Will the truth come out how this administration made blunder after blunder?

[aygart]

This isn't about Trumps Watergate. It is about these Governors who think it isn't going to hit them. How is your governors blunders working out? Didn't this moron just announce that the WWE is an essential business? That is like saying wh*rehouses are an essential business.   

And liquor stores

[Lurker]

This isn't about Trumps Watergate. It is about these Governors who think it isn't going to hit them. How is your governors blunders working out? Didn't this moron just announce that the WWE is an essential business? That is like saying wh*rehouses are an essential business.   

No governor thinks this won't hit them. They just think it's ok to risk lives for economic relief. The moron in charge of my state is looking at numbers. If the old people die, their kids don't vote in FL. But the big business who contribute to his campaign, they'll remember if he closed their businesses.

This is what you get when you have politicians making medical decisions.

[CountValentine]

This is what you get when you have politicians making medical decisions.

So now it has come down to the R's are putting businesses ahead of lives?

[Lurker]

I think there needs to be a national crisis team. If enough governors hit the red button, this team gets final say on all decisions. Make it 35 or 40 to avoid partisan endarounds. In theory, I like it, but just like all other government endeavors, it'll probably fail spectacularly.

[Lurker]

So now it has come down to the R's are putting businesses ahead of lives?

It comes down to politicians putting their campaign coffers ahead of lives. This isn't new, and it's never going away. Democrats, Republicans, Green Party, Independents, doesn't matter. You don't get a say unless you're elected, so you do whatever it takes to get elected.

[CountValentine]

...so you do whatever it takes to get elected.

That pretty cynical. You believe that for all power positions?
Be careful with your answer. 

[aygart]

That pretty cynical. You believe that for all power positions?
Be careful with your answer. 

[Lurker]

That pretty cynical. You believe that for all power positions?
Be careful with your answer. 

I believe it to be the rule rather than the exception. I also believe it becomes more prevalent in accordance with the power of the office.

[aygart]

I believe it to be the rule rather than the exception. I also believe it becomes more prevalent in accordance with the power of the office.

[Lurker]

That face tells me I pressed the wrong button and you're going to get your popcorn...

[CountValentine]

I believe it to be the rule rather than the exception. I also believe it becomes more prevalent in accordance with the power of the office.

So lets take a religious position of power like the Pope. I guess you think it is more likely to be the rule than the exception?
You get three guesses what my next question will be and the first two guesses don't count. 

[Lurker]

So lets take a religious position of power like the Pope. I guess you think it is more likely to be the rule than the exception?
You get three guesses what my next question will be and the first two guesses don't count. 

I don't know enough about the current power of the position to comment on that. I can say that historically, the position has not been impervious to corruption. And if you're going to lean towards positions in the Jewish communities, I'll say that those which are subject to election or re-election, have absolutely been corrupted in the past.

[CountValentine]

I don't know enough about the current power of the position to comment on that. I can say that historically, the position has not been impervious to corruption. And if you're going to lean towards positions in the Jewish communities, I'll say that those which are subject to election or re-election, have absolutely been corrupted in the past.

Man is not impervious to corruption. That is why anything that man touches becomes corrupt. If you are looking for something that is not corrupt then there is only one place to look and it is not on this earth. With that being said that does not mean that someone will say anything to get what they want.

Everyone likes to talk like politicians are a different human race. They are no different than any other human being. Just like in religion you have those that feel they are more pious we have the same thing when it comes to politicians.

[Lurker]

Man is not impervious to corruption. That is why anything that man touches becomes corrupt. If you are looking for something that is not corrupt then there is only one place to look and it is not on this earth. With that being said that does not mean that someone will say anything to get what they want.

Everyone likes to talk like politicians are a different human race. They are no different than any other human being. Just like in religion you have those that feel they are more pious we have the same thing when it comes to politicians.

This is conversation for another day, but I'll give the 10 cent response.

To start, there's a big difference between those who seek power and those who are revered enough to be anointed (so to speak).

