Economic education.

[grimsprice]

Basically, America is fucked financially. Why? Because our politicians are 'career' politicians. Most start out as lawyers. Now thats great if you plan on running for a position in the courts. However, as for the rest of the politicians, we need economists in office.

I propose that the legal requirements necessary to run for almost any government office should include at least a minor in economics. And for bigger political roles, a major in economics. How well off would our country be if we had people capable of actually... i don't know... running a country?

What do you think? Should politicians be required to have college degrees in economics?

 

[Simalacrum]

I understand what your saying, but then that also gets in the way of the whole concept that anybody can do politics. If there are requirements to becomming a politician, then all the idiots will begin to moan... Its sad, really =\

 

[Dusty Donuts]

How about they get trained in "Thinking"?
SRSLY: If I was in any position or had enough experience to make a comment on this, I probably wouldn't. But, yes, I agree that there should be economic training.

 

[RedPandaMan]

Politicians should be trained in diplomacy, economics, and political sciences. I still say Technocracy.

I agree with him. I always thought Technocracy was the best way to go, but yeah, they should be trained in economics and diplomacy.

 

[Loiterer]

Economics involves a lot of conjecture. It's far from an exact science.
You can try to predict the future state of the economy as much as you want, but it's inevitable that there are certain unpredictable events that will totally throw you. If people invest a lot of faith in economists, the effects of anything they don't see coming could be severly worsened.

I think most politicians are motivated almost exclusively by a thirst for power, but there are some truly altruistic ones out there.

 

[Turtleboy1017]

I understand what your saying, but then that also gets in the way of the whole concept that anybody can do politics. If there are requirements to becomming a politician, then all the idiots will begin to moan... Its sad, really =\

I do agree that some people will complain, but won't those who have the work ethic and dedication to become a politician still be able to?

Even with this required major, the said concept that anyone can become a politician still applies. Anyone can become anything they choose to, so long as they put the time and effort required to be able to succeed into said career.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

I do... not agree. Reluctantly though. Many policies of the US government in the last few decades have been based around 'economical considerations.' These have been written, if not pushed, by those with a pure economical agenda: To make themselves, and their ilk, richer. Imagine, if you will, what sort of bills Bill Gates would pass if he could get away with it. With a government filled with these people it would become even more likely that government will protect corporate interests even further then they have already. That all other things would become secondary to 'will it make the rich richer.'

I am reluctant though cause I feel those career politicians are already in the pockets of those who would make a killing in the current economical crisis. Either they are directly related to 'old money' or they are in the pockets of those who have the cash. Maybe if we cut out the middle man we would at least know who to hang from the lamp posts when they create yet enough crisis for profit....

The very least we could get rid of career politicians for other reasons though. For one it would allow us to get rid of the whole 'money trumps' election cycle and ensure normal people have a chance to get into positions of power as they should have. Really hard for someone other then a career politician to raise the funds required to be elected in this day and age, and normally they do so through methods we would associate with whores... only it is the people, us, who get....

Get rid of career politicians but don't demand the replacement comes from the very same crop we get our politicians from these days. Nothing will change if you do.

"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents."

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

I do agree that some people will complain, but won't those who have the work ethic and dedication to become a politician still be able to?

Even with this required major, the said concept that anyone can become a politician still applies. Anyone can become anything they choose to, so long as they put the time and effort required to be able to succeed into said career.

I disagree. A comedian I listen to once, when he was young and naive, thought the same way you did. He joined a branch of politics at the local level with aspirations to move up higher and do 'good for the people.' There was one requirement this man did not have, and never would be able to achieve in good faith: He was not corrupt. In the very short period of his political career he spoke up against corruption and theft found in his local government.

He was blacklisted for it. Cause you see, the corrupt thieves not only held the ear of his bosses but where his bosses! They ensured that he would have no political career in any way shape or form. Not even if he joined the opposition, where even more corrupt thieves would not have someone willing to speak out ethically. The best he could hope for is a minor position on a party that got no air time and had even less political 'muscle.'

That is the trap for the honest and good politician: To succeed to a position to enact change you have to embrace the corruption, the dirty politics and remain silent on all sorts of evil acts. Once you reach this position it has now become too late, you can not speak out without undermining yourself and losing the power to bring about change....

Catch 22, a bloody catch 22.

 

[aussiesniper]

What we should do is ensure that people who create legislation for a certain thing have at least an undergraduate degree in the topic. Censorship laws should be made by artists, musicians and game designers, and foreign policy should be made by people who have studied international politics.

Not everyone should be an economist, just people who are going to control the economy.

 

[Oopsie]

An economics education will do absolutely nothing to protect someone from the inner workings of politics.

 

[Barciad]

If you think the US is screwed, you should have a look across the pond to sunny old Blighty. There too career politicians excel at making a pig's ear of everything. Why? Because they are politicians first and politicians last. They know about power, and that is it. They know how to acquire power, and they know how to retain it. They are experts in the arts of backroom deals arm-twisting and horse trading. They are all in it to see how high they can rise, and how long they can stay there.
As for the public sphere, their lives revolve around short, pretty speeches and soundbites. Nothing too long, and definately nothing too complex. They are all masters at twisting and manipulating the English language to suit their needs and their needs alone. Honestly, what to the words 'reform', 'revolution', 'progress'. 'liberal', etc, etc.... really mean?
When it comes to actually running things, they haven't got a clue what's going on. They might be experts at making things look good, but getting things to be good. They haven't got a hope in hell. They just delegate things to bodies of interested parties (usually Quangos) who almost always have an agenda of their own. These bodies are accountable to no-one but the ministers, and just so long as things are 'looking good', then it's a don't ask/don't say policy with regards to what is really going on.
I can only imagine that this is how America as run as well. Result, we have two economies upp shit creek and not a paddle in sight.
My advice would be to give all aspiring politicians this rule.
No-one is allowed to be a member of a party, let alone run for an official position until they have worked for at least 10 years in the real world. However, there will be certian places that will not count. Marketing, advertising, law, salesmen, in other words people who are paid to do nothing but bullshit - I don't want running the country. Get people in who have had actual experience of doing things. Get them in charge. Not those whelps that have lept straight out of university/college and into a research/advisory position to an MP or minister. People like that we have no use for whatsoever.

