Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (56324)	9/28/1999 12:12:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

I do not think one can avoid at least a "semi- pro" political class. In any event, I suppose that one might worry about how the parties are run, but could you be more specific in your complaint? If your main point has to do with cash, I am afraid that I think campaign reform is mostly an unconstitutional restriction of free speech, and I also think it is unwise, because it unduly disfavors the challengers, especially those with eccentric candidacies, who might be particularly dependent upon one, or a handful, of benefactors.

To: Dayuhan who wrote (56324)	9/28/1999 1:20:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Respond to of 108807

You asked a rhetorical question about what is wrong with the political system... let me add a simple point based on personal experience.... We have a friend who has held CEO positions in the defense industry as well as top political posts. The major difference seems to be accountability... to whom, and why. For example as a CEO he is responsible to the shareholders and the board... as long as he performs, he is in complete control, and generally will not be asked to step down as long as there is some reasonable performance level, etc. There are special cases such as turnaround situations at Apple, etc. where high compensation is exchanged for speedy progress, and in those cases the CEO is under the gun, but still, even then, he is in complete control of the circumstances at hand. Otoh, in public service, there is a completely separate level of accountability coming from the public sector, congresspeople, and the like.... so the situation is somewhat reversed, you have the employees telling the boss what to do, and lots of times they don't have a clue as to what the issues really are and whether they have somebody good in the post or not, and sadly sometimes complaining about whoever in charge becomes a career builder for the antagonist. The directors of the national laboratories for example have to balance their real priorities - which should be scientific accomplishment within the facility - against the juvenile accusations from Dingle and others in congress that there is too much "waste". Why does Dingle do it? For himself, of course. The net result is that nobody good wants to take the CEO slot at the labs since the same people that can do this are also candidates for any major defense firm.