Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Qualifications for politicians?

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Bob_Harris
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,619 ✭✭✭Bob_Harris


    Stekelly wrote: »
    Brilliant and informative as your reply is, (you) have no no real answer?
    If Brian Cowan lines up 47 economists that agree with Nama, then by your logic it's a good thing again, no?

    I never claimed there was only 46 economists in Ireland.

    If he can line up 47 independent economists that agree with it and fully supported the idea of NAMA, then fair play to him.

    The simple fact is that 46 economists felt strong enough about it to make a point in signing the article. Prof Brian Lucey contacted 250 lecturers in economics, and while only 46 signed, not one actually put forward disagreement.


  • Options
    #33
    mickoneill30
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭mickoneill30


    Bob_Harris wrote: »
    The simple fact is that 46 economists felt strong enough about it to make a point in signing the article. Prof Brian Lucey contacted 250 lecturers in economics, and while only 46 signed, not one actually put forward disagreement.

    So if I read this right 46 out of 250 economists signed their disagreement with NAMA. Is that correct? Is that good or bad for NAMA? Of course you can add Fine Gael to that too I suppose. Again, not sure if that's bad for NAMA.


  • Options
    #34
    RandolphEsq
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,296 ✭✭✭RandolphEsq


    leitrim lad wrote: »
    interesting point, and your from a town i take it or a city is it, sure thats not a council estate

    you forget that its the men from the bog who built your fancy towns and cities in ireland america and britain,

    dont forget that now, town mouse

    They might be good at building but they should never be the engineer. But if they MUST be given some authority they must be quarantined from alcohol. Alcohol + Power + bogger = k'oed rabbit in a ditch with sellotape on its back after some hicks tried to wax its hair with the sellotape


  • Options
    #35
    artanevilla
    Moderators, Education Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,487 Mod ✭✭✭✭artanevilla


    There would be a level of intellectual snobbery which is never a good thing.


  • Options
    #36
    Pygmalion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,082 ✭✭✭Pygmalion


    Requiring people to have a degree in politics is retarded. Just look at the type of asshole who studies politics in college.
    Though I do agree that Minister for X should be required to have a background in X.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    In All Fairness
    Closed Accounts Posts: 515 ✭✭✭In All Fairness


    mike65 wrote: »
    Boards.ie party? Dev or Snyper could run, I bet he could get 9000 votes in a Dublin constituency.
    No doubt at all. Unfortunately Snyper's power base doesn't have the right to vote yet.

    Edit: Haven't read whole thread yet so if this has been pointed out. Sorry.


  • Options
    #38
    WeeBushy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,572 ✭✭✭WeeBushy


    Pygmalion wrote: »
    Though I do agree that Minister for X should be required to have a background in X.

    What happens if nobody with a backround in healthcare/sport is elected? Very probable considering these aren't areas where many people go into politics.

    Or what if the only person in a government eligible for a certain post is a newly elected TD aged 30. Should they be picked to run an entire section of our country, over vastly more experienced politicians, because they have a piece of paper in agriculture/medicine etc.

    Not a very good idea I'm afraid.


  • Options
    #39
    Long Onion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭Long Onion


    If the issue is so imporatnt to you, why elect politicians who have no 'acceptable' credentials?

    The elections present you with the opportunity to vote for whom you deem to be the most suited to govern the country, use your opportunity. I'd like to know how many of you complaining have actually argued the toss with the canvassers when they come calling. How many of you have asked them about their background, what they feel qualifies them to do the job, what their aims and achievements are?

    What qualification would you like the president to have - a masters in presidenting perhaps?

    If we actually engaged on politics instead of just complaining, we might actually get somewhere.


