Now that it's official that we live in a corporatocracy, let's make the needed changes [View All]

[zulchzulu]

SCOTUS pretty much let the cat out of the bag in regards to assuming that corporate entities can buy Senators and Congress people today. Some of us were suspicious of the obvious, but it is now in plain sight.

So, what do we do?

Here are some ideas.

From now on, elections are generally to be treated as polls or sports games. Surely, one side wins or gets the most votes and has bragging rights. Kind of like the winner of American Idol. You, the winner, get some kind of prize or something. Nothing actually allows you to make any gains in legislation or law-making. That's to be explained later.

Consider winning an election like winning a popularity contest in junior high. You get a parade, a watch and maybe even a date with a movie star.

But you have no power.

That's for the new seats of power. Essentially, every corporate entity (we're talking the Big Guys here) gets a seat in the House or Senate. So, for example, the Senator from General Electric would have one seat. The Senator from Raytheon would get a seat. And since some multi-national entities have many subsidiary corporate interests under their portfolio umbrella, getting 100 corporate senators should be no problem.

The same application of said corporate appointments to Congress would work under the same template.

Now here's the really cool part.

Depending on what corporate interest a Corporate Senator represents, the amount of "votes" would be much like currency values. So Senator Mitch O'Fuggoff (GE) would have a rolling value based on a combined value of stock market share prices and monetary values based on "expense control" layoffs (the more, the higher value), global outsourcing, offshore job locations, junk bond profits and derivatives-based income, all obviously run in a unshackled free market.

Senator Mitch O'Fuggoff (GE) could have a "vote value" of 12 as opposed to a lesser valued Corporate Senator.

In conclusion, let's get rid of elections as an optimistic democratic tool. Have elections merely for people to get together and chat about the doggone good old days of yesteryear when they thought their vote actually counted.





:sarcasm: