruptive technology and possibly responsible of making a third of all jobs in the medium term future obsolete?

Well - the big five (tech companies) don't want to pay for it, and as thus it has become a lobbying battle - and currently they are winning. Because they have money, and a flawless image.

Facebook should have been broken up. Google should have. Amazon should have. Nothing happened along those fronts. In fact currently the "trend of the time" is to create even bigger corporate conglomerates to "battle the chinese megacorps".

Which brings us to overall lines - where I'd recommend you to watch the introduction speech of Merkel at Messe Hannover:


As I've said, the tech sector serves as a good cross section to look at corporate / public power relationships.



SG854 said:


> So imagine this situation but applied to game consoles game servers.


What servers? The majority of online game session hosting is done P2P.
You basically give those companies money for nothing.

How can you "see" that? Persistent massively multiplayer environements arent the norm. And thats the only thing you need server capacity for. Every thing else can be done P2P, so it is done P2P. Another way to look at it is, that on the PC you dont pay for online play. And game prices are lower. And there is still a business, and you still have the same, or better online experiences as a result. What do you think you are paying money for exactly? So Epic (Fortnight) can make a living?

see for example: h**ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jht8LTe_mpI


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Apr 11, 2019)

SG854 said:


> Here is a point I don't really see many people bring up. What if some of the buisnesses aren't corrupt. What if it's the politicans that are corrupt and buisness are just defending themselves.




given the long history and countless examples of big business doing really crooked and or morally objectionable things in this country... I have a hard time feeling sympathy for big faceless corporations getting some of their own medicine every once in a while (not that it justifies it.... its just really hard to care)


----------



## supersonicwaffle (Apr 11, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Disney, Facebook, Apple, Google, and Amazon are all much closer to monopolies now than Microsoft ever was.



Nonsense. I don't think you know the corporate and enterprise market for Microsoft solutions very well.


----------



## the_randomizer (Apr 11, 2019)

supersonicwaffle said:


> Nonsense. I don't think you know the corporate and enterprise market for Microsoft solutions very well.



They're all fall too powerful and it would be very cathartic to see such big useless companies be knocked down a few rungs.


----------



## SG854 (Apr 11, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> given the long history and countless examples of big business doing really crooked and or morally objectionable things in this country... I have a hard time feeling sympathy for big faceless corporations getting some of their own medicine every once in a while (not that it justifies it.... its just really hard to care)


What if they are a corporation or a business that did no harm? I noticed a lot of things people complain as corrupt business practices are not actually corrupt. Like having prices too high! Like a business in a high crime area that has higher prices then in a non high crime place for the same items. Even if it's from the same business chains. Are they greedy? Are they taking advantage of people? Or are the prices higher because crime is higher so they have to hire more security, more cameras, use less floor space to sell items, make up for damage costs, make up for items stolen, also worry about people going to the store less because fear of safety which lead to less items sold.

Some stores can freely put out items in the front of the store without having to worry about it getting stolen and maximize store space, while some can't and less items are on display to be sold. So they raise their prices to make up for this loss or they'll go out of business. Not many stores will be open in that area because of high crime and people will complain about a food dessert in the case of markets.

The "greedy" store actually makes less then a different store that sells the same items for less. Because of higher turnover rates from the cheaper store since more people go to that store instead of the more expensive one. Even if they travel to a cheaper store in a different city, that's added traveling costs and time just to get cheaper items. And in no way good for people in poor cities. But you have people rag on them for being greedy even thought the more expensive store is making less overall then the cheaper one.


----------



## SG854 (Apr 11, 2019)

Or are you talking about Big Oil and Gas preventing new technologies from arising and want people to use more gas so they can make more money.

They seem to be doing a bad job of it because the U.S. leads the world and all countries in reducing Carbon Emissions. And they do a good job at debunking the Washington Post fact check. Which i've noticed their fact checkers are sometimes just plain bad. And U.S. per capita reduction is higher then any other country. United States is a big country. So using the country as a whole compared to a smaller European country is a bad metric to use. The U.S. had the largest decrease in carbon emissions. And is among the top countries leading the world in carbon reduction. No matter how many times people criticize the U.S. for having crazy anti global warming conservatives.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapie...es-in-reducing-carbon-emissions/#7a052de93535




Nuclear Power is the solution solutions to global warming, much better then solar and wind power. We just got to get people on board. Even the environmentalist people against Nuclear. Its much safer then it has been in the past. And will generate tons of new jobs which will get a conservatives attention to support a switch in power.


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/06/opinion/sunday/climate-change-nuclear-power.html


----------



## notimp (Apr 11, 2019)

Arguing on willpower. 

All this is getting to nowhere, isnt it? Arguing that politics is more bad than business because people mistake high prices for corruption. What is this, seriously..


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Apr 12, 2019)

notimp said:


> Arguing on willpower.
> Arguing that politics is more bad than business because people mistake high prices for corruption. What is this, seriously..


THIS.


@SG854 if you have never heard of corporations doing shady or illegal things and then being caught and being taken to hell and back for doing it, i do not think any number of examples that i could pull up will convince you otherwise.


----------



## Xzi (Apr 12, 2019)

supersonicwaffle said:


> Nonsense. I don't think you know the corporate and enterprise market for Microsoft solutions very well.


Fair enough.  So you're saying perhaps they were closer to a monopoly than I give them credit for?  Or that they are now?


----------



## petethepug (Apr 12, 2019)

Now the question is.
What about the lt over material or waste. (That's something I can agree with.)



Numerous people have thrown or sacrificed something before. It could be considered a waste. But its like people don't get it until that ""that person."" is caught or ""captured"" for something. Like water gate hotel scandle. Nixon was arrested on the spotr beingght for banking and lawyering.




….. But that doesn't mean its okay if someone is caught. It just means they need to try better. Or harder the next time. Without exorting or distorting funding from somewhere, or something.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Apr 12, 2019)

petethepug said:


> Now the question is.
> ….. But that doesn't mean its okay if someone is caught. It just means they need to try better. Or harder the next time. Without exorting or distorting funding from somewhere, or something.


problem being that at the end of the day corporations being fined millions of dollars for bad behavior are not going to change course. To most of them its money they put aside just in case they get slapped on the wrist


----------



## SG854 (Apr 12, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> THIS.
> 
> 
> @SG854 if you have never heard of corporations doing shady or illegal things and then being caught and being taken to hell and back for doing it, i do not think any number of examples that i could pull up will convince you otherwise.


Never did. Corporation do, do shady things. Never said they didn’t.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

It’s about which ones, not all are bad, and not all things they do are bad. And don’t mistake shady things that aren’t actually shady.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Apr 12, 2019)

SG854 said:


> Never did. Corporation do, do shady things. Never said they didn’t.
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> It’s about which ones, not all are bad. And don’t mistake shady things that aren’t actually shady.



....and for those who do.... its hard to feel sympathy for. The end


----------



## SG854 (Apr 12, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> ....and for those who do.... its hard to feel sympathy for. Thats all im saying


And I’m agreeing. It’s a really complicated issue we can both agree right? Not a one fits all type of thing.

I see people complaining about certain shady business practices when they aren’t actually shady. I’m fine when they complain about actual shady things. I don’t like tax havens and don’t like money in politics.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Apr 12, 2019)

SG854 said:


> I don’t like tax havens and don’t like money in politics.




real talk: This is probably one the most bi-partisan things that will ever be said by someone in this forum. congrats.


----------



## SG854 (Apr 12, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> real talk: This is probably one the most bi-partisan things that will ever be said by someone in this forum. congrats.




