Rumor

[pljames]

Someone told me that if all politicians worked for our betterment instead of there own selfish interest we would live in a utopia. My wife thinks all politicians are crooks.I am pondering that thought. Anyone wishs to enlighten me on this statement?

pljames

[AzurePhoenix]

all I know is that politicians are the ones who add more and more beuracracy (sp?) to the system as time goes on. Why? In order to tangle everything up so thoroughjly that the real work ca't actually make it up to them thereby giving them a term-long break, and also, all the beuracracy makes it easier to hide their shady dealing.

[Ophiolite]

Politicians have much the same range of altruistic and selfish motives as the rest of us. You must decide for yourself if this makes them crooks or saints.

[husmusen]

I disagree.

 

You can have a set of workplaces, all staffed by the same "range" of

people, some workplaces are great to work at, others are,

to put it bluntly, toxic.

 

It's all down to culture.

 

Culture is complex, but when you have things such as the

Australian Prime Minister John Howard, saying that the

detention of children under the age of eight is not a matter of

conscience. That is an example of something affecting culture.

 

In Australian politics, you have a combination of intense cynicism,

massive voter disengagement, and a blame the victim mentality.

Howard has made this ten times worse.

[Ophiolite]

(Phi for All, did husmusen just strawman me?! I've stated that politicians, like all people, have a range of motives, and he sidetracks with the irrelevance that different atmospheres pervade different workplaces. So what?)

 

Husmusen, All you are saying is that the extent to which an individual motivation is expressed is predicated upon the environment the individual finds themselves in, and that is contingent upon leadership. In no manner does that invalidate my contention that "Politicians have much the same range of altruistic and selfish motives as the rest of us."

[husmusen]

It was certainly not my intent although perhaps my post could have been

clearer, now that I am not pressed for time I'll restate and expand.

 

My main point was that it was much more complex than individual

personalities, and that whether politicians "have the same range of altruistic and selfish motives as the rest of us." was irrelevant as once you get a

certain "culture" at a workplace that culture begins to eject/supress some

types and encourage others. Therefore regardless of the initial

spread of personality you soon end up with a narrower range, or a

few people voicing opinions and the rest toeing "The party line".

 

At least that is my experience from seeing Australian politics in action.

 

Hence this is a major cause of why many politicians are scumbags.

But if all politicians were sincere (or even 20% or so), that would go

a very long way to improving things. But how do you encourage

that when the political culture seems to actively knock out decent

people, at pre-selection, election and ministerial appointment?

 

Cheers.

[john5746]

Someone told me that if all politicians worked for our betterment instead of there own selfish interest we would live in a utopia. My wife thinks all politicians are crooks.I am pondering that thought. Anyone wishs to enlighten me on this statement?

pljames

 

If EVERYONE worked for the betterment of others instead of themselves, then we would be close to utopia.

 

Politicians tend to reflect on their society. Even if they always do the "right" thing, they will probably get voted out. This is why in America, we continue to run up huge debts. Anyone who seriously tries to tackle the problem has no chance of election.

[-Demosthenes-]

Even if they always do the "right" thing, they will probably get voted out.

Especially considering that that the "right think" differs from group to group, and even person to person.

Anyone who seriously tries to tackle the problem has no chance of election.

Most any action will alienate some group or another, so the best track for popularity is all too often inaction.

[husmusen]

Even if they always do the "right" thing, they will probably get voted out.

Especially considering that that the "right think" differs from group to group, and even person to person.

 

Anyone who seriously tries to tackle the problem has no chance of election.

Most any action will alienate some group or another, so the best track for popularity is all too often inaction.

 

Well obviously politicians should be able to reflect a range of views.

That's in the essence of democracy.

But I think what the earlier poster was alluding to was How

they reflect them and If they reflect them.

 

It ought be possible to reflect and argue your constituents views, without villifying, telling lies, misleading parliament, presenting false documents, running drugs, and engaging in that drivel that passes for debate during parliament question time.

 

The "Senator Bob Brown is a Nazi speech" particularly comes to mind..

 

And also issues like, should parties be allowed to charge for

"Face time" with a minister,( at a rate of 10K per half hour or part

thereof)?

 

To me that seems corrupt.

 

As for political inaction, I fear you are correct, at least with party politics.

 

Example:

We have a skills shortage in Australia, it's growing worse by the

year, and after a decade of not doing anything about it,

Howard comes up with a pretense of trade collages.

Why is this a joke?

Because the collages aren't even meeting replacement levels of output.

 

Cheers.

[JohnB]

Of course we could always follow the path that the Hawke/Keating governments took. Run the unemployment rate up to 12% and then there is no shortage of skilled workers is there?

