|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Anyone that financially supports a certain political party obviously want their interests promoted.
If we want corporate donations banned. Isn't it also right that we should not allow donations from Labour Unions or other pressure groups?
Political financing has developed over the many hundreds of years, into the current model.
Many people feel that this model is out of date and needs to be replaced.
A few powerful groups seem to control government policy. Is this true or just a perception?
Probably but corporations, although legally defined as such, are not people. Unions, in theory, are simply workers that group together to ensure that corporate "greed" doesn't unfairly take its toll on the employees that make corporate profits possible.
I think the only way politicians could "fairly" compete is by taking the money out of the equation as much as possible and make it so each serious politician running has equal time to get their message out there instead of the person with the most money being able to overwhelm everyone else.
I beleive if this sort of system could be worked out, more high quality candidates may come forward AND grassroots efforts would become even more nessesary.
Of course, doing something like this would need tax payer money so It will probably never happen.
It is absolutely true - your perception.
In the USA there is the federal reserve crime cartel, and there is Ron Paul.
Labor unions have made huge donations for many years and I think they should be banned from making political contributions just like companies. Individual labor union members can make donations as they see fit.
Sadly, I feel that powerful groups with an agenda of their own will always control governments. That's how tribal and national leaders have always been determined - the most powerful people decide who is in charge.
Just as a corporation is speaking on the needs of just a few, forgetting about the rest, a labour union often does the same things. After all, if the big and evil corporations were put out of business, there would be no where for the labour union members to work and nothing to complain about.
I believe that the key is we need to simply worry about ourselves. If I think something is important, I need to stand by it and promote it myself. If enough individual people pushed something among their friends and colleagues, it wouldn't matter how much money was thrown to an opposing candidate - relationships trump all.
How's it going?
Of course, you're right: "Anyone that financially supports a certain political party obviously want their interests promoted." True enough. But I guess would emphasize 'anyone' as the operative word.
What is a 'corporation'? Is a corporation an 'anyone'? What do you mean by the term 'corporation' in the context of political funding? Are we talking about the ENTIRE corporation, manager, executives, and wage-labor employees down to the janitorial staff (which is probably contracted out, come to think of it)?
Or, are we talking about the board of directors of a 'corporation' and their biggest investors in the corporation?
Now, you juxtaposed 'corporations' (board of directors and their biggest investors) alongside "Labour Unions" [and] "other pressure groups."
As I understand it, Labour unions, for example, do go through some kind of democratic (small 'd') process as far as deciding where to put their collective funds politically -- and they do this among the ENTIRE membership of the union.
I would be surprised to hear that corporate boards (and their investors) take a poll among the entire 'membership' of the enterprise (executives, middle management, supervisor, hourly employees and janitorial staff) in order to determine where to spend the corporate funds (which everybody, the entire membership of the firm from the CEO to the toilet scrubber helped to generate) politically.
The board of directors (and their biggest shareholders) probably make those decisions among themselves with no input from down below. So, it really, really, really (Did I say 'really'?) depends on what, PRECISELY, one means by "corporations," "Labour Unions," and "other pressure groups."
It seems to be very true Michael. I believe that all extreme donations should be banned, or at the least extremely minimized.
by ahorseback2 years ago
A question for our independents and conservatives;We already know what the left thinks .In the nomination of Trump for the republican party are we not symbolically AND technically nominating exactly that...
by candice58 years ago
by Col. Duke LaCross (...Okay, maybe I lied)6 years ago
Anyone else utterly unconcerned that Obama supports equal rights?We all knew he supported gay marriage, that's assumed, right?
by Randy McLaughlin5 years ago
Has anyone ever seen the message that their content appears to be about drugs, but it's not?Here is the link if you want to see the message: http://randy-m.hubpages.com/hub/How-to- … -In-A-Home I don't know if...
by JON EWALL6 years ago
Why are taxpayer funds given to political action non-profits who contribute to political campaigns?Payback to campaign donors for support during an election seems to be just another way to waste taxpayer money. The...
by Susan Reid5 years ago
Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney said Tuesday that he thinks teachers unions should be banned from making political contributions because union leaders often negotiate contracts with Democratic politicians...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.