I’m actually rooting for a Democrat next election. Maybe Yang or Bernie. Tulsi Gabbard looks interesting too. I like trying different ideas. I don’t really choose sides. I like ideas rather then parties. All I want is to find the best solutions to problems that is all. I’m still young in my 20’s just trying to figure things out.

And posting stuff on here is a good place for me to learn, since I still don’t know much, and people push back a lot on what I say. I gets me to think in a different perspective and research things that I didn’t think about that never crossed my mind.


I think conservatives and democrats act as a balancing force so that the 2 won’t go wild. I don’t hate neither parties.


----------



## notimp (Apr 12, 2019)

Just realized, that the Merkel speech is in german. Sorry, my bad..


----------



## petethepug (Apr 12, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> To most of them its money


By the time they lose more money. There's no point to the value of money.
Its what a lot of people forget about it. Early. Especially when marketing of... goes on sale or happens. And I mean that in almost the sincerest way possible. Losing money from extortion or distorition without also frauding in some mischievous way... .




Otherwise. This story would probably be a lot different for the ""wars"" that happen around or across the globe. (took this off topic.) but war is a meaningful way to economically ruin distortion without paying or spending money. For the effort of lives or the environment.


----------



## notimp (Apr 30, 2019)

How political power works, from "americas biographer in chief" Robert Caro:
(Pulitzer price winning)




Have fun.


----------



## kevin corms (Apr 30, 2019)

These days people have a hard time with the concept of two things being true at once.


----------



## notimp (May 13, 2019)

Chance find: Book review "Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right. By Jane Mayer.": The Economist 30.01 - 05.03. 2016

```
Political influence in America

A network of wealthy donors has a mission to push politics to the right

The avengers In 1972 W. Clement Stone, a wealthy businessman, gave $2m
to Richard Nixon’s presidential campaign. The cheque, worth $11.4m
today, provoked outrage and led to calls for campaign-finance reform.
How quaint history seems when compared with the momentous present. In
2016 a group of rich conservative donors will spend nearly $900m to
influence the presidential and congressional elections. They avoid
public scrutiny by funnelling money into a labyrinthine collection of
foundations and anonymous political groups.

This secret system is the subject of “Dark Money”, an ambitious new book
by Jane Mayer of the New Yorker. David and Charles Koch (pronounced
“coke”), who inherited an industrial conglomerate based in Wichita,
Kansas, which is the second-largest private company in America, are at
the heart of the book. Although the company is diverse, with interests
in energy, chemicals, commodities and consumer goods, its owners focus
on advancing their conservative political agenda. The Kochs deny climate
change and oppose government regulation, welfare and taxes. They view
the rise of the Democrats and Barack Obama’s election in 2008 in
apocalyptic terms, and the counterinsurgency they have funded has
changed the face of politics in America. They have exerted their
strongest influence at state level, where a lot of business regulation
is written.

Ms Mayer, whose sympathies are with the left and who is a critic of
Republican values and motives, does not go so far as to call the source
of the Kochs’ fortune “blood money”, but she does claim that it is
tainted. This is not the first book to look at their business interests
(“Sons of Wichita”, by Daniel Schulman, came out in 2014), but it is the
first to allege that the patriarch Fred Koch made part of his early
wealth by helping build oil refineries in Soviet Russia and Nazi
Germany. The company has faced plenty of public controversy in America,
including environmental fines and lawsuits. There have also been family
conflicts. There are four Koch brothers, not just Charles and David who
are well known. Along with their brother Bill, they allegedly tried in
the 1960s to blackmail a fourth sibling, Frederick, to sell his shares
in the company. The brothers had concluded that he was gay (which he has
denied) and, Ms Mayer suggests, they threatened to expose him to their
father, which caused a permanent rift.

It is the political panorama beyond the Kochs, however, that makes Ms
Mayer’s book more than just another feisty corporate critique. Rich
conservatives, Ms Mayer argues, set up private foundations, which allow
them quietly to divert money to their favourite political causes free of
tax. These foundations-including those set up by the Kochs, Richard
Mellon Scaife and Harry Bradley—are not subject to much disclosure or
oversight. Since foundations were first used by the robber barons as a
way to avoid taxes while appearing philanthropic, they have ballooned.
In 2013 there were over 100,000 of them, with assets of around $800
billion. Some of these do good for the world’s poor, but their structure
also enables them to push money secretly into partisan think-tanks like
the Cato Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise
Institute and the Hoover Institution. In other words, the wealthy have
always used charitable foundations to influence politics at the expense
of taxpayers.

“Dark Money” tracks other attempts to alter public discourse without
leaving a trace. The Kochs and other conservatives support academic
research that is allied to their political ideologies. They want to take
“the liberal out of liberal arts”, as Ms Mayer puts it. For example, the
John M. Olin Foundation backed a professor at the University of Chicago,
John Lott, to write a book, “More Guns, Less Crime”, calling for
concealed weapons to be legalised. The Kochs have regularly held summits
to share their free-market, anti-taxation views. Among those invited are
federal judges, 185 of whom have attended seminars sponsored by
conservative interests, including the Koch Foundation.

Ms Mayer’s book seethes with distaste for her subjects. The Koch
brothers denied to be interviewed for “Dark Money”, and purportedly
tried to smear Ms Mayer’s reputation by accusing her of plagiarism after
she published a critical article about them in the New Yorker in 2010.

An author can dislike her subjects. However, the book would have been
stronger had Ms Mayer expanded the scope of her scorn. She acknowledges
in passing that Democratic donors, including two hedge-fund
billionaires, George Soros and Tom Steyer, have funnelled money into
their own political causes. But she never dissects whether the left has
embraced the deceptive funding mechanisms that she so assiduously has
traced for the right. The fact that she does not cast a critical eye
across the whole system prevents “Dark Money” from being a comprehensive
analysis of how America’s campaign finances are distorted. But it offers
a valuable contribution to a subject that requires far greater scrutiny
in this election year.
```
Codebox can be scrolled.

Have fun.


----------



## notimp (May 23, 2019)

Roßmann redet mal wieder.


This one is in german only - no subtitles, sorry. 
And its really a shame - because it gives allegories for everything. (Politics, economic power, constitutional law, media and overreach.)


----------



## notimp (Jun 16, 2019)

Oh dang it - the Rossman interview is down... 

Well - we'll have to do it in article form then... 

Germanys rich:


> The life of German tycoons
> 
> *The reticent rich*
> 
> ...


src: The Economist 15 06 2019


----------



## notimp (Jun 16, 2019)

Another story - same issue. This time I'm not posting it in full.

Basically states, that the state taxing companies that can not threaten to leave and thereby gaining investment capital, had been used to boost middle class economies, when the need arises (they want progress). Because thats not happening anymore in recent years (see: Mariana Mazzucato) - the middle classes now - march. 



> Middlemarch
> 
> Quibble with the details, but the overarching story—immobile companies giving governments a degree of sovereignty, which they self-interestedly use to boost the middle classes—seems a plausible account of the stability of advanced capitalist democracies. It leaves plenty to be concerned about, however. It hinges on the middle classes feeling confident about the economy. A sharp slowdown in growth in real median incomes, as in America and Britain in recent years, might not send voters rushing to the barricades, ...





> ...but could strengthen the appeal of movements that threaten to disturb the status quo.
> Governments, too, are becoming less responsive to middle-class priorities. America's is too dysfunctional, and Britain’s too distracted by Brexit, to focus on improving education, infrastructure and the competitiveness of markets.





