When a Wall Street Billionaire funds a Hillary super pac or her campaign it comes from an individual

[Csainvestor]

Not from a corporation. But is there any difference at all? When Billionaires fund your superpacs they do it because they want things for their corporations. Money coming from the CEO instead of from the corporation, they are one and the same.

[EdwardBernays]

1. No

Theres no difference.

No matter what a handful of Clintonites have decided to suddenly start pretending.

[DanTex]

2. Of course there is a difference between people and corporations.

Is Bernie going to pick Mitt Romney for his running mate now?

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

4. Why do you lie so much? The owners of a corporation donating are de jure corporate donations...

Do you understand?

[DanTex]

5. Most major corporations are publicly traded and own by shareholders.

Anyone with a 401k or any mutual fund holdings is an owner of a bunch of corporations.

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

6. That is another lie... Corporations have majority shareholders, CEOs, and Board of Directors...

Mom and pop shareholders have no say in the policy of a corporation.

[DanTex]

8. It's not a lie, anyone who owns stock owns parts of corporations. You really don't

know the financial system very well, do you?

[GeorgiaPeanuts]

9. And they don't have a say in how the corporation is run...

The major players own majority shares and control how the company operates.

When those major players donate to a campaign like Clintons it is a de jure corporate donation.

[DanTex]

10. They have a say proportional to their ownership. And their share of the

profits is also proportional to their ownership.

You might argue that when large shareholders of corporations like Ben and Jerry of the ice cream company donate to Bernie, they are doing it solely with the bottom line of their corporation in mind. Maybe. There can be any number of reasons. Individuals are allowed to decide for themselves who to support with their own money, and why.

[Dragonfli]

11. And the fossil fuel lobbyists? (besides the truth of what the OP speaks to)

[DanTex]

12. They are individuals who work at lobbying firms. It's not the firm donating, it's the individual.

There's a huge difference between individual money, which people spend for whatever they want, and corporate money, which business spend in order to increase their profits. It's staggering that so-called "progressives" don't know the difference between people and corporations.

[Dragonfli]

15. You do know why lobbyists bundle money, and that they have clients or are yu really that uninformed?

I don't think you're stupid, I think that is all pretense.

You are pretending to be completely ignorant for a reason. That reason could be one of many, including personal profit, or simply the enjoyment of spreading misleading and untrue information.

I don't know why you do what you do, but I am not buying the act, because no one outside the tea party is as stupid or ignorant as you are pretending to be.

[upaloopa]

3. That is so easy to post when you run no risk of having to back up what you say

It's just a cheap shot and deserves no respect

[rhett o rick]

14. I see it as the truth and you did nothing to refute the claim. Clinton supporters are pretending

that quid pro quo doesn't exist in politics. They want us to believe that the hundreds of millions given to politicians is purely altruistic. They live in a bubble of denial.

While the billionaires pay millions to our politicians, the politicians just happen to pass laws that help the billionaires loot more wealth from the lower classes. It's greed plane and simple. We must get Big Money influence out of politics.

[Dragonfli]

17. A poster up-thread is actually claiming that the money lobbyists raise is personal and they give it

as a personal donation and not on behalf of clients or anything, I suppose the clients pay them merely for charitable reasons because they like them as friends and it is in no way a business thing, but rather an altruism driven decision regarding those they employ er I mean befriend.

Edited to add: post #12, read also my post he/she is responding to and please feel free to correct any mistaken beliefs the poster may have regarding what lobbyists are and what they do.

[rhett o rick]

20. LOL. I can't see post #12. I got tried of their defense of the greed of the wealthy at the

expense of the poor. I guess for them, rationalization is the key to happiness.

[99Forever]

7. In a real democracy this is called bribery.

Nothing more nothing less. Corrupt politicians taking money from corrupt corporations to do corrupt things.

[brooklynite]

13. A nice platitude...

...when my wife gives money to a political campaign, it doesn't have anything to do with what her Law Firm is doing; just as when I give money to a political campaign, it doesn't have anything to do with MTA's transportation issues.

[Csainvestor]

16. Neither of you are billionaire ceo's

Your example sucks.

Many of the billionaires are funding hillary super pacs with million dollar contributions.

Hillary goes to Wall Street Billionaires houses for private fundraisers.

[rhett o rick]

19. When all of the execs and their wives of Goldman-Sachs give the limit to Clinton it's

because they know she will serve them right. She tells them in her speeches.

Oh yeah, the execs bonuses help overcome the financial burden of their donations. It's naive to think that Goldman-Sachs doesn't have anything to do with this process.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. "funds" = investments in a product they expect a return on.

Which is reasonable considering her vote to give the peoples money to the banksters.