Additionally, I agree that politicians are as human as the rest of us. Many individuals would do no better than corrupt politicians, if they were put in the same position and given the same access to opportunity. There are also many people who would be better in those positions of power, but never make it there. Some shun the opportunity to begin with, in order to avoid playing in the mud. There are also many who lose out during the process, because they won't play as dirty as their competition. Ultimately, I do not believe that the best representatives of humanity are found in public office, though there are some exceptions.

[S209]

This is conversation for another day, but I'll give the 10 cent response.

To start, there's a big difference between those who seek power and those who are revered enough to be anointed (so to speak).

Additionally, I agree that politicians are as human as the rest of us. Many individuals would do no better than corrupt politicians, if they were put in the same position and given the same access to opportunity. There are also many people who would be better in those positions of power, but never make it there. Some shun the opportunity to begin with, in order to avoid playing in the mud. There are also many who lose out during the process, because they won't play as dirty as their competition. Ultimately, I do not believe that the best representatives of humanity are found in public office, though there are some exceptions.

Steve Levitt and Steven Dubner make the very convincing argument that paying politicians very well and/or giving them cash incentives for implementing good long-term policy would raise the quality of our pool of politicians and therefore our policies at a relatively inexpensive price.

[AsherO]

Steve Levitt and Steven Dubner make the very convincing argument that paying politicians very well and/or giving them cash incentives for implementing good long-term policy would raise the quality of our pool of politicians and therefore our policies at a relatively inexpensive price.

It’s a good story in theory. But who controls the money and the metrics? And how do you ensure you’re incentivizing them more than whatever lobby (or worse...) they’re currently motivated by?

[S209]

It’s a good story in theory. But who controls the money and the metrics? And how do you ensure you’re incentivizing them more than whatever lobby (or worse...) they’re currently motivated by?

The theory basically goes if you pay them millions they will not need to resort to the classic bribery that goes on, of course people prefer to work honestly and transparently at the job they’re supposed to. Politicians just historically make their money/frills from lobbyists because they’re poorly compensated in general.

Also, their proposal is that as long term policy is judged the politicians who enacted the well-done legislation can get bonuses.

[CountValentine]

Politicians just historically make their money/frills from lobbyists because they’re poorly compensated in general.

Source?

[AsherO]

The theory basically goes if you pay them millions they will not need to resort to the classic bribery that goes on, of course people prefer to work honestly and transparently at the job they’re supposed to. Politicians just historically make their money/frills from lobbyists because they’re poorly compensated in general.

Also, their proposal is that as long term policy is judged the politicians who enacted the well-done legislation can get bonuses.

A few holes in this logic:

1. It cost gazillions of dollars to get into office, honest people oftentimes can’t afford to get on the ballot.

2. You still haven’t explained how they quantify success. In a 4 year term a representative official (senator/congressman) will have voted on hundreds/thousands of items, and their voting record is only a small voice in determining the outcome of each of those votes. Multiply that by hundreds of elected officials with different/overlapping time periods served, and it’s hard to quantify this stuff on scale to decide who merits a bonus.

3. If the bonuses come at the end of said long term, the politicians will have long retired/been voted out. It’s hard to tempt someone with a vague promise down the road, where there’s an opportunity in the here and now to partner with specific interests, vote a certain way, introduce certain bills, and your campaign is well funded for the next election.

[S209]

A few holes in this logic:

1. It cost gazillions of dollars to get into office, honest people oftentimes can’t afford to get on the ballot.

2. You still haven’t explained how they quantify success. In a 4 year term a representative official (senator/congressman) will have voted on hundreds/thousands of items, and their voting record is only a small voice in determining the outcome of each of those votes. Multiply that by hundreds of elected officials with different/overlapping time periods served, and it’s hard to quantify this stuff on scale to decide who merits a bonus.

3. If the bonuses come at the end of said long term, the politicians will have long retired/been voted out. It’s hard to tempt someone with a vague promise down the road, where there’s an opportunity in the here and now to partner with specific interests, vote a certain way, introduce certain bills, and your campaign is well funded for the next election.

Alright, here’s the article, now tell me what you think

Source?

As I said, it’s a theory. Theories can’t have sources, else they wouldn’t be theories, but facts.