> Demographic change might also take a toll: older and whiter generations may not much care whether a would-be middle class that does not look like them has opportunities to advance or not. Then, too, the authors may have underestimated the corrosive effect of inequality. Threatening to leave is not the only way the rich can wield power. They control mass media, fund think-thanks and spend on or become political candidates. Proud democracies may well survive this period of turmoil. But it would be a mistake to assume survival is foreordained.


"Free Exchange, Votes of confidence" in The Economist 2019 06 15

Ah. Clear text.


----------



## notimp (Jun 22, 2019)

How corruption works:
https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/21/guatemala_presidential_election_thelma_aldana_corruption

(Video starts at the correct time stamp.)

This is a good example of how institutionalized political corruption works. Its good because its a little removed from our (western) sensibilities, so its possible not to immediately take sides with certain political fractions. The video tells the story from the left progressives point of view - but is detailed enough, and includes the right actors - so you can gage how the process of political corruption works in principal.

I'd recommend you watch this video with a mindset that hasn't you automatically side with the "progressives running on a platform of diversity and economic justice" in the end. Because thats what the video suggests.  It might not be wrong (know too little about the country) - but its at least political. (As is the entire rest.  ) If you can - look more at the process... 

edit: Country that has to serve as an example here is Guatemala.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

How corruption works in western societies:
https://www.arte.tv/de/videos/043387-000-A/who-am-tropf-der-geldgeber/

(Sadly only in german and french again.)

This is - without kidding - the single best investigative documentary I've seen in ten years. Not because about what it set out to prove (title of the documentary), but because of what it lays bare of the institutional process. This is how western societies work. As a blueprint.

(Video in german on youtube:
 )


----------



## notimp (Jun 22, 2019)

How political influencing works in the US.

Based on the actual proceedings (step by step) to try to prevent the pentagon papers from being published:

https://www.democracynow.org/2019/6/18/former_new_york_times_general_counsel

(Video in the link starts at the correct time code.)


----------



## notimp (Jun 23, 2019)

Ah, finally a reason to link 'Born Rich' again.

Reason:
Johnson & Johnson faces multibillion opioids lawsuit that could upend big pharma


> As the state of Oklahoma’s multibillion-dollar lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson has unfolded over the past month, the company has struggled to explain marketing strategies its accusers say dangerously misrepresented the risk of opioid addiction to doctors, manipulated medical research, and helped drive an epidemic that has claimed 400,000 lives over the past two decades.





> Johnson & Johnson profited further as demand for opioids surged by buying poppy growing companies in Australia to supply the raw narcotic for its own medicines and other American drug makers.
> 
> One expert witness at the forefront of combatting the epidemic, Dr Andrew Kolodny, told the court he had little idea about Johnson & Johnson’s role until he saw the evidence in the case.


src: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...d-johnson-opioids-crisis-lawsuit-latest-trial

Born Rich (Documentary filmed by one of the Johnson & Johnson heirs.):


If you watch after reading, dont take this one too hard. The irony here is the sweet part..


----------



## notimp (Jul 21, 2019)

1/2 OT - but I think I can place it here.

I'll translate on the fly.

The rich in the west have moved towards private investment vehicles and away from banks.


> Rebecca Gooch estimates, that there are currently 7300 Single-Family-Offices that work for single families, 38 percent more than two years ago. Those are managing combined assets of 5,9 trillion US dollars. This is twice as much as Hedge Fonds are stepping into the ring with.
> 
> The spread is enormous – from a single person unit, which is responsible for 50 million USD, to investment organizations with dozens of billions of wealth. An investment vehicle like Waypoint owned by the genevan family Bertarelli with its 200 staff members looks like a smaller version of Private Equity firms like KKR. Heartland of Family Offices would be the USA, followed by Great Britain and then Switzerland and Germany says Memminger, an adviser that worked with over 20 of them. Asia is currently only at the beginning stages of this development.
> 
> Family Offices have cost conventional banks a lot of business in the past couple of years, even though some of them – like the two swiss giants UBS and Credit Suisse – have created their business model around the needs of the super rich. The industry leader UBS counts more than half of all billionaires amongst its customers.


src:
https://diepresse.com/home/wirtscha...-Reiche-haben-eigenes-Family-Office-fuer-sich (german)

English news sources should be able to be sourced by googling for the two people named in this article.


----------



## Smoker1 (Jul 21, 2019)

In America, how it is supposed to be: A Country of the People, by the People, for the People.
How it seems to be in recent Decades: A Country of the Wealthy, by the Wealthy, for the Wealthy.
Notice how there are Laws in place where if the People do it, it is Illegal. But if the Wealthy or big Business does it, it is Politics/Business. Not to mention, the Wealthy get all the Tax Breaks, while the People end up flipping the Bill for it.
Also, the People Pay into SSI, Medicare, and other items. But you always hear the guy who looks like Cecil Turtle from Looney Tunes, talking about Cutting SSI, Medicare, and anything else that helps the People, Elderly, Disabled, and Vets.
I love how when Bush was in Office, the idiots in Office took Money from SSI, and it has yet to be returned.

I swear, these idiots in Office need to be reminded that they are supposed to be Representing the PEOPLE! Not just the Wealthy, their Bank Accounts, or themselves. Also thought Trump was going to go for getting Term Limits????????
Finally, the Wealthy also need to know, that the PEOPLE keep this Country going. If the People suddenly stopped coming into Work for a few Days, how much would the Wealthy lose?????


----------



## notimp (Jul 22, 2019)

A country of the people by the people? You know that this all just meant, that you'd go with free democratic elections, and that if non-constitutional power (handed on through institutions for generations) would have been established, that people could and were supposed to overthrow it by attaining to the streets.

Well this ship has sailed long ago. Trust in politics is at a constant low for generations. Democracy doesnt matter anymore (gerrymandering, open talk about stolen elections, superpacks, only a two party system - none of which has an actual program - they just pick up what ever soundpieces are popular at the time - and those are almost never directional decision, that have an impact on peoples lives programmatically). Again - I believe, that Colin Crouch' Post-Democracy concept is very much correct. (Oligopolies, are what you are dealing with, if you are lucky.)

People only hold real power, when they are in mobs, on the streets - thereby tanking economies. Because thats so bad for economies, we took that feeling and attached to election processes - which isnt bad, those are rituals that remind everyone of something that isn't real (power of the people) - but feals so good. But then we minimized everything that elections could mean. We stabalised outcomes, we lost all political direction, we dumbed down public decision processes to a point where they really dont matter at all.

I mean - you've got to see it this way - in the US you can now decide between "getting universal health care" as compensation for the impending digitalisation and automation age - something the rest of the world has managed to already get ages ago.

And if and how you want to damage your economy out of you own volition, because of a higher conceptional goal (climate).

If you look at that as someone that comes from a 'working' society, you cry tears. You've all but proven, that the president is really just a figuerehead, and is needed for nothing, nothing at all. And that congress seems to 'function' properly if it is in a 10 year deathlock on all issues - except, when you need to buy out the rich, and spread financial crises around the world.

You've shown multiple times, that symbol politics works, that you can rule people with a boogieman thats not real (terrorism).

You've handed over political decision making to an advertising company ('I get me news from facebook - oh look, an ad'). But now you've seen the faults of your ways and switched to the instagram.

And you are on the verge of loosing half of your power as citizens, at the point when you simply will not be needed from a productivity pov. You've tasted a little bit of that already through globalisation.

No one believes, that more power to the people would be a solution for anything. You consume netflix, and you are happy. Keep it that way.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

This is your bible for the following five decades:
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ative-neoliberalism-still-understands-markets

And none of 'the people' ever thought to protest for that.

