Poll Position: Should we cap lobbyist gifts at $100?
In keeping with the series that began last week, the second question on Republicans’ July 31 primary ballots reads as follows: “Do you support ending the current practice of unlimited gifts from lobbyists to state legislators by imposing a $100 cap on such gifts?”
Do you support ending the current practice of unlimited gifts from lobbyists to state legislators by imposing a $100 cap on such gifts?
- Yes (140 Votes)
- No (20 Votes)
- I don't know (1 Votes)
Total Voters: 161
Loading ...As much as I’ve written about ethics reform, I have not done a Poll Position question about this issue. No time like the present, right?
For background, you can read here, here, here and here, among other columns. But the gist of the issue is that, unlike almost every other state, Georgia does not limit gifts from lobbyists to legislators. We do have some pretty strong transparency laws, which at least allow us to see who is getting what, from whom. The question is whether transparency is enough.
I’ve been arguing that it isn’t. But now y’all get to weigh in on the issue: Should there be a $100 cap on these gifts? Answer in the nearby poll and the comments thread below.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
104 comments Add your comment
arnold
June 1st, 2012
5:28 am
I’d prefer to see no gifts allowed of any amount.
Fartavious
June 1st, 2012
5:29 am
I agree with Arnold.
gman
June 1st, 2012
5:48 am
No gifts, PERIOD!
marko
June 1st, 2012
5:55 am
How are we to keep the best sleaze balls money can buy, if we compel them to live by the same rules that apply to people in the real world?
Gift's ain't the problem
June 1st, 2012
6:43 am
I’m all for limiting the “perks,” but term limits is an even better solution. I used to say two terms is the limit. I’m about to the point of one and done. That way they hit the ground running, don’t take extended breaks during their “session” and don’t rely on the position as their permanent employment.
DeborahinAthens
June 1st, 2012
6:46 am
I’m for term limits as well. They will find a way around the $100 limits.
Ronnie Raygun
June 1st, 2012
6:49 am
Georgia politicians should have to follow the same rules as all other Georgia government employees, no gifts of ANY value should be accepted from lobbyists or vendors with state business.
If they do, 30 days in jail for both the politician and the lobbyist on the first offense. Double the sentence for every subsequent infraction. No more soft on bribery!
Road Scholar
June 1st, 2012
6:51 am
No gifts, and the elected official who accepts one is forced to resign and the lobbyist who provides the gift pays the admin cost of the new election to fill the vacated position. No paper work, no confounded forms, no ifs , ands, or buts.
ByteMe
June 1st, 2012
6:58 am
$25 limit. Raise their pay to bring it in line with the amount of time they spend at it (which is about 4-5 months of the year), so that we can get better quality morticians in there.
Skip
June 1st, 2012
7:00 am
Can someone explain why they should get a gift of any kind?
GT
June 1st, 2012
7:02 am
I would like to see money as far away from politics as possible. Maybe the state could pay these guys a little more or even give them an expense account, they pay their own way and when if gets out of hand they are cut off. Anything outside of that is illegal.
One discomforting fact about these superpacs, someone on the news last night said if they had been around last election Edwards would have been totally legal to have this third party group spend as much money as needed to clear his problem up. These lobbyist in Georgia could be call minipacs but they are just as dangerous if not stopped.
Tyler Durden
June 1st, 2012
7:06 am
The state GOP will continue doing two things: 1) paying massive lip service in public, and 2) privately doing everything possible to ensure nothing changes with regards to lobbying. We had a former GOP speaker of the house committing an ongoing affair with a lobbyist and driving legislation in her favor, which everyone knew about, and the state GOP actively thwarted any attempt to investigate it. What makes you think anything has changed?
GT
June 1st, 2012
7:18 am
The same speaker’s chief of staff shows up in an indictment in Alabama bribing people in the state legislature for gambling rights. He was acquitted but my lord what was this man doing in that kind of company in the first place.
md
June 1st, 2012
7:34 am
No gifts, and tie their pay to results………give them a base salary plus when they actually make something happen on the plus side. And if their actions, regulations can be tied to a negative, dock them.
Sherlock
June 1st, 2012
7:40 am
No gifts. Without the wining and dining, they might have shorter sessions and do less harm.
sheepdawg
June 1st, 2012
7:41 am
and vote out ralston, balfour, chipper, tommie williams, casey, and the rest of the gop trash
laurie
June 1st, 2012
7:45 am
No gifts and term limits sounds good to me.
Karl Marx
June 1st, 2012
7:48 am
Lobbying should be outlawed and no gifts what so ever. As far a legislator compensation I read an article that made the best proposal I have ever heard. We pay legislators to make laws and we have so many that no one can know them all. Lets give legislators a bonus when the repeal laws and charge a penalty when the write new laws. Now that actually would slow the growth of government.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
7:55 am
Kyle, what’s your take on your party’s fascination with voter fraud? Do you see it as the big lie that it is?
Senor Coughee
June 1st, 2012
7:58 am
NO gifts whatsoever to the legislator or ANY of said legislators relatives, legal representatives, etc.
the red herring
June 1st, 2012
8:13 am
since the question was a $100 limit i would vote yes. However I would agree with many others on this blog that the limit should be lower or even zero. These people are elected to represent their voters not the interests of lobbyists who many times do not have the voters best interest at heart.
Queen Bee
June 1st, 2012
8:13 am
No gifts and term limits for all – including Washington. These people should not be “lifetime” congressmen or representatives. They are a huge part of what is wrong with this country! So crooked you can screw them into the ground…
dc
June 1st, 2012
8:22 am
So let’s see…..absolutely not contact between lobbyists and our elected officials…..since I’m assuming that buying lunch or dinner would be a gift. But, I absolutely want access to share my POV through the lobbyists that my pet group pays to get our POV across.
If it was that easy, folks, it would be solved already. There are always more sides that journalists lay out in their blog posts.
John Ellison
June 1st, 2012
8:23 am
No gifts or personal contact. All communication should be handled via email which would be subject to the Open Records Law.
A Conservative Voice
June 1st, 2012
8:29 am
That’s trying to buy a vote and should be illegal and anyone caught giving OR receiving money or goods for the purpose of influencing or voting for money or goods should be charged with a felony. Our lawmakers should be above reproach.
Bobby
June 1st, 2012
8:42 am
From the liberal perspective of things, no gifts should be received by any elected official. Gifts are nothing more than bribes. And we don’t have to look any further than our local elected officials whether Fulton, Dekalb, Gwinnett or other local officials.
iggy
June 1st, 2012
8:43 am
We have term limits. Its called voting. Im ok with the $100 cap, which is also the norm in most private sector business.
Finn, ginning up the Obama vote.
iggy
June 1st, 2012
8:45 am
If the Obama jobs numbers keep decreasing then $100 cap wont be an issue as their will be no jobs.
md
June 1st, 2012
8:45 am
In breaking news Kyle, unemployment rate goes……..up.
That should be interesting to track in the polls. Wonder who will get the blame?
A dad
June 1st, 2012
8:47 am
I find it pretty funny so many are blasting the Repblicans for not doing away with lobying, refusing to set limits, politicians having affairs, etc. Do you really think it was any different when the Democrats were in charge?
Oblama
June 1st, 2012
8:47 am
Cap lobbyists gifts at ZERO. That would eliminate a lot of paper work. In fact, charge lobbyists $100 payable to the state every time they contact an elected politician – including the governor. They are taking up time with someone that is on the clock with the state. This won’t stop crooks from being crooks but it will make it easier to prosecute them.
md
June 1st, 2012
8:47 am
“Gifts are nothing more than bribes.”
Funny how it seems everybody is against gifts and bribes until it shows up in their own wallet…..it happens in reverse in exchange for votes all the time, but folks tend to only gripe about what the other guy is getting.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
8:52 am
their will be no jobs.
Don’t worry iggy, someone will need your mad burger flippin’ skillz.
The Snark
June 1st, 2012
8:54 am
I see absolutely no reason why an elected official should be allowed to take a gift of any amount, but I’ll take a $100 limit.