  • Options
    #40
    leitrim lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,013 ✭✭✭leitrim lad


    generally once your able to waffle your way in and out of a tribunal, and hang everyone else out to dry in the mean time whilst avoiding prosecution yourself ,even if it means getting the doctor you paid to giver you a sick cert in to bother aswell,

    thats about the grist of it


  • Options
    #41
    Long Onion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭Long Onion


    leitrim lad wrote: »
    generally once your able to waffle your way in and out of a tribunal, and hang everyone else out to dry in the mean time whilst avoiding prosecution yourself ,even if it means getting the doctor you paid to giver you a sick cert in to bother aswell,

    thats about the grist of it

    Does this actually make sense to anyone?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Wut yous onabout/ prffect cents to him..


  • Options
    #43
    Jeanious
    Registered Users Posts: 644 ✭✭✭Jeanious


    Long Onion wrote: »
    Does this actually make sense to anyone?

    come on, its hardly ancient Cyrillic now is it?

    Anyway, i do like the idea of Polician being a qualified job, but as said before, what if the elected goverment doesnt actually contain a specialist lawyer/barrister, doctor, economist etc? The way it is now though is a joke, or at least it would be if it wasnt so serious.

    Would anyone support much higher wages for politicians as an incentive to get appropriately qualified people on board? e.g. for a Consultant, make it so that being a politician is a genuine career choice, without sacrificing thousands of euro?


  • Options
    #44
    leitrim lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,013 ✭✭✭leitrim lad


    Long Onion wrote: »
    Does this actually make sense to anyone?


    i will say it again your very lucky thats on line ,in person you wouldnt be as smart,

    another quote on my posts by you will result in me looking and finding you, you can figure out what happens then

    and we willl then see where your smart remarks will get you


  • Options
    #45
    Long Onion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭Long Onion


    coyle wrote: »
    come on, its hardly ancient Cyrillic now is it?

    Anyway, i do like the idea of Polician being a qualified job, but as said before, what if the elected goverment doesnt actually contain a specialist lawyer/barrister, doctor, economist etc? The way it is now though is a joke, or at least it would be if it wasnt so serious.

    Would anyone support much higher wages for politicians as an incentive to get appropriately qualified people on board? e.g. for a Consultant, make it so that being a politician is a genuine career choice, without sacrificing thousands of euro?

    If you're in it for the money, you aren't the right man for the job. People should want to engage in politics to make a difference.

    Abe Lincoln, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington - no formal education. The politics of reward is not the one with which to govern a country.


  • Options
    #46
    WeeBushy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,572 ✭✭✭WeeBushy


    leitrim lad wrote: »
    i will say it again your very lucky thats on line ,in person you wouldnt be as smart,

    another quote on my posts by you will result in me looking and finding you, you can figure out what happens then

    and we willl then see where your smart remarks will get you

    Didn't make sense to me either.

    Maybe you should lay off the sauce in the mornings, doesn't seem to be having a very good affect on your manners...


  • Options
    #47
    Long Onion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭Long Onion


    leitrim lad wrote: »
    i will say it again your very lucky thats on line ,in person you wouldnt be as smart,

    another quote on my posts by you will result in me looking and finding you, you can figure out what happens then

    and we willl then see where your smart remarks will get you

    I'm in the Defence Ministers 'tache - you know, the funny lookin' lad with the barnett and the fondness for guns - the fella you helped elect with the other ones.


  • Options
    #48
    leitrim lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,013 ✭✭✭leitrim lad


    WeeBushy wrote: »
    Didn't make sense to me either.

    Maybe you should lay off the sauce in the mornings, doesn't seem to be having a very good affect on your manners...


    i dont drink at all,

    i dont mind humor, but i hate smart alics taking the piss like that, a joke is acceptable but big headednes used directly to insult someone isnt


  • Options
    #49
    WeeBushy
    Registered Users Posts: 3,572 ✭✭✭WeeBushy


    leitrim lad wrote: »
    i dont drink at all,

    i dont mind humor, but i hate smart alics taking the piss like that, a joke is acceptable but big headednes used directly to insult someone isnt

    I don't think he was joking. The bit that he highlighted in your post was nonsensical, and pointed that out.