'But we have to show more, of what the founding fathers meant, when they...' Oh for fucks sake.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Also - here is what reducing economic activity within societies does. It cements in the status quo (spread of economical differences). It basically produces the reverse american dream.

You are all fine with that, right? No? Go watch netflix.

I mean - you cant be politically interested, intelligent and dumb enough not to see all of that happening.


----------



## supersonicwaffle (Jul 22, 2019)

SG854 said:


> I wouldn't call apple a monopoly because Samsung exists, and other competitors exist. The moment they slip up and sell a horribly bad product they will be over run. They have to keep improving their iphone yearly to compete.



For what it's worth the argument that Apple is a monopoly usually revolves around them being the only way to obtain apps on the iOS platform that doesn't involve jailbreaking and losing warranty. Google allows installing third party app stores like Amazon's or F-Droid without root access.
Their monopoly on app stores is a particular problem since Apple is willing to employ means they have banned in their ToS for other developers to promote their services. Third party developers for example are not allowed to promote their services through push notifications but Apple does exactly that for their own services.

EDIT: If you want a specific example I think Spotify is currenlty in a legal battle with Apple because Apple promoted their Apple Music service with push notifications.



Xzi said:


> Fair enough. So you're saying perhaps they were closer to a monopoly than I give them credit for? Or that they are now?



Sorry for not getting back to this at the time. It's hard to discuss Microsoft without diving into the plethora of products and services they offer and with some of them, yes they absolutely have the market cornered.
Microsoft Exchange Server (Groupware, Mail/Contacts/Calendar) for example is particularly devoid of good alternatives. Calendar and Contacts will not work with standard protocols and are only really usable in Outlook. With their recent push towards cloud services they raised the minimum requirements from 8GB RAM for Exchange 2016 to 128GB RAM for Exchange 2019. The way it works is that you won't get help if you call their support hotline unless you meet the minimum requirements. They have removed Exchange server from their self hosted small business products.
With Office they made a push to get an ISO certification for their document format Office Open XML (docx, xlsx, etc.) in 2008 but have since only released "transitional" versions of their document format that contain a lot of undocumented (read non-standardized) specs. On top of that the default font for Microsoft office is licensed with Microsoft office, so using the default font will mess with formatting when you open the document in a different office suite on a system that doesn't have these fonts installed.


----------



## notimp (Jul 22, 2019)

For all we know more power to the people means, have fun in your gig economy jobs. They so self empowering. Just on a level, where you'll matter less over all.

Now go watch more Netflix.


----------



## notimp (Jul 22, 2019)

It also doesnt help much, that part of the left is CONSTANTLY thinking about how they can reframe "20-40 years of absolutely no net gain of incomes" and "0% interest economy (so saving up isn't viable anymore for the vast majority of people)".

into something extremely wonderful - like

- Look, you havent even noticed, you were so happy, before someone told you

or

- But we have higher employment rates, isn't that great?

or

- But the world is so much better now.

or

- But you dont want to be better off economically - do you? You just want to be more happy!

or

- Look, its much more beautiful outside of cities, somewhere in the woods, where you'll not matter at all.


See:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/jun/13/moving-away-from-gdp-as-a-measure-of-success

No? Still no one biting? Still just how societies should develop "normally". And now new in their portfolio: Could you suffer a little more, so that your grandchildren will suffer less? Promised?

I mean, you dont even feel it - with all your netflix watching and stuff.

Again - those people - hit them in the mouth for me, if you ever see them. Do it for me.


----------



## supersonicwaffle (Jul 22, 2019)

SG854 said:


> An example of them not having complete control would be in 2003 the City Governement of Munich switched from using Windows that they used in 14,000 of their computers to using Linux.





notimp said:


> Accenture was the "independent" consultant, that ADVISED the city of munich to get out out Linux - and even made them a handy step by step plan to switch over to Windows. At the cost of a few million.
> src: https://www.heise.de/newsticker/mel...len-Ausstieg-aus-LiMux-auf-Raten-3463100.html (german)
> 
> Fast forward to 2019: Accenture and Microsoft are founding a new business group to help wealthy businesses do "digitalisation with azure cloud products" yay!
> ...



Have a like each for mentioning LiMux.
I will say however that the project was too ambitious for its own good and introduced a lot of unnecessary overhead that held it back and lead to low user acceptance.
Basically they opted to maintain their own Linux distro based on Ubuntu, which is known to not be particularly fast to adopt current versions of the applications they're shipping and the LiMux team has basically been behind one full 2 year release cycle when rolling it out on top of that.
The LiMux desktop OS 5.0 was rolled out in 2014 and was based on Ubuntu 12.04 while 14.04 was recently released.
As a matter of fact I'm typing this out on a Ubuntu 18.04 machine right now and am annoyed with features missing from my mail client because it's way behind and I will probably switch distributions on that machine in the near future.


----------



## notimp (Jul 22, 2019)

For a mail client? 

Regardless, the point I wanted to make was, that Accenture got their payback in terms of an exclusive business venture with Microsoft to "advise" more companies in the private sector to bet exclusively on MS infrastructure.

Then they were sued for 32 Million USD by Herz, for a website project they cashed 32 Million USD in on. For a website project. Worth maybe 20k, heck - I'm generous today, make it 200k. They cached 32 Million for it. And delivered next to nothing.

I mean if your business is all based on selling people on monopoly power (closed format), then being bought out as an 'independant consultants', and then sell or help sell all information on the customer (https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/microsoft-office-365-banned-from-german-schools/), and then hope not to get sued by your former clients - at which point is it polite to say that you suck?

I mean I'm all for opportunity in capitalism, but this is a little bit much.


----------



## supersonicwaffle (Jul 22, 2019)

notimp said:


> For a mail client?
> 
> Regardless, the point I wanted to make was, that Accenture got their payback in terms of an exclusive business venture with Microsoft to "advise" more companies in the private sector to bet exclusively on MS infrastructure.
> 
> ...



Things are not as easy as they look on the surface. I'm not gonna lie, I have a preference for open source software but for a lot of use cases Microsoft has the better products - period. The cost savings estimations that were published are also very misleading IMO. They assumed the same labor cost for both Windows and Linux while they were maintaining their own Linux distro and developing in-house software to facilitate a migration to OpenOffice. However, they also estimated the cost for personell training to be the same for both scenarios where I believe it would be much higher for Windows.
They estimated they saved 10 million Euros with LiMux over the course of 10 years in an infrastructure of a scale of 15,000 desktop PCs. That's not that much if you consider the cost of organizational issues that surely came up along the way that haven't been factored in at all.
Another thing that simply isn't mentioned is that you buy support from Microsoft along with most licences but that has not been quantified in the LiMux reports at all. They did not buy commercial third level support for Ubuntu or OpenOffice and assumed there's no cost savings with Microsoft products here.
They also only considered the cost of hardware upgrades necessary for windows without looking at energy savings as hardware has become a lot more energy efficient during the timeframe that the LiMux project lasted.
Low user acceptance and growing pains will also lower productivity but that is very hard to quantify. In some cases you're saving money by replacing hardware outright.
The point is that something with the scope of LiMux really only gets viable in large scale deployments where labor cost is becoming less of an issue compared to licensing cost, LiMux also committed them to maintaining their customized solutions for an unforseeable time. It makes sense, especially for a private entity, to avoid this scenario. Another thing to consider with private entities is that they tend to get more and more decentralized as they grow, which is another point where a city administration has better chances at success because they can keep a centralized IT department.

Microsoft recently revoked CERN's status as an educational organization and require them to pay full price for licensing now. CERN has announced that they are looking for open source alternatives. They have been blogging about it here: https://home.cern/news/news/computing/migrating-open-source-technologies
I'll cheer them on!


