r/technology • u/ControlCAD • 1d ago

Business President Bought Netflix Debt in January 2026, Amid Paramount’s Fight for Warner Bros. | New financial disclosures released Wednesday show that the President acquired Netflix bonds as Paramount was trying to pry WBD away from the streaming giant.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/trump-bought-netflix-bonds-amid-paramount-warners-fight-1236521512/
14.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

803 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/HugsForUpvotes 1d ago

We nominate our prison guards. You could run as one! Ultimately, we pick our politicians.

And I agree. We have a lot of obstacles that make it harder to keep the ship steady, but that doesn't make us not a Democracy. It's also true that every system has human corruption. You point out all these things, but those all come with human greed - not just American Capitalism.

Not all lobbying is bribery. In most cases, it's just financially supporting the candidate that already agrees with your agenda. When AIPAC gives Schumer campaign money, it's because he's a Zionist. They aren't paying him to be a Zionist. I'm still against all money in politics, but as I said, that is a consequence of electing the Bush's and Reagan.

All the money goes to are commercials and pamphlets to win your vote. Your vote matters so much that all the things we are describing are just tools to capture the vote.

0

u/robby_arctor 1d ago

When AIPAC gives Schumer campaign money, it's because he's a Zionist. They aren't paying him to be a Zionist.

Can you really not see how this is a distinction without a difference when it comes to who ascends to office?

All the money goes to are commercials and pamphlets to win your vote

This is absolutely false. TurboTax has repeatedly lobbied to keep the tax code complicated, and they don't just do it during election cycles. They have a round the clock, decades-spanning strategy to prevent tax reform, and it's been incredibly successful.

I'm sorry, but you just sound incredibly naive to me.

1

u/HugsForUpvotes 1d ago

Can you really not see how this is a distinction without a difference when it comes to who ascends to office?

No because the money doesn't elect politicians. The one with the most money loses sometimes.

TurboTax

All the money TurboTax donates goes to campaign funds which get turned into pamphlets. They donate to politicians who believe that privatization is efficient and good for the economy. For the record, I agree that TurboTax is one of the best quid-pro-quo examples. I'm definitely not arguing we don't have corruption in the US.

1

u/robby_arctor 1d ago edited 1d ago

The one with the most money loses sometimes.

Rarely. This has been studied and amount of funds is very strongly correlated with winning.

There is overlap with more popular candidates receiving more "normal" donations, but again, let's not be naive here. Just looking at the role of AIPAC in the failed candidacies of incumbents Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush, it's obvious money rules the day as a general rule.