Should public office be limited to business executives?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vonsalza
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think that political parties would soon set up sham enterprises so that their candidates would gain the qualifications needed to hold political office.

Each administration has tens of thousands of experienced civil servants whose job it is to administer budgets etc.

I have no query with your brother in law deciding to vote for business executives when he has such a choice but it is undemocratic to insist on such a thing for all others.

Perhaps it is a stretch but communist governments only allow ‘voting’ for candidates who are members of the communist party because they supposedly are the best ones to have the needed skills and mindset. I do not believe it is healthy to start restricting all candidates who can run for office by profession or membership.
 
Last edited:
This line of thinking is popular with the new generation of STEM tech bros who are typically American. I think it’s interesting. Honestly I’d support it just in that maybe it would help people realise what a farce democracy really is. Hard to have much faith in it when those ruling you are very directly limited to wealthy capitalists. I don’t imagine it’s something that will happen anytime soon though.
 
Last edited:
abucs said:
Each administration has tens of thousands of experienced civil servants whose job it is to administer budgets etc.
Click to expand...
In civil service, administering a budget is mostly about spending all of it, so you get the same next year.

Some of those administrators have gained the decision making experience that qualifies them for leadership, and many of them are just adept at spending their budget. The same applies in how large businesses run.
 
Last edited:
My perfect candidate is just the opposite. Never holding office would be a great start.
 
I would be in favor of eliminating the right to vote for anyone receiving medicare and social security.
 
Why?

I’ve been that person. I didn’t have a choice - I could use medicare, or I could rack up a bunch of big hospital bills I couldn’t pay for lack of regular medical care. Getting a job was certainly not on the table.

I worry that the whole idea of “contributing to society” ends up being the Catholic version of social darwinism.

I don’t think a competent adult should be expected to live under the rules of a government that they are not allowed to have any say in.
 
Last edited:
DarkLight said:
Why?

I’ve been that person. I didn’t have a choice - I could use medicare, or I could rack up a bunch of big hospital bills I couldn’t pay for lack of regular medical care. Getting a job was certainly not on the table.

I worry that the whole idea of “contributing to society” ends up being the Catholic version of social darwinism.

I don’t think a competent adult should be expected to live under the rules of a government that they are not allowed to have any say in.
Click to expand...
Because social security and medicare encourage laziness, and are contributing to the bankrupting of our society. We can’t afford the programs, plain and simple.
 
I assure you that yanking the programs does nothing to encourage hard work unless someone is actually able to work. Lots of people aren’t able to work for whatever reason, or they are working but they can’t get healthcare through their job, or something.

Medicare meant I could eventually get a job, rather than bouncing in and out of the hospital and probably eventually dying from lack of medical care. I don’t want to take that from people, and given modern attitudes I’ve found I don’t want to rely on “charity” that presumes someone is lazy or mooching.
 
Last edited:
My husband is a public employee and he is not and never has been a “business executive” (and has no desire to be). He excels at his work, is happy to serve the public, and does not waste taxpayer money. The same goes for almost everyone he works with. There is some skill overlap, but they aren’t the same thing.
 
DarkLight said:
I assure you that yanking the programs does nothing to encourage hard work unless someone is actually able to work. Lots of people aren’t able to work for whatever reason, or they are working but they can’t get healthcare through their job, or something.
Click to expand...
There are many people on social security that are perfectly able to work. If somebody is able bodied, why should working people have to sacrifice for them? If someone truly can’t work, then society at some level should provide for them, starting with family, then the church, then local government.
 
How do you know that?

I would caution against drawing too many conclusions on how people look. When I was very sick, I had good days and bad days. I think someone looking at me on a good day, would have concluded that I was able to work and just being lazy. The trouble was I couldn’t schedule those good days, and there were more bad days than good. No employer will take on someone who can’t show up reliably. But if you saw me in public, I looked like someone who could work.
 
DarkLight said:
I would caution against drawing too many conclusions on how people look. When I was very sick, I had good days and bad days.
Click to expand...
In the 1880s, about 75% of men over 65 worked. The jobs back them were more physically demanding. If they could work back then, then many 65 year olds can work now.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
40.png
DarkLight:
I would caution against drawing too many conclusions on how people look. When I was very sick, I had good days and bad days.
Click to expand...
In the 1880s, about 75% of men over 65 worked. The jobs back them were more physically demanding. If they could work back then, then many 65 year olds can work now.
Click to expand...
Respectfully, is there a citation for that number? I find it difficult to accept.
 
Are we talking about social security retirement, or social security disability?

Social security retirement is a mess, but people have been paying into it all their lives, so it’s not a simple thing to just end it. People have been putting money into the program that they might otherwise have saved for themselves. We also have the kind of stupid problem in this country that health insurance is tied to the employer and it’s pretty much impossible to get affordable care without some form of health insurance.

Social security disability and medicaid (I should correct, I was on medicaid) are a different issue.
 
Like heqq!

That would be the death of anything resembling “democratic representation.”

ICXC NIKA
 
Exactly. Many people who are sick or unable to work look fine to others. The average person doesn’t understand illness at all.
 
That’s also one of my concerns with private charity. A smaller charity is less likely to have experts on hand to be able to make a competent evaluation, so it’s a lot easier for whether someone looks like they need help to influence things. And that’s a problem both ways - both that people who want to fake it can look genuine, and that genuine people can look fake.

(In fact, it’s even not uncommon for people with genuine issues to use “fake” techniques to try to match up with stereotypes of what people expect them to look like.)
 
Vonsalza said:
40.png
stinkcat_14:
40.png
DarkLight:
I would caution against drawing too many conclusions on how people look. When I was very sick, I had good days and bad days.
Click to expand...
In the 1880s, about 75% of men over 65 worked. The jobs back them were more physically demanding. If they could work back then, then many 65 year olds can work now.
Click to expand...
Respectfully, is there a citation for that number? I find it difficult to accept.
Click to expand...
I will try and get the cite sometime today.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
40.png
Vonsalza:
40.png
stinkcat_14:
40.png
DarkLight:
I would caution against drawing too many conclusions on how people look. When I was very sick, I had good days and bad days.
Click to expand...
In the 1880s, about 75% of men over 65 worked. The jobs back them were more physically demanding. If they could work back then, then many 65 year olds can work now.
Click to expand...
Respectfully, is there a citation for that number? I find it difficult to accept.
Click to expand...
I will try and get the cite sometime today.
Click to expand...
See page 7 of the document below.

http://www.nber.org/chapters/c8040.pdf
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top