----------



## notimp (Jul 22, 2019)

Closed formats. Lock in. Predatory practices. Consultant Companies, that build direct business relationships with the monopolist in the field in countertrade deals. I'm not interested in User expectation or support cost. At all.

A small part of me is miffed, that there was no state sponsoring to keep something going that was a beacon project in terms of publicly funded software development in germany - on scale - on a project that was actually in use. While currently every not so bright political planner in the EU is looking at estonia and praising them, for what they were able to do - while even as VW, you get into partnerships (fancy word for "marketing opportunity for both, but its client/customer"), with MS yet again - when you want to tackle industry 4.0 - the buzzword you beat to death for years, over how far ahead german manufacturing was in that instance?

Regardless - thats not the point, the point was, how Accenture was used and let themselves being used as a company in this instance. Its a development over time - that company potentially was corrupt. Got kickbacks. Took special status. Microsoft used their "independent" status and name - to benefit both of them. And after all that they got themselves into a legal case with a sum of 32 Mio USD at dispute - over having charged inflated prices, for ficticious services.

I recognize, that for the munich government it was potentially exploding costs, and end users complaints. But for MS it was a nudge in the belt. A prestige project. Something they let themselves cost some kickbacks, maybe a few fancy dinners. Nothing too outrageous in terms of 'corruption'. But then the behavior of Accenture in this case - was.

Stating the obvious here. I'm not considering blowing this up and making Microsoft the bad guy here.

They acted like a monopolist, wanting to get the "we supply the entire german government" achievement back under lock.

They've done things far worse - which all would fall under "normal competitive behavior" just with the push of - we already are the monopolist in this sector behind their actions. I dont even blink at that - thats not stuff this thread should be concerned about - imho.

When we talk about big companies interacting with politics in matters touching on corruption, there are far more noteworthy cases out there. For once - what do we classify as corruption? Because its normal day to day politics at this point to have Angela Merkel, or someone from her office intervene in the political law making process in Brussels - direct as can be. With letters of intent in the mix that were signed from heads of industry - with change proposals that were worded by the lobbying party... I mean...

So - is that 'national interest' is it corruption, is it politics as usual? Is it lobbying at work (informing policy). Lets set MS aside for a moment, its not that company I'm after.

Accenture was just a juicy case of a company that probably received kickbacks for shady advising contracts (after the LiMUX stuff), and then got sued for what very much looked like fraudulent behavior in another case.

Best business partners. Still. Here - watch their webinar:
https://www.avanade.com/de-de/about-avanade/partnerships/accenture-avanade-microsoft-alliance

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

We also havent talked about revolving door as a political concept I believe? (Have to reread the thread.)

We didn't talk about regulatory institutions just giving a green light for mergers, when they are of prominent national interest. We havent talked about...

Direct relationships of politicians to 'jetsets', political favors. The business of being and staying informed on decisions in the making.

We havent talked about centers of 'elite' education. We havent talked about thinktank financing. We havent talked about political influence on media (in the publicly financed model (tax, without calling it that)). We havent talked about agenda setting. The importance of agenda setting. Public image. Role of the public in managed interactions with politics or the private sector (PR basically).

We havent talked about networks. We havent talked about interest group financing, political campaign financing, or why every politician worth his salt seems to positively loooove watching soccer matches (The greens, the greens. The blues, the blues. We didn't just take our legal system from the romans - positively so.)

My problem is certainly not with Microsoft in particular here.


----------



## supersonicwaffle (Jul 22, 2019)

notimp said:


> Closed formats. Lock in. Predatory practices. Consultant Companies, that build direct business relationships with the monopolist in the field in countertrade deals. I'm not interested in User expectation or support cost. At all.
> 
> A small part of me is miffed, that there was no state sponsoring to keep something going that was a beacon project in terms of publicly funded software development in germany - on scale - on a project that was actually in use. While currently every not so bright political planner in the EU is looking at estonia and praising them, for what they were able to do - while even as VW, you get into partnerships (fancy word for "marketing opportunity for both, but its client/customer), with MS yet again - when you want to tackle industry 4.0 - the buzzword your beat to death for years, over how far ahead german manufacturing was in that instance?
> 
> ...



I‘m not justifying what happened in Munich, all I‘m saying is that there‘s legitimate reasons to arrive at the conclusion that Microsoft is the better option. 
I‘m also not trying to defend Accenture either but what has come forth from Munich’s IT staff has been highly misleading. 

Vendor lock in can always happen, to a certain degree even with open source software. The other side of the coin that you don’t mention is that staying within the ecosystem gives you a level of integration that simply isn’t available anywhere else. Sometimes you just can’t reach that unless you’re driving your own standards and disregard other vendors. These sorts of arguments happen in the open source community as well with lots of disgruntled users, while certain approaches are directly driven by huge enterprises in the technology space.
You can tell us how little you care about user experience as much as you want but the only thing you make evident with that is that you should never be in a position that has responsibility for employees. You’re never gonna hold on to talent if you mandate using the command line for browsing the web. 

One Problem I see is that technology has a tendency to create monopolies because there’s a desire to standardize things. Usually you have multiple approaches competing until the hivemind announces its preference, the rest is discontinued or relegated to a niche.


----------



## notimp (Jul 23, 2019)

supersonicwaffle said:


> I‘m not justifying what happened in Munich, all I‘m saying is that there‘s legitimate reasons to arrive at the conclusion that Microsoft is the better option.


There are. 

I'm not vilifying MS (or any large multinational) on such a small (comparatively) incident. There are better ones you could choose.


----------



## notimp (Aug 21, 2019)

I'm currently reading

Close to Zero by Nathan Dubovitsky (2009)

Which, I just learned, was Vladislav Surkovs take on russian power structures under capitalism (oligarchy, state), which he wrote under a pseudonym. Wikipedia states that its disputed - but a middling documentary on theatre arts in russia that ran on Arte had a russian art manager just state it as a fact. Whatever that is worth.  The german Feuilleton loved it as well, when it was released.. 

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladislav_Surkov

Maybe there are some similarities.. 

Like Born Rich, read it as a culture study.  Of uncertain origin.


----------



## notimp (Aug 22, 2019)

Ok, so far the book is... ehm *special*. Its currently hanging in my 'insane BS' filter, and I actually would want to kick it by the wayside.

Will finish it anyhow - and then edit this posting again, because I'm interested - but so far... Ehm. Sorry for the recommendation.  I take that one back. 

edit: So here is the deal. The book is a collection if literally insane dialogues, interrupted with pretty specific sounding tales of russian oligopoly business (and more shady) deals. So make of it what you will.  I'm no expert in russian censorship circumvention, I don't know what to make of it. Discard.


----------



## chrisrlink (Aug 24, 2019)

apple not a monopoly what have you been smoking? they are 100% anti right to repair going as far as putting lockout chips in their shit and suing anyone who bypasses them small shops that offer repair services for cheaper then the crapple store (talking hundreds of dollars cheaper) are pulling out cause of the lockout chips and fear of being sued for bypassing them Bernie and other dems who support rtr will force apple's hand and depending on penilties (say 1bil fine a DAY) that would either change apples tune or bankrupt them in a year


----------



## notimp (Oct 16, 2019)

Here you see a current example of structural corruption:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/14/business/deutsche-bank-china.html

Meaning businesses planning in corruption costs into their business relations cost. This is business as usual as far as they are concerned, in germany alone we now had, maybe three, four top level scandals for this practice in the last 20 years or so. Nothing is ever changing in that regard.

