But it's not money==speech. More like often times restricting money is restricting speech. That doesn't necessarily mean money is exactly speech.
Which is why the government still restricts campaign donations. It just can't restrict money when that money is being used for actual speech.
Money is speech when it suits them. You can yell from the rooftops that you support Daesh, but try sending them some money... suddenly money isn't speech.
Re:Bernie’s Army of Coders
by toomuchtodo on Thursday February 18, 2016 @06:27PM
(#11130230)
The government already regulates certain kinds of speech. Can't yell fire if no fire exists in a crowded room.
Re:Bernie’s Army of Coders
by dragonwriter on Thursday February 18, 2016 @06:36PM
(#11130297)
> The government already regulates certain kinds of speech. Can't yell fire if no fire exists in a crowded room.
Popular saying, but very bad example. http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time...
First off, depends on how you use the word "regulate".
But the government has done a poor job of regulating money, and well, to be honest, money is really the result of our efforts / labors, and thus yeah, the government should not be regulating it, generally.
Given money == speech, you're okay with the government regulating speech?