• VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    You would be right on both counts.

    That being said, term limits for members of Congress to solve anything is one of those things that sound good on the surface but could actually make everything even worse.

    It’s supposed to decrease corruption by incumbents being less entrenched, but it could be the cause of much MORE corruption by making the revolving door between corrupt business interests and corrupt politics spin faster…

    • Pasta4u@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Could just add in sensible term limits of like 10-20 years. Also not allow them to own stock

      • VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Except the first one wouldn’t work, for the reason described above.

        Banning them from holding stock would probably help a lot, though. Too bad that it won’t happen as long as oil boy Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi’s even more corrupt protégé are the Dem leaders of the two Chambers and their Republican counterparts continue to be even worse 😮‍💨

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Or at least not individual stocks.

        Having a bog standard market tracker would be fine.

      • VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, exactly!

        IMO, ranked choice voting, publicly (and only publicly) funded elections and outlawing partisan and otherwise discriminating gerrymandering would be much better solutions.

        Will probably never happen though, since the people in charge of reforming the system are themselves amongst the main beneficiaries of the corruption inherent in the system 🤦