Use this as a primer on structural corruption in business relations (usually with certain countries).


----------



## notimp (Nov 5, 2019)

First an article on Viktor Orbán, the Prime Minister of Hungary.

The EU gives out compensation payments to farmers, once their country enters the EU, because compared to the other productivity sectors in a country they cant compete on an 'international level' in an open market. This is basically done to prevent revolts in rural regions. 

The subsidies are tied to land ownership.

In the former eastern block countries, land was owned by the state. So the state had the rights to sell it away. What happened in the eastern european countries, that now are EU members, shortly before they entered the EU?

Magic. 

Victor Orban, his family, and his schoolfriends own land, that nets them 42million USD a year in EU subsidies.

The NYT posted a google earth infograph. 







src: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/03/world/europe/eu-farm-subsidy-hungary.html
--

Second story:

Soros in a (rare) The Guardian Interview, if you want to read it.
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...hurts-both-sides-money-educate-british-public


----------



## notimp (Nov 12, 2019)

To get Windows reinstated in the Munich government, Steve Balmer canceled his vacation and came by germany for a personal visit...
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://www.linux-magazin.de/ausgaben/2019/10/interview-2/

Now - this is not something that qualifies as 'political corruption' yet, but we had the deal mentioned in this thread before, and this is a more jovial follow up to that...


----------



## notimp (Nov 18, 2019)

This one is more 'Power Politics' - but it doesnt happen all the time, that a 403 page transcript on a government doctrine leaks from China.

Something to read:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/11/16/world/asia/china-xinjiang-documents.html

edit: You can get past the nagwall by putting it in google translate and letting it translate to 'original' english, btw.  Or removing the nag layer in any other way.  The text is still in the page.


----------



## KHEOPS (Nov 19, 2019)

Thank you this thread is interesting
Lots of information here thanks to all for posting on this feed
What do I think about it?
Well, I'll pass....
We are all ONE, I do not judge and never without knowing the bottom of things, analyzed, verification of sources that is how I live in conscience..... In the laws of the universe. I love humans, I know their shortcomings, but everything on this earth has a reason the light does not exist without darkness,

politicians if they do things against the progress of man, they will no longer hold out, see around you as everything collapses, the korea, the yellow jackets, the climate, so be positive, think positive, be in the moment present, while informing yourself in search of truth,

 Monsanto? There are bad people on earth, but as they are the equilibrium universe, and so there are people controlling these practices result? The company will start again on a good basis.... It is a fact, the collective awareness acts, I by being positive I contribute to the balance.
Man only uses 10% of his brain, what you take for granted does not exist, it is just that we cannot interpret all the interractions that lead to a final result, we see the result of the event and we believe in luck and chance?
Research the pineal gland
The organ that pumps the most blood after the kidneys, and what other living species has this organ? Absolutely none, only the human.
See also the quantum progressives, the yang window for example, the observer modifies the result of the experiment by the thought.
I'm not off topic here, what you needs to understand in concrete terms, an example
Our French president, if he does anything wrong, the French will be against it, and the result? The yellow jacket, and the result? Macron loses points in the polls, and the result?

A little like trump right now we are talking about his destitution, so deny that everything is connected is a pity, because in the universe chance does not exist, if the earth is placed where it is, is it luck? By chance? If it were further away from the sun we wouldn't be here.
Then I do not criticize humans, I accept their defect, because thanks to the negative the positive is born,
From the neant the matter is born
If you are negative, you make progress in negative things, that makes sense.

, from the darkness the light comes out, then be positive, empathetic, love yourself, because we are all one, the same blood, the same DNA, just that some men think differently of each other,


----------



## notimp (Nov 19, 2019)

On the current influx of protest movements world wide.

I see it structurally.

In germany the head of the Bundesbank just confirmed, that the ECB made a mistake in not reacting at all to the immense split of wealth distribution between globalized interests (situated, or operating out of) germany, and everyone else in the country.

While the underlying fiscal policy for years was to entice people to spend their money now and not later (no interest on savings) to get peoples money into circulation.

He then simply hinted at "but thats easily fixed with social spending.." - which it is not.

Lets just say - when the "dream" of a millennial becomes to have a stable job perspective and an affordable flat - something went wrong.

So all those 'climate protests' - at least for some - are an opportunity to vent, experience community, and badmouth politicians - even though, none of what they could actually demand will tackle the underlying cause of the issue.

And even if I'm wrong - and this is not causally related... There is just something in the air.

In other countries its easier to explain. Tackling climate change is a new cost factor thats not easily explained to people. So they rebell, when gas or subway prices are raised.

In western europe (climate protests) its not the same cause, but the same underlying 'dread'.

In large parts of the working population.

It will pass.  The chance, that something substantial will change in the short term is almost none. People are venting their anger in the streets. Basically.

On climate change in general. The current outlook is that the 'minimum necessary' steps will be tacken to tackle it. And to be honest, from my perspective that always was what was most likely.

In germany - if you get old folks to invest their money in climate funds now - so they expect less return on investment, you minimize the next issue of - what about when those savings get drawn to be used. Because then you have a real social devide - and that time will come within the next 20 years. Also - most future investments will be made oversees. Europe structurally has become uninteresting for investors, and even the climate change ones - will invest in second or third world countries first - to get most done on the issue. So social devide very much is one of the issues of our age. Still. (Where will growth come from.) Even though people like to do climate change drum cycles right now. 
--

Also - the stuff I've accumulated here is not something I've collected to find any meaning in it - its just, reading the news as usual, and copy pasting some of the stuff that relates to this theme in here.

Mainly to show our very eclectic audience, that this gets tackled in mainstream media. That none of it is as easy as a simple 'conspiracy' - and mostly, that its even 'strangely normal' from a societal perspective.

Don't worry, world isn't going away anytime soon..


----------



## notimp (Nov 28, 2019)

Here is what structural corruption looks like, and how its being tackled -


Most boring topic imaginable. But that way you can concentrate on the structural principle. 

Now thats the next step. So imagine, if corruption wasnt just a character defect, but rather what humans kind of tend to want to do, if you dont design society around it.

(Its the systems, stupid.)

Have fun.  (Its so boring, though..  )


----------



## notimp (Dec 3, 2019)

Ex-CEO of Siemens Greece convicted to 15 years of jailtime by greek court of law, for paying bribe money to be allowed to digitize the greek telecommunications infrastructure.

Hes going to appeal the sentence.

Article in german:
https://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/u...r-zu-15-jahren-haft-verurteilt-a-1299296.html

I think I commented once, that I've learned 10 years ago that Siemens had entire departments for bribery in international relations. Here is just more proof of what this looks like. The thing is, that this is very much still industry practice for big multinationals, with entire public governmental structures in different countries expecting cuts for brokered deals.


----------



## Deleted User (Dec 4, 2019)

.


----------



## notimp (Dec 4, 2019)

LonelyPhantom said:


> More than anything, the biggest problem is not so much an issue about ethics of individual Politicians & Special Interest Groups, but more about the ever increasing centralization of political power at the Federal Level & The lack of physical proximity between DC Politicians and their voting base(s).


Again, as far as I know, thats by design as well. At least the centralization part.

Lack of physical proximity then follows suit. Because if you create centers of political importance - you have interest brokers, that now got a vested interest in reaching you in a timely matter - and they will pay for it. This will totally dislodge local housing economies, for example, so thats what follows in the wake of simply creating those power centers.

(Read Machiavelli  )

I agree, that it is an issue.