[husmusen]

Of course we could always follow the path that the Hawke/Keating governments took. Run the unemployment rate up to 12% and then there is no shortage of skilled workers is there?

 

I'm no great defender of Hawke and Keating, but Howards even worse.

 

The only reason we have as low unemployment as we do is because

Howard/Costello shunted all the older workers onto the DSP.

 

And 12% unemployment will pretty look pretty good, if the

skills crisis reaches a point at which things start to break and the

economy goes straight own the shitter.

 

"Our real unemployment rate is not a tick over 5%, contrary to what you’ve been breathlessly told by the government and the media, because the numbers are a fraud. If you add up the total of unemployment, disability and sole-parent benefits together, there are more people now than when the official unemployment rate was much higher. This, despite a decade of boom. It works like this: We used to have about a million unemployed and about 100,000 disability pensions. Now we’ve got half a million unemployed and 600,000 disability pensions. We’ve just rearranged the deckchairs, and declared victory. That’s why we still have one in six children growing up in a jobless household. If you doubt that, let me take you for a drive forty-five minutes from here. The truth is we have about two million people who have less work than they want." -- Evan Thornley, CEO Pluto Press and founder

of Looksmart.

 

And yes you can have 12% unemployment and a shortage of

skilled workers. It takes a lot of effort but it can be done. It just

means that the skills possesed dont match the skills required.

 

At the moment Australia has a huge pool of unemployed unskilled

workers, and a big skills shortage, the solution should be obvious to

blind freddy. Instead Howard prefers to ignore it or make token efforts.

 

Cheers.

[some nerd]

Well I think that to be politician, you have to be very cunning and rhetoric in speech. And good guys always speak from their heart so they dont end up as politician or unable to survive in political environments.

[Phi for All]

Someone told me that if all politicians worked for our betterment instead of there own selfish interest we would live in a utopia.

The problem here is the phrase "our betterment". You are applying an objective solution to subjective problems. What seems like smart business to one is shady dealings to another. If I pass a law making marijuana legal will it hurt business at your liquor stores? All legislation will hurt some while helping others.

 

Where modern politics falls down is that the voters feel helpless to change anything, when the exact opposite is true. If you think big business has bought the politicians, then get together with other voters and find someone who won't be bought, and back them as a candidate. Then go out and convince still more voters that you are right. Then find people who don't vote and convince them they have to start voting.

 

Sure, you might have to get involved and do more than complain, but YOU ARE NOT POWERLESS UNLESS YOU DIE OR YOU QUIT!

(Phi for All, did husmusen just strawman me?! I've stated that politicians, like all people, have a range of motives, and he sidetracks with the irrelevance that different atmospheres pervade different workplaces. So what?)

Since he disagreed with your statement and changed your "range of motives" into "range of people", it is a strawman, but more likely a misunderstanding. And since he said his example was cultural, in the end I think he was actually agreeing with you.

 

And I think husmusen is coming from a very dark, very Howardian place in his political views. He speaks very much like the half of the US who didn't vote for Bush.

[JohnB]

I would say Evan Thornley has an axe to grind. Adding the single parent benefit to the unemployment rate? Is he talking total people on benefits or about unemployment? They are two very different fish.

At the moment Australia has a huge pool of unemployed unskilled

workers,

Then would you like to tell me where the hell they are? We've been looking for unskilled people (that we will train) for our industry for ages and can't get anyone. We use backpackers because the Aussies are too bloody lazy to do the work. If there are so many people looking for work, why is it that when we advertise for people we get 5 Aussies and 25 backpackers applying?

 

The prevailing opinion (and this includes the blue collars as well) is that the only ones left in the jobless pool are there because either they don't want to work or nobody bloody wants them.

 

The picture in the big bad world of private enterprise is very different to the world of publicly funded medicine. As to what I do, go to http://www.qxaust.com/

All companies in our industry have the same complaint whether they are based in Brisbane, Sydney or Melbourne. So I ask again "Where is this huge pool you speak of?", 'cause we can't find it.

[ku]

If many of you were in the same position as the politicians, you'd be tempted to put your own interests ahead of that of the state. That political process has to take into consideration the self-interest of the politicians and be designed in a way that minimizes social harm resulting from politician self-interest.

 

The reality of policians acting according to their own personal interests really illustrates the illusion of the national consciousness. The masses tend to believe that policians embody a nation, that their personalities represent that of the nation, when in reality a nation-state is just a legal process.

[husmusen]

Then would you like to tell me where the hell they are? We've been looking for unskilled people (that we will train) for our industry for ages and can't get anyone. We use backpackers because the Aussies are too bloody lazy to do the work. If there are so many people looking for work, why is it that when we advertise for people we get 5 Aussies and 25 backpackers applying?