If it passes, it will be interesting to see who quits the General Assembly immediately afterward.
The Snark
June 1st, 2012
8:57 am
@ A dad: No, it was not the same when the Dems were in charge. Things have changed a lot in the last ten years. The volume and value of the gifts is far, far greater now. This has nothing to do with which party is in charge — in fact, many of the same people are in charge, only in a different party — it’s more a reflection of changes in the times we live in.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
8:58 am
So Repubs can vote to limit it to $100 but then we’ll have to wait until our Republican lawmakers get around to voting on it?
iggy
June 1st, 2012
9:02 am
LOL!
AmVet
June 1st, 2012
9:06 am
Is it any wonder that Georgia is dead last in public corruption laws?
Or that you just elected one of the 15 most corrupt members of the entire US Congress as your governor?
As well as a long litany of other money-grubbing Republican scandals involving corruption, sexual misdeeds with lobbyists, etc?
Thank you, fake conservatives.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
June 1st, 2012
9:12 am
Meanwhile, at least the Repugs have the decency to obtain their trivial perks from the coffers of private industry instead of pilfering it from the US Treasury in obscene quantities, like Michelle obozo, for instance.
iggy
June 1st, 2012
9:14 am
You’re welcome, ScamVet.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
9:23 am
You conservatives elect a guy with known ethics issues and now you’re worried about ethics issues in the rest of the state government?
Conservatives are the most confused people!
I think it might be time the adults take away your toys (voting id’s and especially guns.)
Jefferson
June 1st, 2012
9:31 am
I also say they are state employees and should follow the same rules. Zero is the limit, maybe a Coke at the most.
iggy
June 1st, 2012
9:42 am
Secr of Labor now spinning like a top. Blame blame blame…
AmVet
June 1st, 2012
9:51 am
Thanks, piggy.
Frank Castle
June 1st, 2012
9:52 am
I think we should CAP all lobbyists…
…with high-caliber firearms.
BOOG
June 1st, 2012
9:54 am
if money is the root of all lobbying evil, why tolerate any amount? Why place an artifical cap on the amount of a “gift” when that cap can be easily circumvented by just inviting another lobbyist to dinner?? Just sayin…..
Rafe Hollister- trying to save the Choom Gang
June 1st, 2012
9:54 am
I’d say a $10 cap on gifts, anything more than a ball cap or pen is a bribe.
However, I was reading a story of a crook the other day who was charged with buying off and corrupting the authorities and he had a good response. He said, “I never bought anyone, that wasn’t already for sale”.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
9:54 am
“Zero is the limit, maybe a Coke at the most.”
As long as that Coke is less than 16oz, a la Mayor Bloomberg, right, Jefferson?
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
9:55 am
Frank Castle, there is zero need to post something like that.
Try to be civil, OK?
HIPPOCRIT
June 1st, 2012
9:59 am
HOW ABOUT NO GIFTS
these BASTARXX are working for taxpayers
why should they get gifts at all
they are being paid to do a job
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
10:00 am
Ohh, looks like Wisconsin Republicans are taking a page out of the GA Republicans books and electing a governor with ethics issues.
Boy, you folks sure do think alike!
http://www.salon.com/2012/06/01/scott_walkers_john_doe_scandal_explained/
Fartavious
June 1st, 2012
10:02 am
One-term limit for all elected officials!
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm! Just sayin...
June 1st, 2012
10:06 am
Let’s see here, should I be worried with some low level Repug going on some golf outing with a private company seeking redress from it’s government official or should my concern be better spent looking into one of the two major political parties seizing a major private auto maker and giving it to it’s biggest campaign contributor, who also happen to work for it, like it’s the world’s biggest birthday present?
Hmmmmm….
ragnar danneskjold
June 1st, 2012
10:10 am
Just what we need, another layer of complexity. Forget ethics, just prosecute “bribery” when a bad law is enacted, or when a good law is not. I do not care how much lobbyists waste on mere politicians so long as the politicians do not enact laws that harm the public.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
10:13 am
Salon trying to explain a “scandal” in an objective manner?
redneckbluedog
June 1st, 2012
10:15 am
Let me apologize in advance…I’m ‘jacking the thread….but this is news….
