New form of government

[conceptualizer]

The problem is that high-level government positions don't pay enough for qualified personnel, so these jobs are taken by people who are on an ego trip and don't care about the salary, and would even pay money to get the job. The same mindset can be said about all non-profit organizations. Regardless of their good intentions, they don't have the discipline of the free market, where if they don't do a good job, they go bankrupt. Non-profit organizations just go on and on and on, ad infinitum, regardless of results.

I can see that things can also work out the way you describe. Nonetheless, I think financially comfortable, qualified, and civic minded people would still apply. Only a few are needed at any one time. Also I am sure non-financial incentives could be created, such as some kind of official achievement rating that would have financial and status advantages after leaving office. Each way has its advantages and disadvantages. Whatever remuneration scheme one uses people will find an unintended way of extracting extra value from a role. At least the low cost way I propose reduces the corrupting effects of money while in office and reduces the burden on the tax payer.

[bobevenson]

At least the low cost way I propose reduces the corrupting effects of money.

Sorry, money doesn't have corrupting effects, it's the lubricating oil of free-market capitalism, my friend, which has delivered the highest standard of living the world has ever known.

[mickthinks]

It's not money that is the lubricating oil of the developed world, it's, er ... OIL!

[bobevenson]

It's not money that is the lubricating oil of the developed world, it's, er ... OIL!

It's energy, my friend, energy, that lifts our standard of living somewhat higher than the Stone Age.

[conceptualizer]

At least the low cost way I propose reduces the corrupting effects of money.

Sorry, money doesn't have corrupting effects, it's the lubricating oil of free-market capitalism, my friend, which has delivered the highest standard of living the world has ever known.

Perhaps I would have been more accurate if I had said that money enables our inherently corruptible nature to express another of its darker facets. But I agree with you that money also greases the wheels of free-market capitalism and that is undeniably associated with some of the highest living standards the world has ever known. The question then occurs: is free-market capitalism causal for those living standards or just attendant and something else being causal, such as a good education system or the rule of law. Most likely it is some combination of factors. Also I am not sure it’s as simple as energy either, some very underdeveloped countries have loads of it.

[bobevenson]

The question then occurs: is free-market capitalism causal for those living standards or just attendant and something else being causal, such as a good education system...

Education is the biggest scam on Earth, well, not as big as patriotism and religion, but, you know, it's right up there.

[conceptualizer]

The question then occurs: is free-market capitalism causal for those living standards or just attendant and something else being causal, such as a good education system...

Education is the biggest scam on Earth, well, not as big as patriotism and religion, but, you know, it's right up there.

I can immediately agree with you about religion, although it took me a long time to reach this conclusion due to its deep cultural entanglement, long history, impressive traditions, and diverse practices. Even as I say this I find myself reconsidering if anything has changed that view. There is it seems a congenital desire to believe in a beneficent omnipotence. Then I remember that this is a condition probably caused by cultural and/or biological factors that I need to control. By definition there can be no hard evidence for religious doctrines and all religions are by definition doctrinal. While belief can be useful in some circumstances it is not prudent to organise one’s life or anything important around beliefs when there are empirical alternatives. Deeper involvement with religion is correlated with their access to one’s assets.

I also agree about patriotism. It obviously exploits a human characteristic like that exploited by religion to develop unquestioning obedience to ideas promulgated by a leading elite. As with religions, patriotism has its ardent believers. Unquestioning belief is dangerous and worrying to me. It can lead to witch-hunts. They are the armies sent out to quash free thinking and tolerance. They narrow the diversity of thinking and its expression causing strife and hardship. In some ways patriotism can be worse than religion, because there is generally a single version of patriotism to follow in each country, whereas there is generally a very diverse range of religions.

Please explain why you think education it is a scam. I imagine you are referring to some mechanisms used to educate or biases applied to them rather than the value of knowing and understanding.

[chaz wyman]

The question then occurs: is free-market capitalism causal for those living standards or just attendant and something else being causal, such as a good education system...

Education is the biggest scam on Earth, well, not as big as patriotism and religion, but, you know, it's right up there.

Yes, how awful it is that you know how to read and write. Quite disgusting!

[chaz wyman]

The question then occurs: is free-market capitalism causal for those living standards or just attendant and something else being causal, such as a good education system...

Education is the biggest scam on Earth, well, not as big as patriotism and religion, but, you know, it's right up there.