    And it's a "smart alec" :cool:


  • Options
    #50
    Long Onion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭Long Onion


    leitrim lad wrote: »
    i dont drink at all,

    i dont mind humor, but i hate smart alics taking the piss like that, a joke is acceptable but big headednes used directly to insult someone isnt

    My post was directed, not at you, but at your post. Your posts are continually moaning on about the "crooks in government" and how they are out to ruin all our lives. I now find out that you helped them get there in the first place.

    If you backed the wrong horse, deal with it. If you are so desperate to to tell us all how hard done by you are, that you can't even take the time to ensure that you are making sense, then be prepared to deal with the consequences.

    Threats of physical violence made to an unknown stanger in an unknown location just show your true mentality and are unlikely to win your cause much support here. They do not have the intenede consequence of fightening me either, so your anger would be best directed elsewhere.


  • Options
    #51
    Jeanious
    Registered Users Posts: 644 ✭✭✭Jeanious


    Ladies, please!!
    Long Onion wrote: »
    If you're in it for the money, you aren't the right man for the job. People should want to engage in politics to make a difference.

    Abe Lincoln, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington - no formal education. The politics of reward is not the one with which to govern a country.

    On an idealogical level that's very true, however in practice it's irrelevant, as we don't have many Abe Lincolns around these days, and how many people in their right minds would take a paycut of the order of several thousand euro? Indeed how many of the current TD's are in it to make a difference anyway?

    My question basically is, is it better to pay a sh1tload to the current crop of half-baked incompetents, or pay two sh1tloads to get someone genuinely qualified, experienced and knowledgeable?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,074 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Long Onion wrote: »
    If you're in it for the money, you aren't the right man for the job. People should want to engage in politics to make a difference.

    Abe Lincoln, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington - no formal education. The politics of reward is not the one with which to govern a country.
    back in the day there weren't that many good schools there and besides I'd bet they all had private tuition

    also Franklin offered to work for free, just taking essential expenses. he was refused and forced to take a salary, because he had skimmed so much on the expenses before.


  • Options
    #53
    Salvelinus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 272 ✭✭Salvelinus


    I think the Irish qualification of a persons Surname has served us very well.


  • Options
    #54
    ScumLord
    Registered Users Posts: 28,789 ✭✭✭✭ScumLord


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    back in the day there weren't that many good schools there and besides I'd bet they all had private tuition

    also Franklin offered to work for free, just taking essential expenses. he was refused and forced to take a salary, because he had skimmed so much on the expenses before.
    Didn't Dev do something similar even bringing himself to the point of bankruptcy?


  • Options
    #55
    enda1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭enda1


    Dáil Éireann is supposed to be a cross-section of society put forward by the people of Ireland to lead them.

    If you enforce the need for a degreed education you automatically eliminate those you for whatever reason didn't or couldn't get a degree.

    If the candidates need a degree in Politics, that will mean we end up with a class of candidates with ideologies and dogma from instilled into them from our universities. Politics professors will become incredibly powerful people and we will end up having schools of thought politicians further removed from the common man and real world problems.

    Perhaps yes, as a prerequisite for becoming say minister of finance then you maybe should need to do a night course or something in rudimentary economics and finance but realistically the ministers and TD's do not needed doctorates nor degrees in the subjects over which they decide to be perfectly competent in leading in these positions.

    Do people really think Mary Harney should be a qualified GP/nurse etc.? Would that not just alienate most of the heath service from her while putting her in a compromised position regarding decision making?


  • Options
    #56
    Long Onion
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,342 ✭✭✭Long Onion


    enda1 wrote: »
    Do people really think Mary Harney should be a qualified GP/nurse etc.? Would that not just alienate most of the heath service from her while putting her in a compromised position regarding decision making?

    But it might make her less fat;)


  • Options
    #57
    enda1
    Registered Users Posts: 5,166 ✭✭✭enda1


    Long Onion wrote: »
    But it might make her less fat;)

    How? And so what if she's fat?


Advertisement