He definitely has a great point and a very valid one at that!
I'd add to that and suggest that they shouldn't be paid either but prove their worth by outcomes and only be allowed to claim a means tested capped expenses allowance on receipt of valid tangible receipts. The constituents they serve should set the criteria for code of conduct and parameter for scope of representation regarding what they can fight for -no degenerative lifestyles, or anti black anything. I've always held this rationale. It would certainly end corruption and nepotism and cripple WS 👍🏿👊🏿
I'd add to that and suggest that they shouldn't be paid either but prove their worth by outcomes and only be allowed to claim a means tested capped expenses allowance on receipt of valid tangible receipts. The constituents they serve should set the criteria for code of conduct and parameter for scope of representation regarding what they can fight for -no degenerative lifestyles, or anti black anything. I've always held this rationale. It would certainly end corruption and nepotism and cripple WS 👍🏿👊🏿
That's interesting. There are some parallels to serving an apprenticeship. Plumbers, carpenters and some other trades people serve an apprenticeship to gain experience. Maybe not the best analogy but wouldnt it be better if a politician receives some sort of training before serving in a method similar to that of tradespeople.
That's interesting. There are some parallels to serving an apprenticeship. Plumbers, carpenters and some other trades people serve an apprenticeship to gain experience. Maybe not the best analogy but wouldnt it be better if a politician receives some sort of training before serving in a method similar to that of tradespeople.
No, because entry level should be comprehensive understanding of government, constitution, law and history of the country they want to serve. A university degree should cover the knowledge required. Experience would ensure from on the job. The point is to prove their commitment without the monetary, privileged trappings conducive to corruption and bias. They should go in qualified.
No, because entry level should be comprehensive understanding of government, constitution, law and history of the country they want to serve. A university degree should cover the knowledge required. Experience would ensure from on the job. The point is to prove their commitment without the monetary, privileged trappings conducive to corruption and bias. They should go in qualified.
The issue is that it doesn’t address the problem with Politicians in the first place which is campaign financing. All licensing does is reduce the pool of candidates the corporations could buy out.
The issue is that it doesn’t address the problem with Politicians in the first place which is campaign financing. All licensing does is reduce the pool of candidates the corporations could buy out.
Licensing for anyone who wants to become a politician could weed out anyone who wasnt serious about the role. This would mean corporations could only select from good candidates (relatively speaking), and not bend the incompetent or easily bought candidates. Thoughts?