Why shouldn't I vote lib dem?

jojo2004

kabayiri wrote: »

These are great jobs we are offering to elect them into. We deserve better than the dross we have been served up so far.

Please tell me you're joking? 'Great jobs'? Yeah - for people who aren't bright enough to go and work in the private sector and earn four times as much. I'm really sorry, but if you think these are great jobs, you have no awareness of the job market at that level.

MP's get paid far too little. We expect them to run the country, and to be the brightest financial, political, and analytical minds, but we pay them far less than they could earn in the private sector, and subject them to the harshest possible scrutiny. Funny that we never seem to get the brightest people becoming politicians... You know what they say about peanuts and monkeys.

Make it the most attractive, prestigious job a person can do and it will become highly competitive, attracting the best people. At the moment, you'd have to be mental, or have a severe case of altruism to go into Parliament. They're targets, and underpaid ones at that.

Cleaver

jojo2004 wrote: »

Please tell me you're joking? 'Great jobs'? Yeah - for people who aren't bright enough to go and work in the private sector and earn four times as much. I'm really sorry, but if you think these are great jobs, you have no awareness of the job market at that level.

If you have a genuine desire to help your community and shape your local society, then what job in the private sector would be equivalent to an MP?

ninky_2

jojo2004 wrote: »

MP's get paid far too little. We expect them to run the country, and to be the brightest financial, political, and analytical minds, but we pay them far less than they could earn in the private sector, and subject them to the harshest possible scrutiny. Funny that we never seem to get the brightest people becoming politicians... You know what they say about peanuts and monkeys.

Make it the most attractive, prestigious job a person can do and it will become highly competitive, attracting the best people. At the moment, you'd have to be mental, or have a severe case of altruism to go into Parliament. They're targets, and underpaid ones at that.

not everyone is motivated by money. if you are only motivated by money you are unlikely to become an mp. i find the suggestion that only those who earn high amounts of money are bright and capable rather insulting. i'd rather have someone as my mp who is driven to do the best for their constituency and improve the way our society works. not someone who is driven by personal financial gain.

gordon brown is pretty clever i'd say being accepted to edinburgh uni at the tender age of 16.

if i was motivated by money i would be far richer than i am now. but personally other things are more important to me.

ninky_2

Cleaver wrote: »

If you have a genuine desire to help your community and shape your local society, then what job in the private sector would be equivalent to an MP?

isn't this where all this big society b0ll0cks that cameron is talking about is supposed to come in. the army of trained big society stick wavers paid for by 'dormant' bank accounts. a completely ridiculous idea.

JonnyBravo

jojo2004 wrote: »

MP's get paid far too little. We expect them to run the country, and to be the brightest financial, political, and analytical minds, but we pay them far less than they could earn in the private sector, and subject them to the harshest possible scrutiny. Funny that we never seem to get the brightest people becoming politicians... You know what they say about peanuts and monkeys.

Utter rot.

I suppose you think we got/get real value for money from the highly paid?
The bankers and leaders of industry who missed the train crash that was lending money to any Tom !!!!!! and Harry who asked for it?

jojo2004

Cleaver wrote: »

If you have a genuine desire to help your community and shape your local society, then what job in the private sector would be equivalent to an MP?

I wasn't suggesting that there are equivalent private sector jobs, but that people who are bright, well-educated, and capable, would not be attracted to a career in politics at the moment. It is an unattractive job.

Besides, I don't trust anyone who trumpets their desire to 'help their community'. Truly altruistic people don't shout about it.

Blacklight

Their stupid policy of a local income tax rate would mean I get clobbered for having a reasonable job instead of being a layabout waster.

Oh and I also get to pay for the layabout wasters to lay around, wasting my money.

Great idea...

jojo2004

ninky wrote: »

not everyone is motivated by money. if you are only motivated by money you are unlikely to become an mp. i find the suggestion that only those who earn high amounts of money are bright and capable rather insulting. i'd rather have someone as my mp who is driven to do the best for their constituency and improve the way our society works. not someone who is driven by personal financial gain.

gordon brown is pretty clever i'd say being accepted to edinburgh uni at the tender age of 16.

if i was motivated by money i would be far richer than i am now. but personally other things are more important to me.

I am not claiming that only those who earn high incomes are bright and capable. I am saying that generally speaking, a high proportion of the brightest, most capable people go into the highest paid jobs - because highly-paid, attractive jobs get more applicants, allowing the organisation to pick the creme de creme (in the words of Miss Jean Brodie).

Politics is not one of those jobs.

In the States, the brightest and best are headhunted to advise/serve on the government. Look at Obama's White House Staff - there are talented people with prior experience in industries which are vital to the US economy and society: accountants, lawyers, journalists, economists, and financiers. Compare the UK cabinet...

jojo2004

JonnyBravo wrote: »

Utter rot.

I suppose you think we got/get real value for money from the highly paid?
The bankers and leaders of industry who missed the train crash that was lending money to any Tom !!!!!! and Harry who asked for it?

Why were Tom, !!!!!! and Harry asking for money? The blame cannot be laid only at the door of the 'bankers' (although why that term seems to be used as a pejorative catch-all is a mystery to me. I can't help but think of the horrible father in Mary Poppins whenever I hear it. Such a lazy stereotype) and 'leaders of industry' - whomever they may be.

Many people in the banking industry predicted the crash before it came. Surprisingly enough, they do not act with one will, nor do they speak with one voice; hindsight's a wonderful thing. Had all 'bankers and leaders of industry' the power of foresight, I'm reasonably sure they'd use it to win the lottery, not predict the economic future of a country.

JonnyBravo

jojo2004 wrote: »

Many people in the banking industry predicted the crash before it came. Surprisingly enough, they do not act with one will, nor do they speak with one voice; hindsight's a wonderful thing. Had all 'bankers and leaders of industry' the power of foresight, I'm reasonably sure they'd use it to win the lottery, not predict the economic future of a country.

Not enough of them predicted it so that they might take action to stop it. Yes plenty saw it when 3 months off, how many saw it 3 years off? Hardly any, they were too busy making money and not thinking about sustainability. Just like the politicians eh?
So here we are, these are the people that you think would be vastly better at running the country. I disagree. Wholeheartedly.
We'll leave it at that I guess.