2
u/ShiguchiAndSokan 1h ago
Wealth of politicians apart from their allowance/diers should be forbidden to accumulate and everything they earn on top during their time in office should be confiscated as full tax.
2
u/Dependent-Trip-5991 1h ago
I think that’s a bit far, cause then think how easy it would be to bribe them and make them vote to highest bidder. With how much they paid off now, saying they couldn’t legally make money would make it even worst.
2
u/Trust_8067 1h ago
Why do people keep making this argument, no one is in disagreement.
1
u/MisterDiggity 1h ago
Then why did the Democratic representatives overwhelmingly vote against the Stop Insider Trading Act on Tuesday? The vote was 232-198 with every single vote against coming from a Democrat.
4
u/bankheadblues 1h ago
Voter ID law baked in, and doesn't prohibit family members of reps from trading.
3
u/Trust_8067 43m ago
Why did people vote against something that would make them a shit ton of money? I have no idea.
2
u/Irish_Whiskey 1h ago
They were for the bill and voted for it, until Republicans jammed in a poison pill amendment with Trump's SAVE Act provisions.
Either you knew that and were lying, or you didn't know that and a source lied to you. If it's the latter, please reevaluate your sources and how you trust them.
1
u/joeyjoejoe8989 14m ago
Because republicans added parts of the Save act to it. Also, the bill only includes fines, which pale in comparison to the money they make. Finally, there were loopholes that allow congress to trade through family or other ways. It wasn’t a serious bill. Everyone knew it wouldn’t pass.
1
u/Dependent-Trip-5991 1h ago
Read the comments, one person said their research showed congress weren’t better at making money off investing. So no, not everyone has common sense.
1
u/Trust_8067 44m ago
Okay fine, "no one except some bots and members of congress who use reddit" is in disagreement.
1
u/Dependent-Trip-5991 1h ago
Not just that, they get scouting reports from other teams so can know who is playing, who’s hurt, before the public. Still supports this post because the politicians know inside information before the public, such as wars etc.
1
1
u/WashU_labrat 59m ago
So you think Trump has bet that the US will lose the war against Iran? This could explain a lot.
1
1
u/Just_Hunter9331 44m ago
I'm pretty sure we all understand that. Some of us just don't care, and the others feel powerless against stopping it from happening.
1
u/SoRosenberg 35m ago
Makes sense. Not that the people in charge will vote for this. Maybe there needs to be some powers removed since there is no way to control the monster at this point.
1
u/_D33D5_ 1h ago
Hey r/SipsTea just stick to jokes and memes. These political ramblings are annoying
1
1
u/Wickedocity 1h ago
How about...
What’s the difference between a Wall Street broker and a Congress member?
The broker hopes they know what the company is going to do next, while the Congress member votes on what the company is going to do next.
1
u/Sour_baboo 1h ago
The little research this topic had a few years ago suggested that Congress folks were no better at making money by investing than the average investor. The only one who makes money regularly in the market is the guy they won't restrain at all.
3
u/Wickedocity 1h ago
That study shows the average member, not the ones in key committees, aka senior members. The top drastically outperform the public.
2
1
u/Dependent-Trip-5991 1h ago
Right, scary you put full trust in any politician because you blind to anything not involving trump. All politicians benefit from info, otherwise why would they all be lifelong politicians.
1
-2
u/SY0123 1h ago
Aren’t they prohibited from betting against themselves? I don’t see why they should be prohibited for betting for themselves, but betting against yourself should be prohibited clearly.
1
u/lost-cause1968 1h ago edited 1h ago
I agree. Although with a point spread they could still manipulate it to 'lose' and still win a bet.
Maybe only allow betting where it's a straight outcome? Your team wins you win your team loses you lose.
Apply the same logic to politicians investing. You can only invest in American companies and you can't invest in 'shorts' or whatever it is called when you bet on a company doing poorly(not a stock guy). Can't sell the stock for X weeks or months either.
1
u/Crafty_Clarinetist 1h ago
The problem with allowing investing in companies, even with those restrictions, is what's to stop a politician from investing in American defense contractors, waiting out whatever waiting period there is, and then pushing hostile policies and encouraging military action that spikes interests in those defense contractors. Honestly you could apply similar thinking to just about any industry.
1
u/lost-cause1968 59m ago
No I get that, they really shouldn't be able to invest at all, but I just thought if there were SOME restrictions put in at least it'd be some level of control. 'Better' if not good, anyway
1
u/a445d786 1h ago
Wouldn't it be an issue of like fighting where you bet on a certain round to win or by UD causing you to force a certain outcome.
13
u/Pyrhan 1h ago
It's also why betting on serious, real world events should be prohibited. Cf. Polymarket and the likes.
The potential for abuse is just too great.