 

That's a good question and it's not the first time I've heard that, at the

same time I am quite aware of the fact that there are many people who send

out hundreds of application, cold call companies and so forth who can't

just can't find work.

 

About this time last year, I would have moved to Brisbane for work,

(I am not kidding), any work, any roster. But I didn't see your ad's.

 

I also know of businesses that advertise and they have to subcontract the

selection because they get 30,000 resumes in the post/email/fax and

people coming in and handing them in. Either that or (in one instance)

they grab 200 at random toss the rest and pick the best one they can

from the 200.

 

This leads me to believe that the gremilins are in the interface.

In market terms we have buyers and sellers, both are sincere and neither

has a clue the other exists.

 

So I've a few questions?

1) Where did you advertise? (Job Network, Papers?)

1a) Did you ask around your current staff?

2) Have you tried a provider e.g. Salvation Army Jobs+.

3) Are you willing to hire disabled people, or even consider them on a

case by case basis?

4) Would you hire a person with a criminal conviction in the last ten years,

(on a case by case basis?)

5) Would you hire a person who had been caring for a ill relative and had

just re-entered the workforce and therefore has no recent job experience?

6) Would you hire a persn on a trial basis?

7) What types of jobs are they? Clerical/IT/Carpentry/Other trade?

Full time/part time/ casual on call?

I am just trying to get a feeling for what may be going on,

because I doubt it's lazyness.

 

We can all find individual instances of moronic employers and

lazy individuals.

 

But my own experience says most people are genuine, most

employers are genuine, despite the few job snobs, and employer

snobs, and that it's more likely they ae not talking to each other.

 

I still think the government should encourage the retraining

of unskilled workers, because it would be more profitable for them

to collect taxes of skilled workers, than unskilled workers.

(we really need a machiavelli smiley on this forum).

 

Cheers.

[Ophiolite]

(we really need a machiavelli smiley on this forum).

There is one....it's just not quite what it appears to be.

[JohnB]

This leads me to believe that the gremilins are in the interface.

In market terms we have buyers and sellers, both are sincere and neither

has a clue the other exists.

A truer word has not been spoken.

 

To answer you questions;

1. Seek.com, papers. you name it.

1a. Yes.

2, 3, 4, 5, 6; Yes.

7. Casual on call.

 

In general, we work all hours and that seems to be the killer. Too many (we find) seem to think that as unskilled they should get $25/hour and a 9-5, 5 day week. Never going to happen.

I still think the government should encourage the retraining

of unskilled workers, because it would be more profitable for them

to collect taxes of skilled workers, than unskilled workers.

Agreed, the problem with the way we are currently doing it is that we are paying the trainers without too much regard for the quality of training. I've heard some real horror stories.

 

Our Universities aren't helping things either. They are churning out graduates with degrees that we don't need. Look at the sheer number of law students in this country for example. Plus the rediculous number of "Social Workers" of all stripes and minimal intelligence and training.

 

The fact is that for many years we (as a nation) have been putting down the unskilled workers, inplying that they should "do something" to become skilled. We actually need a pool of "unskilled" so that various industries can train them in their particular industry. Ours is such an industry, there is nothing less useful to us than a unversity graduate with a degree in "Event Management."

[husmusen]

1. Seek.com, papers. you name it.

1a. Yes.

2, 3, 4, 5, 6; Yes.

7. Casual on call.

 

That's seems reasonable, #7 might be a sticky for some but

single men and women who don't have family commitments would be

able to cope.

 

Back when I was looking for work, I would have gone for that,

especially if you taught trades.

 

Agreed, the problem with the way we are currently doing it is that we are paying the trainers without too much regard for the quality of training. I've heard some real horror stories.

 

Agreed, so have I, the nursing courses though, are very well done and very high quality(in VIC at least). I suspect partly due to the Nurses Board having oversight, which could perhaps serve as a model for reform of some other ones.

 

Cheers.

 

P.S. Regarding universities, they also keep cutting engineers(I think) and nursing courses(I know), I guess they aren't considered as necessary to industry and nation as the lawyers. Between the New agers who want to teach all sorts of rubbish("The Gender interpretations of teacup sipping styles" ) and those who want them to become trained monkey factories (no research), they're in a bit of a hard spot I fear.

[revprez]

Someone told me that if all politicians worked for our betterment instead of there own selfish interest we would live in a utopia.

 

That's funny. Someone told me that if unelected nobodies actually bothered to convince us that they're morally superior than some random elected official, we'd live in a much better world.

 

Rev Prez