"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:



Why do you say the idea is wrong? The insurance industry has already
purchased the necessary politicians to do its bidding.

Can't talk for the OP, but to my mind, this is a way of placing
blame without really thinking about the why. It is way too simplistic
and pretty much used as a way to avoid actually making any effort to
actually understand the underlying causes. It is used often by merely
changing the name of the industry or group that has bought the
politicians.


If a president said he wanted legislation that banned the sale of all
military equipment to other countries, what do you suppose would happen
in
the ensuing months after he made that statement?

He probably wouldn't get it. But the reasons for such would be
much more varied than merely X bought and paid for something. Just using
that as the catch all for anything politicians do is intellectually lazy
at the absolute best and also indicates there is nothing that can be
done about it.


Well, this is what I've seen on the local level, which is the training
school for the few politicians that climb the ladder and move to bigger
things, like congress.

"No one is sure what convinced President Clinton to approve such an
ambitious escalation in the War on Drugs. But some observers at the time
speculated that the critical factor was a conversation with Sen. Christopher
Dodd, the Connecticut Democrat, whose state is home to the helicopter
manufacturer Sikorsky Aircraft. In early 2000, Clinton unveiled Plan
Colombia - and Sikorksy promptly received an order for eighteen of its
Blackhawk helicopters at a cost of $15 million each. "Much has been made of
the notion that this was Dodd looking to sell Blackhawks to Colombia," Beers
tells me. He pauses before adding, "I am not in a position to tell you it
didn't happen.""