The May jobs numbers are indefensable…..They are L-O-S-E-R-S come November….I don’t intend to defend them…..I am out of the Kenyan’s corner and back to the center, though I hate the thought of it……I know it can be worse…but SURELY it can get better….
Carry on….what…??? Free speech is free speech…if you’re going to allow Citizen’s United, then by the same premise, lobbyists can give whatever they want…!!!! Quid pro quo is quid pro quo….
redneckbluedog
June 1st, 2012
10:16 am
Just hand the country over to the wealthy and corporations….and the voters will decide based on said result….
md
June 1st, 2012
10:20 am
Folks in Wisconsin are probably more focused and appreciative of the unemployment number vs some scandal…..from 9.2 to 6.7. And that seems to be reflected in the polls. That’s what happens when the public unions aren’t allowed to blackmail those paying the bills……….
md
June 1st, 2012
10:22 am
“if you’re going to allow Citizen’s United,”
Which must be allowed if the 1st calls for “freedom of the press”…..as the “press” are all corporations these days.
redneckbluedog
June 1st, 2012
10:22 am
Jimmy Carter couldn’t do any worse creating jobs….
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
10:26 am
The President only creates jobs by spending more tax dollars. Is that what you want?
Private sector jobs are created by consumers buying stuff. (not by rich people, as many of you think.)
redneckbluedog
June 1st, 2012
10:27 am
You have 10% of the population with 80% of the wealth….the rest are pro athletes….at what point do we become a true Plutocracy….??? 10%/95%…..Maybe throw somebody a bone every now and then if they win “America’s Got Talent” or kiss their feet just right…???
Take away Social Security and Medicare….make people build bombs or “drill, baby, drill”….or beg the church…..Women..!?!? Force them to bear children or become nurses…There will be casualties when we go to war with Iran…..
redneckbluedog
June 1st, 2012
10:29 am
Finn McCool (The System isn’t Broken; It’s Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
10:26 am
The President only creates jobs by spending more tax dollars. Is that what you want?
Private sector jobs are created by consumers buying stuff. (not by rich people, as many of you think.)
======================
Uhhhh….Welcome to 1990…!!!! Consumer goods are now produced in China and Mexico…!!!! The only thing America makes is donuts, hamburgers, oil, gas, and bombs…..Even our “fresh Gulf seafood” is now imported….
redneckbluedog
June 1st, 2012
10:31 am
Hand it over to the wealthy and corporations….We have no choice….Obama sucks…..If Romney and the Plutocrats blow it….we’ll be Socialist in 2016…..Probably headed there anyway….
John from Little Five Points
June 1st, 2012
10:39 am
Why does a politician need a “gift’? Free sports tickets, free concert tickets, free meals, etc. Why? I’ll tell you why. Their vote is being BOUGHT. You’re a fool if you believe differently.
iggy
June 1st, 2012
10:40 am
I hope they trot out Biden to do some “jobs numbers” damage control.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
10:40 am
“The President only creates jobs by spending more tax dollars.”
Really, Finn? Is that your new mantra when things go bad? I guess all that great economy when Clinton was in office no longer belongs to him, since he didn’t spend tax dollars? Do you realize how ridiculous and lame you sound?
Government (not just Presidents) create jobs in two different fashions: Artificially and temporarily propping up the labor market by spending money, and creating an environment where private businesses can grow and add jobs.
We are now seeing the disastrous results of BOTH of these policies in this weak recovery, as was predicted by some of us from the very beginning.
Government jobs are going away according to this latest report, and have been for a while. That’s because the first part of the equation – government artificially and temporarily creating jobs – has run out of money. Whether states and localities can come up with the funds on their own is yet to be seen, but the predicted temporary benefit of stimulus funds had arrived.
As to the second part, there has been NO move to create a climate conducive to growing businesses from Washington, D.C. No relaxing of onerous regulations, no coherent tax policy, no – anything – from this administration or Congress.
