Big Business Under Ron Paul?

[Tac1]

I hope Ron Paul wins the upcoming election, he touches on every important issue and he's the only candidate with a plan to restore liberty and freedom. However, I have to be honest and say that there's one big issue that I never hear him talk about, and that's the issue of lobbying. I cannot picture a pure democratic society so long as big businesses are allowed a system that favors their dollars over the voice of the people.

We know by now how powerful money is, unfortunately. It can buy influence, it can buy votes, and it can continue to promote a government that's pro-business instead of a government that acts in the fairness of both business and citizens.

I worry how things would be with the amount of deregulation we would have under Paul all while allowing corporations to guide this country where they see fit. Really it won't even matter what Ron Paul would want while in office if he constantly has to fight against lobbyist anyway. Thus, step one IMO is without a doubt making lobbying illegal.

What's your thoughts? Has Ron Paul discussed this issue?

[The Gold Standard]

Lobbying would be pointless if they couldn't influence regulations or hold their hands out. President Paul wouldn't be writing new regulations and would surely veto any regulations or corporate welfare coming from Congress.

[RickyJ]

I worry how things would be with the amount of deregulation we would have under Paul all while allowing corporations to guide this country where they see fit.

That happens already today. Paul is not against all regulations, he is just against the federal government mandating it for all states. The states themselves should decide how they want to regulate businesses. Oh, and you wouldn't have to worry much about this anyway even if Paul won, he is only one man, and even as president can only do so much to change the federal government. What he can do however is bring all our troops home from these undeclared wars. That reason alone is enough to vote for Ron Paul for President. All his other positions on issues are just icing on the cake! :)

[PauliticsPolitics]

Well, lobbying as a whole should certainly not be outlawed.
If you and your friends petition your congressman to vote a certain way, that is technically lobbying.
And it is important for us people to have this power to make our elected officials aware of issues that concern us.

The bigger problem is not "lobbying" by it's pure definition. The problem is big business and big government collusion. Why does the government have to power to bail out banks and other companies? Why does the government set regulations to pick winners and losers in the free market? These are the problems. We the people do not have much power to change big corporations and their strategies, we can not convince them to not take free government money. This is why want to make the federal government smaller and weaker, so it does not have to power to pick winner and losers (with out money!). History has shown us that big government joins forces with big corporations. This is oligarchy. Fortunately, we can change the government and limit its power to favor certain businesses. We need to hold off the oligarchy, though without Ron Paul, we will continue on that sad trajectory. This is part of the reason that the media is anti-Paul. They are a big part of the aspiring oligarchy.

[Gumba of Liberty]

Right now big business (corporations) is privatizing (internalizing) profits and socializing (externalizing) losses. Big government proponents believe the proper course is to socialize profits and make corporations accountable for their behavior through government regulation (bureaucrats) . Small government proponents believe the proper course is to privatize losses and make corporations accountable for their behavior through market regulation (property rights).

[LinuxJedi]

If there are fewer regulations, which allow new competitors to enter the market, I think big business might be too busy competing (or being replaced by small innovative companies) to have time to lobby. Companies lobby, I think, as a means of profit and also as a means of preventing competition. Why compete when you can tax, and there are companies who basically collect taxes from their competitors (e.g. RIAA - technically a group of companies). Bear in mind that lobbying is also done to secure government contracts, and if government shrinks, the pool of money dries up and the lobbyists dry up with it (like the leaches they are). Lobbying can be done to force people to buy a product also, but if we don't allow it, what will the lobbying accomplish?

[Brett85]

Private companies lobbying members of Congress is part of their 1st amendment right. It's no different that you or I writing a letter or making a phone call to our local member of Congress. Doing away with lobbying would be doing away with the 1st amendment.

[Carehn]

Welcome to the forums

[Carehn]

Funny story about lobbying... I think it was Grant who use to get drunk in the lobby of a hotel and people would 'LOBBY' him for stuff. Thats how that word came to be.

[aSwedishSupporter]

I agree that Ron Paul hasn't emphasized the importance of big business enough. Very large companies produce a great deal of what human beings value. Supporting very large companies is very important. They are the life support system of human kind. We would certainly benefit a lot from having more and larger companies.

[kusok]

I wonder about one thing regarding de-regulation and getting rid of things like EPA.


Paul explains the negative things about EPA, and I agree. He also says corporations that pollute would answer directly to property owners. But here comes the tricky part. let's say some large corporate swine polluted my land. Would I stand a snowball's chance in hell of holding them accountable??? What will I do? Sue them? With their finest army of best lawyers, likely bought and paid for judges, and so on. What is to stop the rich and powerful from running me over?

Paul says THAT is government's role - to protect me in this case, and to be a referee. But how? What would the government do? Will government give me lawyers as good as the corporation's??? Will government oversee the fairness of my property rights law suit? What is to stop the corporation from bribing the government all the same???

[Len Larson]

Govt. should not have anything that we would want to compete for. Just one set of laws that apply equally to everyone. No special regulations that allow polluters.

And of course Rothbard was here first:Law, Property Rights and Air Pollution (http://mises.org/daily/2120)

[seapilot]

Limited Government would lead to limited lobbying.