Another issue (think europe) is, that press has 'regional closeness' as one of its news factors, and that in europe there is a language barrier (down to 'the people') as well. So on essentiall processes you are missing more transparency than you'd like.

Another issue is size. Because the more important your power center becomes, the less you can expect 'normal citizens' to make structural decisions in their favor. Which means that you've now resorted to 'representative democracy' almost exclusively - and that transparency gets kicked to the wayside. (The concept of 'topic of national security' exists in all western civilizations.)
-

The 'its designed that way' point is less popular, but still is pretty obvious to me. Lets use the aid concept of 'pillars of society' (companies, or people), if you've got the money, you want to matter to keep it, you will always use it in that way, you will always be able to inform decision processes better - because you are a partial expert in your field... And what follows is, that its more opportune - to create legal venues for those influence attempts to flow in.

Revolving door is the best example for that, its openly and obviously buying favors for favors. So much so, that you have to implement cool off periods (between switching jobs) and such for it not to become too big of an issue.
-

The balancing out comes from elections, activism campaigns, journalism, whistleblowers, the legal system (but only if you bribe stupidly) - it doesnt come from people 'being expected to behave morally good'.

Because in essence, what that is  - even means different things to different constituencies. So moral flexibility is needed (not on a personal level (because you want to trust that the politicians do what you voted them in for), but on the system level).
-

On the Greece case specifically. State corruption, usually is a factor of institutional politics becoming bloated. So - if economy sucks. As one of the potential measures, state might employ a third of the country (if it has natural resources, or open credit line). If everyone has a cousin in politics, they start asking for favors, and pretty soon you've got a favors against favors economy going.

Again - businesses don't care, if the outcome for them is cheaper than the alternative. And if f.e. public perception doesnt impact their bottom line. Which (all kidding aside) it still seldomly does.

There are ways to construct working institutions - without having them resort to corruption, basically you increase oversignt, opportunity cost, shame, ...

Also institutional politics, vs. party politics also is a necessary distinction. Institutions basically hold the knowledge and saveguard the process, and whoever gets elected can steer the thing into a new direction, but doesnt get to replace it structurally without running it for decades.
--

There are different reasons why you need larger groups of states with a central political power hub. One of them is globalization. Another one is multinationals that have become larger and larger. Yet another one are issues that cant be solved on a state level.

The thing is, if you increase that - you increase certain issues with it as well.  EU basically is a structure that aims to align the economical interests of 28 member states, which means its utterly pragmatic and slow moving. If you now - for whatever reason have to move fast on a certain issue, you beat down smaller particular interests and discontent starts to grow.

So its all a trade off. There is no 'whats best'.

edit: Ah, one more thing - really read the counter deals of Deutsche Bank to become an important player in China (I should have linked them in here, NYT article - afair), this gives you a sense of the inner logic of structural corruption for business development gains.

And another concept. If you want to control a country through trade. Corrupt dictator is the easiest to deal with long term. He's so reliable..  So suddeently - you don't want for democracy to develop in your 'former colonies' for instance. Thats part of the two faced nature of western democracy. (There usually are at least two value systems. Also foreign policy never acts on moral grounds. As in - it isnt part of foreign policy. (People dont get to vote for that, thats simply not part of election debates. To an almost exclusive extent. Thats why you needed universal declaration of human rights in that sector for example. (In Europe one monarchy would always kill off the other one, in a happy circle of events, and all of it was extremely morally just in the value system of the time..  (Fun with foreign politics..  ) ))))

Institutions like the the International Anti-Corruption Academy (IACA), or the International Anti-Corruption Court (IACC) are basically a joke, as far as I can tell. A good will initiative..  edit: Or, usually more often a way to impose certain doctrine over smaller state players.
edit: See also f.e.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_International_Criminal_Court


----------



## notimp (Jan 24, 2020)

Crash course on american politics:


edit: Ted Turner in S01E04.


----------



## notimp (Feb 29, 2020)

> City Mayor Mike Bloomberg has hired two state Democratic party vice chairs in Super Tuesday states with two of the top three highest number of pledged delegates. Bloomberg hired Texas Democratic Party Vice Chair Carla Brailey as a senior adviser to his campaign in December, and he hired California State Democratic Party Vice Chair Alexandra Rooker for a similar role in January.


https://theintercept.com/2020/02/28/bloomberg-super-tuesday-texas-california-democratic-party-hires/

/edge case


----------



## notimp (Mar 4, 2020)

Just the D.C. bureau chef of the intercept telling some stories. Pretty off hand. Just day to day politics.

Thats a pretty rotten system you've got going there...  And thats just the run off stage. (What you are doing, when you are starting out in politics.)



Lets just spell out, what we have in that video.

- Actual attempts to pay for votes going on right now.
- Historically successfull attempts of voter fraught being laughed at.
- Politicians being conceptualized as 'cattle farmers' being able to move people
- Politicians being valued based on how much weight an endorsement they give carries
- Politicians being valued based on how much campaign contributions they can bank.
- Politicians setting up patronage structures to cement their importance.
- Politicians having convinced voters, that they own a state
- Voters being talked about as people that have to be reminded by media, that they now can make their cross somewhere different, maybe.
- Political fractions/camps being judged on how fast they supported viable candidates financially.

- Voters being described as educated and decisive in not wanting to support Biden, ultimately behaving like cattle again, because, you did saw the Super Tuesday results, didn't you. (So if you fallow that categorization, Bidens success on super Tuesday, was educated people finally giving into the establishments lure, just not to get Sanders. Thats encouraging. )

Basically every element that the video speaks about is broken, in one fashion or another. Oldest democracy in the world. Export that to other nations.


----------



## notimp (Mar 5, 2020)

notimp said:


> Lets just spell out, what we have in that video.
> 
> - Actual attempts to pay for votes going on right now.
> - Historically successfull attempts of voter fraught being laughed at.
> ...


What kills me though is the eagerness of those three people to just matter of fact like - report on those aspects, and to learn more about them in a weird 'apprenticeship' to power set up, where they seem to think, that if they just understand this more extensively, they will have achieved journalistic mastery in it - or something I'm not quite sure of.

And until then, by jove - they will almost sportscast every move nook and cranny out of this and find it fascinating and thrilling, while they are at it, because that is what grows their viewership or something.

Someone asked at the beginning of this thread what political corruption was, how it came to be. I think I've answered that question just now.

Do something better with your life.


----------



## notimp (Mar 7, 2020)

Slight warning on content from The Hill (which I quoted in the previous two postings), I only realized after - what kind of beat the are going for, so I'd advice against using them as your primary information source.. 



> Today, with inequality at the highest level since the Gilded Age, the wealthy paying next to nothing in taxes, children being gunned down in schools, and a massive crisis of addiction, no one needs to use propaganda or lies to make us look bad. Simply telling the truth is a subversive act and yes I suppose[...]


src: https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/4...t-accusations-of-being-called-a-russian-plant

Thats agitation bait.

If your ankers say stuff like that it means, that you are not following a standard journalistic process. You are basically "hot girl, selling folks on ideas". Also same guest booking list as some of the more russia sympathizing alternative media. 

(edit: She was featured by Fox News, CNN, CNBC und Real Time mit Bill Maher though according to her wikipedia entry, so not entirely sure whats going on there. )

For anyone wondering, why I landed on that video - youtube algo.


----------



## notimp (Mar 27, 2020)

Bob Dylan released a 17min song.


