Can someone tell me one politician who is qualified to do this job

Sir_Humphrey

Actually, I'd say that History is a pretty good qualification. Blair famously knew little of History, which explains some of his f**k ups (like Iraq). Considering the mauling that neo-Liberal economics has taken over the last couple of years, NOT having economics training (if the politico is under 50 years old) ought to be a qualification.

Generali

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Actually, I'd say that History is a pretty good qualification. Blair famously knew little of History, which explains some of his f**k ups (like Iraq). Considering the mauling that neo-Liberal economics has taken over the last couple of years, NOT having economics training (if the politico is under 50 years old) ought to be a qualification.

Well possibly the best Chanceller I've been aware of in my short life is Ken Clarke and he famously knew nothing about economics.

The best writer on economics around at the moment seems to think that being an economist should be a capital offence!

Sir_Humphrey

Vince Cable is the best diagnoser of problems, although some of his solutions do not quite add up. He still makes more sense than the others. However, after the treatment meted out to fellow bald men, Neil Kinnock, William Hague and Ian Duncan Smith, the Lib Dems decided that having a full head of hair as leader would go down better with the voters than someone who had a bit of substance. They are probably correct, as Cameron has no substance, lots of hair and is ahead in the polls. Truly, the voters get the leaders they deserve. EDIT. Vince needs to do like Thatcher and get a good hairpiece (allegedly).

Wookster

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Vince needs to do like Thatcher and get a good hairpiece (allegedly).

I thought you were going to say do like Thatcher and get a moustache

geoffky

The problem we have is we are comparing them all against each other and not one of them really have the qualifications for running a country.Imagine a government where the people who run it were actually qualified to do it..lets say they are all educated at LSE. in government management(probably no such thing) but i imagine the confidence in them would be greater and maybe messes like we are in could be wiped out before they begin(wishful thinking)..It does frighten me when you look at the quality of education in the goverment and scarey when people like prescot get to run the country having got his degree at ruskin..

Sir_Humphrey

geoffky wrote: »

The problem we have is we are comparing them all against each other and not one of them really have the qualifications for running a country.Imagine a government where the people who run it were actually qualified to do it..lets say they are all educated at LSE. in government management(probably no such thing) but i imagine the confidence in them would be greater and maybe messes like we are in could be wiped out before they begin(wishful thinking)..It does frighten me when you look at the quality of education in the goverment and scarey when people like prescot get to run the country having got his degree at ruskin..

Or John Major... . There is a degree that trains politicians for government, it is called PPE. Or do you mean there should be an NVQ for politicians. BTW, I knew people at Ruskin College, who were most certainly not stupid.

Generali

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

Or John Major... . There is a degree that trains politicians for government, it is called PPE. Or do you mean there should be an NVQ for politicians. BTW, I knew people at Ruskin College, who were most certainly not stupid.

I've always felt that John Major is possible the worst dealt with person in British history, certainly post-WWII.

He had a tough upbringing in many respects (yeah I know, let's not recreate the Yorkshiremen Sketch, by eck(!)) and rose to be one of the longest serving PMs in the country (not the most popular I'll grant you).

Looking back it was like he'd got above his station. All that stuff mocking his missus for freezing the last bits of cheese. Hell, when I was doing all my finance stuff I'd still freeze a chicken carcass on a Sunday night for my once a month stock making.

In most other countries the guy would be lauded as the bloke from Brixton who rose to be PM. In the UK he was despised as a suburban oik. Very sad.

Sir_Humphrey

Generali wrote: »

In most other countries the guy would be lauded as the bloke from Brixton who rose to be PM. In the UK he was despised as a suburban oik. Very sad.

I have no problem with working class people becoming PM (or any senior politician), quite the opposite. Who led the home front in WW2?, Ernest Bevin. Who created the NHS?, Aneurin Bevan. The fact that John Major was a hopeless PM is nothing to do with his upbringing or background.

robin_banks

In many respcts Major was a PM left to drift by his own party, for most of his premiership the Tories were a ****dy shambles and Major alone or anyone for that matter after Thatcher never really had a chance.

Generali

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

I have no problem with working class people becoming PM (or any senior politician), quite the opposite. Who led the home front in WW2?, Ernest Bevin. Who created the NHS?, Aneurin Bevan. The fact that John Major was a hopeless PM is nothing to do with his upbringing or background.

You may feel he was a good or bad PM but a lot of what was said about him at the time (and since) was pure snobbery and I think that is the sort of thing that will continue to hold the UK back until it's addressed.

I think it never will be myself.