They are BOTH failures and responsible for this mess, but as the old saying goes, “The fish rots from the head down”.
Skip
June 1st, 2012
10:44 am
Boner said he was going to focus on jobs, and I thought he meant MORE jobs.Foolish of me.
Bob Loblaw
June 1st, 2012
10:45 am
Read here, here, here and here to see that I can’t find anything worth writing about besides how much money it costs to feed a legislator or go play golf. This must be serious!
redneckbluedog
June 1st, 2012
10:51 am
Tiberius – Banned from Bookman’s and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
10:40 am
================
All that “job climate de-regulation” blah, blah, blah……is just as much bunk as whatever Obama is trying…….Bush tried it and it failed MISERABLY….!!!! “Free market cultism” I call it……all that’s going to do is send more jobs overseas and pollute the Gulf and aquifers and get more workers killed and create another credit meltdown……
I’m telling you…we’re headed toward Socialism…..The government takes over the banks and oil companies…..TEMPORARILY……The government creates jobs directly…..I don’t like that idea any better than answering to a bunch of corrupt Plutocrats….but that’s where we’re headed…..
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
10:57 am
So Tiberius, you blame everybody BUT the consumer, the people who buy stuff?
Why is it so difficult for you folks to see the link? People buy stuff that companies sell. If demand is high enough the company hires more workers. If the company isn’t selling stuff people want, they don’t make money. If they don’t make money, they can’t pay (and don’t need) workers.
The company doesn’t hire more workers just because some politician is giving him a tax break or relaxing his regulations. A company hires because demand dictates it. If the company isn’t selling what consumers want/need, then there won’t be anything to tax or anything to regulate.
But let’s just blame the politicians for companies not hiring…….(Finn smacks head repeatedly against brick wall…)
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
10:58 am
“All that “job climate de-regulation” blah, blah, blah……is just as much bunk as whatever Obama is trying…….Bush tried it and it failed MISERABLY”
Actually, he did not, therefore it could not have failed miserably. Bush’s focus was not on deregulation regarding job creation, but deregulation of certain industries.
You’d know that if you weren’t such a partisan hack.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
11:06 am
If I’m an entrepreneur and the financials suggest I can make a profit by setting up an oil rig in the gulf, am I gonna stop cold when I find out about the regulations? Uh, not if I did my homework – those regulations would be included in my initial financial calculations!
Regulations are what they are. Everybody else with an oil rig in the gulf also knows what the regulations are and have taken them into account.
If the regs are sooooo high that the business wouldn’t be profitable, then I’m not going to put up an oil rig now am I!
But it sounds like the Cons would want me to go ahead and put that rig up anyway, because I can get tax breaks and government subsidies so I can run it because it will provide jobs??? And then I can bi$ch and moan all day about the high regs……crazy…
md
June 1st, 2012
11:08 am
“Private sector jobs are created by consumers buying stuff. (not by rich people, as many of you think.)”
Wrong……consumers are just people with money in their pockets without products to consume.
The ipod “consumer” would not exist without the ipod……which had to be thought of, researched, produced, and brought to market……before the consumer even has a chance to consume.
And last I checked, Home Depot wasn’t selling any ipod trees……….
redneckbluedog
June 1st, 2012
11:11 am
Hey…I’m right down the middle here….I’m off the Obama train….I”m telling you what’s going to happen in the next 4 years……..Unbudgeted war with Iran and Wall Street de-regulation…..They’re going to steal more of our money, because they can….That’s what capitalism is about…..
Oil and gas drilling is already going as fast as it can….the prices will go up, though, when we attack Iran…….and people aren’t going to give up their entitlements….Just ask Greece and France……
There’s really no reason to be idealogically opposed to Socialism…It’s going to be our last resort…..FDR did it pretty well…….”Born in the USSA”……
Brosephus
June 1st, 2012
11:13 am
Either limit their gift totals to that of every other government employee in the state, or remove the limit for all other government employees.
iggy
June 1st, 2012
11:14 am
Doesnt matter. Obama is out. The EU breakup is just around the corner.
redneckbluedog
June 1st, 2012
11:14 am
We’re handing the White House over to somebody who believes in a Planet, for Christ’s sake…!!!! And we already have one leading the Senate…..What do you expect..!??!?
and the one we have in there now can’t create any jobs….!!! And Reagan has been dead for years…!!!