----------



## notimp (Apr 14, 2020)

Now in relation to this news: https://gbatemp.net/threads/the-med...r-the-coronavirus.559721/page-12#post-9013358

- and the Dylan video posted above (which no one cared to comment on.  ) its probably time to post this as well:

h**ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JirrKIQfOmk



edit: And maybe this:


Spoiler


----------



## notimp (May 22, 2020)

Biden is on tape urging the then ukraine president Petro Poroschenko to privatize the then insolvent 'PrivatBank' (40% of stock held by Igor Kolomoiski (oligarch) at the time), before the US administration changed over to be run by republicans (Trump administration).

Furthermore on December 3rd 2015 on a call between John Kerry and Petro Poroschenko, an american official is on tape (released three days ago) voicing the demand to investigate 'the opportunity to solve the problem of replacement, of Viktor Shokin (the countries prosecutor general)' and arguing for it, by bringing in 'the concern of Joseph Binden about this'.

Former ukraine secret service chief Leonid Derkatsch is on record presuming, that Bidens 'concern' would have been driven by Burisma (gas company Bidens son held an administrative post with) being under investigation by the then prosecutor general.

Biden commented on this in 2018 by acknowledging that he pushed for the layoff of Shokin, by withholding a billion USD credit line from the ukraine until matters were resolved. But he argued, that he didn't do that to protect his son, but rather, because of accusations on part of the atlantic council ( https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/why-do-ukraine-s-reform-ministers-keep-quitting/ ) and others, that Shokin would not have been active enough on corruption prevention.


The entire US involvement in this - is now being investigated in the ukraine as an international corruption case.

This was demanded by Trump in a declassified call on July 25th - again, underlined with threats to withdraw credit lines, if you remember.
See: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Unclassified09.2019.pdf


src: https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Bi...eralsanwaltschaft-weitergeleitet-4725569.html (german)

edit: For some reason, the Washington Post calls this 'a whole lot of nothing burger'
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ons-biden-ukraine-are-gigantic-nothingburger/
(no joke..  )


----------



## notimp (May 31, 2020)

notimp said:


> How political power works, from "americas biographer in chief" Robert Caro:
> (Pulitzer price winning)
> 
> 
> ...



Edward Norton made a movie about this book (and Robert Moses).


----------



## notimp (Jun 7, 2020)

How corrupting influence works on the functional level:


----------



## notimp (Jul 26, 2020)

Whats the inherent motivation behind corrupting influence on the functional level. (A few of the comments about the nature of 'elite influence' at the beginning of the interview.)


----------



## notimp (Aug 21, 2020)

Bannon charged with Fraud in We Build the Wall Campaign

https://web.archive.org/web/2020082.../nyregion/steve-bannon-arrested-indicted.html

Step one: Say that you are a non profit collecting funds to build great wall.
Step two: Take money to do whatever.  Share with two pals.

edit:

Video:


In unrelated news, Honeywell and GE just signed oil extraction contracts worth 8 billion USD with Iraq. (Also see video.)


----------



## notimp (Aug 21, 2020)

Revolving door:

Former House Speaker Paul Ryan to chair $300 million blank-check company
https://www.wsj.com/articles/former...arts-blank-check-company-11597934227?mod=mktw


----------



## notimp (Sep 10, 2020)

There is always room for a good liar on the Amazon Board of Directors:


----------



## notimp (Sep 20, 2020)

notimp said:


> How corrupting influence works on the functional level:



Part 2: How you buy a disinformation campaign:
https://thegrayzone.com/2020/09/07/green-billionaires-planet-of-the-humans/


----------



## notimp (Sep 24, 2020)

Oh, we havent touched upon the aspect, that some corruption is 'legal' because it is seen as 'needed structural information politics depends on'. At least thats the argument for lobbying, which is one step removed.. 

So how about we take a few minutes and look into how that looks in practice..


----------



## notimp (Sep 30, 2020)

Bwahaha:



> Palantir: The darling of secret services goes public One of the most secretive data-mining companies in the world, Palantir Technologies, has listed its shares in New York. The firm provides secret services with information — but stands accused of violating human rights.


src: https://www.dw.com/en/palantir-the-darling-of-secret-services-goes-public/a-55107199

Sorry, bad joke...  (No politician involved here directly..  )


----------



## Viri (Sep 30, 2020)

I'm going to be honest with you all. If I was a politician, I would be corrupt as fuck! I would easily sell out your kid's future for a nice bribe. But don't worry, I'm never going to run for any type of office.


----------



## notimp (Nov 7, 2020)

What is managed opposition. 


Really worth a watch, imho. And no that question does not refer to Greenwald.


----------



## notimp (Dec 9, 2020)

How to set up your own influencing operation:


----------



## notimp (Dec 18, 2020)

Thinktanks and intellectual elites:


----------



## morvoran (Dec 18, 2020)

Wait....  has this thread been about Quid Pro Joe this whole time???..
*Hunter Biden's ex-associates wanted to 'get Joe involved' in joint venture with Chinese energy company so they assumed it was a 'truly family business'*

It's comedic and sad that the Pedocrats, Chinese, and Dominion algorithms voted for Joe "Pedo" Biden when he makes Trump look like a Kool-aid haired, gender fluid, soy eating, commie leftist when comparing how corrupt the Biden family is.


----------



## djpannda (Dec 18, 2020)

morvoran said:


> Wait....  has this thread been about Quid Pro Joe this whole time???..
> *Hunter Biden's ex-associates wanted to 'get Joe involved' in joint venture with Chinese energy company so they assumed it was a 'truly family business'*
> 
> It's comedic and sad that the Pedocrats, Chinese, and Dominion algorithms voted for Joe "Pedo" Biden when he makes Trump look like a Kool-aid haired, gender fluid, soy eating, commie leftist when comparing how corrupt the Biden family is.


Oh we moved here?


morvoran said:


> Any sources to back that up?
> 
> Also, I keep getting your Leaders mixed up as you are all commies.


 this is an oldie but a Goodie
*Donald J. Trump Pays Court-Ordered $2 Million For Illegally Using Trump Foundation Funds*


----------



## notimp (Dec 18, 2020)

morvoran said:


> Wait....  has this thread been about Quid Pro Joe this whole time???..
> *Hunter Biden's ex-associates wanted to 'get Joe involved' in joint venture with Chinese energy company so they assumed it was a 'truly family business'*
> 
> It's comedic and sad that the Pedocrats, Chinese, and Dominion algorithms voted for Joe "Pedo" Biden when he makes Trump look like a Kool-aid haired, gender fluid, soy eating, commie leftist when comparing how corrupt the Biden family is.


Also we can still use your postings as examples how to destroy any reasonable discussion from the getgo. You pronounce Chinese, Algorithms, and Pedophiles, and pronounce yourself the winner - what else could be there, really.

You have a religious conviction and you learned three trigger words. Now you know which way the world is turning!


----------



## notimp (Dec 25, 2020)

On money laundering:


----------



## notimp (Sep 28, 2021)

How many politicians can a legal person in the US own?

Thom Hartmann: The Hidden History of the Oligarchy


edit:
Hint: There is a law for that that was mad laxer in 2013. If you want to know its name, watch the video.  Also if you want to know the history of the filibuster, and...


----------



## djpannda (Sep 28, 2021)

I think the best news of the day is
Trump called press secretary from Air Force One to defend shape and size of his penis​and sorry I don't have a Radom youtuber link I know some people consume "news" only like that


----------



## notimp (Sep 29, 2021)

djpannda said:


> I think the best news of the day is
> Trump called press secretary from Air Force One to defend shape and size of his penis​and sorry I don't have a Radom youtuber link I know some people consume "news" only like that


Not a random youtuber: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thom_Hartmann 


And what does Trumps penis have to do in a thread about political corruption (history)?

Should he have payed for the phonecall?


----------