I can immediately agree with you about religion, although it took me a long time to reach this conclusion due to its deep cultural entanglement, long history, impressive traditions, and diverse practices. Even as I say this I find myself reconsidering if anything has changed that view. There is it seems a congenital desire to believe in a beneficent omnipotence. Then I remember that this is a condition probably caused by cultural and/or biological factors that I need to control. By definition there can be no hard evidence for religious doctrines and all religions are by definition doctrinal. While belief can be useful in some circumstances it is not prudent to organise one’s life or anything important around beliefs when there are empirical alternatives. Deeper involvement with religion is correlated with their access to one’s assets.

I also agree about patriotism. It obviously exploits a human characteristic like that exploited by religion to develop unquestioning obedience to ideas promulgated by a leading elite. As with religions, patriotism has its ardent believers. Unquestioning belief is dangerous and worrying to me. It can lead to witch-hunts. They are the armies sent out to quash free thinking and tolerance. They narrow the diversity of thinking and its expression causing strife and hardship. In some ways patriotism can be worse than religion, because there is generally a single version of patriotism to follow in each country, whereas there is generally a very diverse range of religions.

Please explain why you think education it is a scam. I imagine you are referring to some mechanisms used to educate or biases applied to them rather than the value of knowing and understanding.

He can't tell you because he resents his ability to read and write.

[bobevenson]

Please explain why you think education it is a scam. I imagine you are referring to some mechanisms used to educate or biases applied to them rather than the value of knowing and understanding.

The day education becomes synonymous with knowing and understanding, I'll retract my statement. Until then, education is about taking tests, pulling all-nighters, getting good grades, applying for expensive student loans, getting into prestigious universities, getting "good" jobs, etc., etc., etc.

[henry quirk]

I voted 'other', that being: democracy is mob rule dolled up.

I'm no more inclined to take orders from the crowd (we, the people) than the one (monarch).

If I had the power: I'd strike 'governance' from the discussion and replace it with 'proxy hood'.

Speaking only for me: as I assess myself and the world, I find the only person fit to govern me is 'me'.

I don't need 'governors', I need proxies.

[conceptualizer]

Please explain why you think education it is a scam. I imagine you are referring to some mechanisms used to educate or biases applied to them rather than the value of knowing and understanding.

The day education becomes synonymous with knowing and understanding, I'll retract my statement. Until then, education is about taking tests, pulling all-nighters, getting good grades, applying for expensive student loans, getting into prestigious universities, getting "good" jobs, etc., etc., etc.

Mostly, I suppose.

[conceptualizer]

I voted 'other', that being: democracy is mob rule dolled up.

I'm no more inclined to take orders from the crowd (we, the people) than the one (monarch).

If I had the power: I'd strike 'governance' from the discussion and replace it with 'proxy hood'.

Speaking only for me: as I assess myself and the world, I find the only person fit to govern me is 'me'.

I don't need 'governors', I need proxies.

Each political representative has to act for many people, not one, so they can never be proxies. Anyway, I suspect that once elected most represent themselves or the party that put them forward as a candidate, rather than those who voted them in. The payback for that betrayal is a long way off so they don’t care. There are direct democracy schemes that provide the opportunity to get your opinions aired directly - no need for a proxy. However, I doubt that most people care enough to get involved in running a country. They have busy lives to lead. So if we had direct democracy I think it would effectively be a kind of mob rule anyway. Worse, and rather to the heart of what I am suggesting, those people would still not adequately understand what they are deliberating on. So the country would still end up in a mess.

[henry quirk]

A proxy -- in the context of this thread -- only refers to the same kind of 'service' offered by, say, a plumber.

I have a broken pipe, I call the plumber, he comes over, replaces/fixes the pipe, hands me the bill.

The plumber doesn't presume to dictate squat to me; he just does his job (no less or more).

The plumber, then, is 'proxy', not 'governor'.

Elected and appointed folks ought to 'keep the lawn trimmed' and the 'toilet unclogged', 'touch up the paint on the walls' and 'replace burned light bulbs'.

Not a one of them should 're-sod the lawn', 'replace the toilet', 'repaint the house inside and out' and 'rewire the house'. In the American system (at least) such overstepping is forbidden (constitutionally) though -- today -- such overstepping is S.O.P.

"the country would still end up in a mess" no matter what system is adopted (the communitarian utopia is a rainbow which can never be caught).

However, adopting (1) the individual is responsible for him- or her-self and so should expect little to nuthin' from the other guy, and, (2) elected and appointed folks are proxies (public SERVANTS) who cannot save you, CAN make the mess a bit more manageable (in the long run).

It'll never happen, of course...too many expect (demand!) lots and lots from the other guy with 'governors' as the conduit for securing the booty.

[bobevenson]

I voted 'other', that being: democracy is mob rule dolled up.

Actually, I believe democracy is one step above mob rule in that it has structural refinements used to justify oppression.