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
11:17 am
Finn, you need to become equated with the concept of “cause and effect”. You also need to become equated with the concept of consumer confidence.
Of course the consumer drives the economy, but that’s not exactly what you’ve been preaching since Obama got into office, have you?
Businesses create jobs based on demand, but what goes into demand? Well, people need jobs which earn income, first and foremost. Next goods have to be PROFITABLE for a company to make them, which goes directly to the heart of regulatory costs of compliance. If a company can create something for less cost, they by-and-large pass on those savings to the consumer in order to drive volume. If the cost to create products is too high, less are created at a higher price, and less are sold, meaning there is no need to hire new workers to create more.
Cause and effect, Finn.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
11:19 am
The “regulations is too da@n high” excuse is used by incompetent managers and business owners who shouldn’t be running a company or managing it in any capacity.
In any given industry/market, every other company in that industry/market faces the exact same regulations. If others can figure out how to profit in that environment but you can’t? Time to hang up your cleats.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
11:21 am
“Everybody else with an oil rig in the gulf also knows what the regulations are and have taken them into account.”
And industry executives just testified before Congress yesterday and told of up to 10-year delays in bringing that well to full capacity just because of REGULATIONS, Finn. How many people do you know that can fund a venture for 10 years waiting for it to pay out?
Regulations, especially onerous ones that go too far, are job killers.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
11:22 am
md, you’re wrong.
A company can develop Ipod’s all day long but if no one wants to buy that thing? You don’t have demand so you don’t have a market, so you better find something else to start developing real fast.
What wealth and money do is find out where there is demand and start investing in that market – whether it’s the market for ipads or the market for doggie biscuits. Where ever the consumer goes, there goes the money to PROVIDE to meet that demand.
iggy
June 1st, 2012
11:22 am
“Time to hang up your cleats.” Excellent advise for the ObamaClan.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
11:23 am
“The “regulations is too da@n high” excuse is used by incompetent managers and business owners who shouldn’t be running a company or managing it in any capacity.”
You’ve obviously never owned a business or managed one.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
11:24 am
“We’re handing the White House over to somebody who believes in a Planet, for Christ’s sake”
Thanks for the incorrect and religiously bigoted comment of the day, redneckbluedog.
redneckbluedog
June 1st, 2012
11:25 am
…and the “effect” of shipping jobs to Mexico and China “causes” us to have 8% unemployment…….
Deregulating businesses isn’t going to stop outsourcing…..most likely the opposite…..
Romney himself said the best he can do is 6% unemployment…..
and if we “drill, baby, drill” and DON’T go to war with Iran….D-E-F-L-A-T-I-O-N…..and that’s not good for anybody….
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
11:26 am
Tiberius, in that case those regulations also act as a barrier to entry. You make it too easy to get that rig up and going then those companies testifying are all of a sudden facing more competition once others with the means see they too can get a rig going!
Now you’ve got more supply, forcing prices down and profits down, now you need to lay off workers!
redneckbluedog
June 1st, 2012
11:26 am
Tiberius – Banned from Bookman’s and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
11:24 am
“We’re handing the White House over to somebody who believes in a Planet, for Christ’s sake”
Thanks for the incorrect and religiously bigoted comment of the day, redneckbluedog.
====================================
Just sayin’…..I’m calling out the dog eating Kenyans as well as the polygamist polytheists…!!!!
Mandingo
June 1st, 2012
11:27 am
Georgia is a lost cause. Johnny Reb values rule the day. The voters have spoken.
md
June 1st, 2012
11:30 am
“md, you’re wrong.
A company can develop Ipod’s all day long but if no one wants to buy that thing? You don’t have demand so you don’t have a market, so you better find something else to start developing real fast.”