 

[Fulax]

Anyone who wants to make a career out of controlling people is a morally bankrupt bastard who doesn't deserve to have such power. So just take away their power, problem solved.

Leave the economy to people who know what they are doing - us.

 

[Zacharine]

Well, I've actually thought for a long time now (after getting fed up with questions like "why don't we just build a whole lot of wind-power and remove all coal and nuclear power plants...?" from our representatives in the parliament) that in order to actually get a position at our parliament after getting elected would require one to pass a simple high-school level test of basic physics, biology, psychology, political history, recent history and less than uni-starter level of micro- and macroeconomics and a test on the principles of energy production within our country.

Believe me, this would reduce the amount of insane proposals and questions by at least 60%, because everyone hearing the question and having the power to decide what to do with it would know why the question is insane and filled with fail.

Failing the test would mean two weeks or so of lessons on the subjects given by qualified teachers and professors, before re-taking the test. This way, even if one didn't know the stuff before getting elected, one would have them taught. After failing the third or fourth time, the position in the parliament would go to the one with the next largest amount of votes within the party. Then they take the test and pass/fail... continue until you have a parliament where everyone has passed and shown themselves to be competent.

 

[Turtleboy1017]

I do agree that some people will complain, but won't those who have the work ethic and dedication to become a politician still be able to?

Even with this required major, the said concept that anyone can become a politician still applies. Anyone can become anything they choose to, so long as they put the time and effort required to be able to succeed into said career.

I disagree. A comedian I listen to once, when he was young and naive, thought the same way you did. He joined a branch of politics at the local level with aspirations to move up higher and do 'good for the people.' There was one requirement this man did not have, and never would be able to achieve in good faith: He was not corrupt. In the very short period of his political career he spoke up against corruption and theft found in his local government.

He was blacklisted for it. Cause you see, the corrupt thieves not only held the ear of his bosses but where his bosses! They ensured that he would have no political career in any way shape or form. Not even if he joined the opposition, where even more corrupt thieves would not have someone willing to speak out ethically. The best he could hope for is a minor position on a party that got no air time and had even less political 'muscle.'

That is the trap for the honest and good politician: To succeed to a position to enact change you have to embrace the corruption, the dirty politics and remain silent on all sorts of evil acts. Once you reach this position it has now become too late, you can not speak out without undermining yourself and losing the power to bring about change....

The comedian you speak of could have still become a politician, but he would have had to throw away his morals as well as his dignity in order to do so. He could have become one if he truly wanted to, but he could not due to his uncorrupted nature.

There is nothing wrong with choosing a different career path because it suits your overall personality, but if someone were truly willing to do anything to become a politician, with a do or die attitude, he or she would be able to change themselves into the sort of person that a job requires.

 

[grimsprice]

I do... not agree. Reluctantly though. Many policies of the US government in the last few decades have been based around 'economical considerations.' These have been written, if not pushed, by those with a pure economical agenda: To make themselves, and their ilk, richer. Imagine, if you will, what sort of bills Bill Gates would pass if he could get away with it.

I think, that you are confusing 'someone with an economics degree' with, 'economic tycoon'. Yes, electing bankers and corporate mangers wouldn't be the best. In fact, it would be playing with fire as you suggest. No, i'm simply saying we take the current crop of lawyers (and it is predominately lawyers who get elected) and force them to have a degree from a college. That idea is in no way associated with any banks or corporations or anybody with any financial ties.

Besides, getting an economics degree is hard if you are a total moron like most politicians.

And completely off topic and beside the point, i don't think bill gates is the sinister computer baron you portray him as.

 

[A Weary Exile]

Their only job is to take our money and use it for bettering (Or protecting) our country so yes they should have majored in economics of some sort.

 

[Jinx_Dragon]

I think, that you are confusing 'someone with an economics degree' with, 'economic tycoon'. Yes, electing bankers and corporate mangers wouldn't be the best. In fact, it would be playing with fire as you suggest. No, i'm simply saying we take the current crop of lawyers (and it is predominately lawyers who get elected) and force them to have a degree from a college. That idea is in no way associated with any banks or corporations or anybody with any financial ties.

Besides, getting an economics degree is hard if you are a total moron like most politicians.

And completely off topic and beside the point, i don't think bill gates is the sinister computer baron you portray him as.

Economics 101 is fine but I still would worry that it would leave politicians even more open to corruption then they are, seeing they will know how the 'too big to fail' firms are making money hand over fist and instead of outrage would just demand a bigger cut. Who knows though, a few might very well be inclined to speak up more if they understood what really was going on economic wise. Of course how could the current politicians not see the scam that was unfolded in the latest economical scandal without deliberately having their head up their arses is beside the point I guess.

As for bill gates... I was just trying to make people ask the obvious question using one of the leading marketing figures of our times: What soft of bills would a person like this pass. Of course they will be the ones which helped companies short term, regardless of long term damage these changes would bring.

Sadly the US economical system does seem geared towards quarterly profits... a major flaw that does need addressing but that is another topic for another time.

 

[LongAndShort]

And have a government full of fucking Dick Cheney's? One was bloody bad enough. And I see a lack of anyone mentioning that they should have experience in the military and law enforcement, military especially if they're gonna be dealing with foreign policy.