I can’t believe I’m going to post a link to the Shill. Leftists think this is actually a conservative site which it is not. Like I’ve been trying to teach Josh, the source isn’t as important as the information.
Politicians selling stock right before covid.
If you were told that this virus was some kind of big deal and that the government was going to react crazily, wouldn’t you sell? My point is that when the government controls the market, government employees profit.
Carbon markets:
Carbon trading markets are one of the left’s favorite solutions to non-existent climate change. It sounds like a ‘free market’ solution but its foundations are entirely communist in nature. You have X number of carbon credits for emission and you may buy and sell them as your ‘greenness’ allows. The total carbon credits on the market (supply) are of course controlled by the benevolent and soft handed (95% leftist-by-vote Washington DC) government. The dangerous and planet destroying manufacturers and businesses of the country must track and purchase or mitigate carbon according to an arbitrary and guaranteed incomprehensible ‘greenness’ rule set provided by the previously mentioned benevolent arbiters of freedom in DC.
In carbon markets, the politicians control both supply and demand giving full control over the value of a carbon credit. As the Shill notes, these sorts of conflicts of interest violate the STOCK act. For those of us who are not in congress, having not been ordained as princes or princesses, they call it insider trading. Trading on knowledge nobody else has is blatant theft of others money.
As always, leftists and RINO’s and couch coaches, have the answer. Ban trading!!! Having some kind of “politicians cannot trade carbon” will not stop the corruption. Imagine for a moment, a world where politicians are not even allowed to own stock. No trading in the markets whatsoever. If they are issuing more carbon credits to the supply and they know it is coming and prices for credits will drop, how much would a non-politician PAY for that information? Just some words in a noisy off-the-path bar, and cash comes to the campaign later.
You cannot stop the corruption even in non-carbon markets, but when the politicians can tighten the supply of carbon credits, like the fed releasing an interest hike, foreknowledge is very, very useful.
Stock markets:
If you are a politician and based on a coming decision of government your entire investment is about to get wiped out, your life savings say. You would be hard pressed not to react to what you know. Equally true, what would you do if you knew vaccine mandates were going to be passed just 24 hours before the public found out? Trading through an institution would be equally bad because a quick off-the-record meeting by a trusted associate later and all of a sudden buy/sell signals are transferred as needed.
The Founders:
The authors of the constitution knew of many problems that large central government would create. Corruption and grift being right at the top of the list. As we move farther and farther away from the vision that made America great, we are seeing the fruits of our sins. Unless we reverse course, cancelling and deleting large sections of the United States federal government, we will be in for very bad times across this entire planet.
the Air Vent 
The authors of the constitution knew of many problems that large central government would create. Corruption and grift being right at the top of the list. As we move farther and farther away from the vision that made America great, we are seeing the fruits of our sins.
Any level of government. A horrifying and funny self-justifying explanation of government graft was written (perhaps with a ghost-writer) by a ward-heeler in the old New York City Tammany Hall. “Plunkett of Tammany Hall”
https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/plunkitt-of-tammany-hall/
Plunkitt …was best known and most influential acting as a ward boss [and] a substantial and powerful following among the working-class Irish of the district by doing political favors and providing services for the people. At the same time, he became independently wealthy by manipulating the political system and trading political favors for insider information. These practices, which Plunkitt candidly (if ironically) defended as “honest graft,” provide a close-up look at the functioning and practices of the big city machines.
Plunkitt wrote: Just let me explain by examples. My party’s in power in the city, and it’s goin’ to undertake a lot of public improvements. Well, I’m tipped off, say, that they’re going to lay out a new park at a certain place. … I go to that place and I buy up all the land I can in the neighborhood. .. Or, supposin’ it’s a new bridge they’re goin’ to build. I get tipped off and I buy as much property as I can that has to be taken for approaches. I sell at my own price later on and drop some more money in the bank. Wouldn’t you? It’s just lookin’ ahead in Wall Street or in the coffee or cotton market. It’s honest graft, and I’m lookin’ for it every day in the year. I will tell you frankly that I’ve got a good lot of it, too.
The “civil service” was implemented to cut down on the trading of politically appointed positions in exchange for political favors. And yet now we have civil servants who are not responsive at all to political , elected, leadership — while both elected leaders (McCain? Pelosi?) and appointed public officials (Fauci? Bolton?) enrich themselves in the same fashion as Plunkitt, over a century earlier.
A couple of idea to shake things up. I suspect these are no more a long-term solution than the civil service has been. But for a while we might try
Term limits for elected officials. The newcomers, perhaps, won’t be as well trained in how to graft as the more experienced office-holders.
The idea from Glenn Reynold about a “revolving door” surtax, for which those leaving highly paid civil service jobs are steeply taxed on the private earnings paid in speech fees, book deals, consulting contracts, sinecure academic positions … to those who have just finished making profitable decisions in favor of certain constituencies.
A draft or “selective service” style draw of ordinary citizens to consider decisions of the civil service, just as we require such citizens to serve on juries. When we can’t get enough volunteers to serve and when those commenting on proposed policies are all vested in industries lobbying the decision makers, the citizenry needs to amplify a voice. (I’d pay “jurors” more than $6 a day, though…)
And always and everywhere, delegate decisions back down to local authorities. It’s one thing to grift alongside a million dollar bridge or city park. It’s another to slice off a piece of a moonshot or interstate highway system or world-wide vaccination program.