Well….here’s a little exercise for you……yes, it takes both, but where do you think the process starts?
With the consumer standing around with a dollar in his pocket or after a company has acquired the capital to produce the product while at the same time employing people to produce the product?
Don’t know about you, but I’ll put my money on the group acquiring the capital vs that consumer walking around with a dollar in his pocket.
And on a side note, if gov’t were the answer, communist China would not have turned to capitalism to pull itself out of decades of stagnation………
Formerteacher
June 1st, 2012
11:30 am
iggy
June 1st, 2012
8:43 am
“We have term limits. Its called voting.”
True, except for the Executive branches at both the federal and state level. The Legislative branch is happy to allow the electorate to determine THEIR term limits, but that same electorate isn’t to be trusted to do the same with a President or Governor.
Hmm.. could it be that, like the gift ban they haven’t exactly embraced enthusiastically, we are asking these fine, upstanding folks (I’m looking at you, Balfour, Ralston, and Rogers, among many others) to vote themselves out of jobs and perks?
Term limits for all! As far as I’m concerned,if you have an (I) next to your name, you’re out. This is not a life-long job. Go serve a term, then go back to your real life.
Tiberius - Banned from Bookman's and proud of it!
June 1st, 2012
11:31 am
Reading economic advice from a liberal is like reading rocket science written by a 4 year-old.
Neither is going to get your venture launched.
md
June 1st, 2012
11:33 am
And by the way, while China was in all those years of stagnation, they had more consumers than any country on the planet.
Kyle Wingfield
June 1st, 2012
11:47 am
Finn: You need to read up on Say’s Law.
Short version: Supply creates its own demand.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
11:50 am
md, do you have a clue as to how many gadgets, devices, shampoos, rakes, tv’s are financed every single day that never find a market?
For every ipod that has succeeded there are probably a million items that didn’t succeed. Some of them were even financed through production.
Next time you are in a bookstore, take a look in that remainder bin. A company took a gamble, published a book and nobody bought it. Back when I worked in a B&N I remember a Marlon Brando biography came out and the bookstore bet big that it would be a winner. Bad bad bad mistake. One month later you could buy the hardback for $3.99.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
11:51 am
Kyle, there are a LOT of manufacturers of dresses out there, a lot of manufacturers of perfume out there.
All that supply, why am I not demanding it?
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
June 1st, 2012
11:52 am
Yeah, all those chinese consumers who couldn’t afford to buy anything. Why do you think there was stagnation?
Kyle Wingfield
June 1st, 2012
11:55 am
Um, maybe because you’re not a woman? (I assume.)
Hillbilly D
June 1st, 2012
12:40 pm
Couldn’t vote in the poll because none of the options fit my outlook. My view is why not cap them at $0.
Dusty
June 1st, 2012
12:53 pm
Ah the poll!!!
I check the $100 item. If we don’t, there’s nothing else offered.
Brosephues is right. The legistaltors should not have “gifts” if the rest of government employees can’t have gifts. We do not have elites in the business of running this state. It’s all for one and one for all. Equality! Aint it great!
md
June 1st, 2012
2:01 pm
Finn….you still don’t get it (and may never)….how does that consumer with a dollar in his pocket get more dollars to spend??
He goes to work…….at a company that first had to take a chance/risk with capital to employ that person……only then does that individual have the capacity to consume….and he will only consume what is made available to consume.
Without that initial capital outlay, we have an entire society roaming around without the means to consume……
ld
June 1st, 2012
5:46 pm
I agree with others hereinabove; NO gifts.
dabir dalton
June 2nd, 2012
8:24 am
Re: Do you support ending the current practice of unlimited gifts from lobbyists to state legislators by imposing a $100 cap on such gifts?
____________________________
This question is so poorly written that it will allow David Ralston {Speaker of the house} to claim that a No vote means that the voters support the status quo of their elected leaders accepting corporate bribes. Making it all the harder for me to believe that republicans are really and truly interested in ethics reform.
phil stembridge
June 4th, 2012
9:59 am
why are they getting any gifts?