Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,951,955 times
Reputation: 40635
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by scratchie
Amen to that. I don't know why people fall for that "I'll run the country like a business" BS. Running a nation's government is nothing like running a business, for reasons that should be obvious to anyone who's spent more than ten seconds thinking about it.
I would suggest an edit: "should be obvious to anyone that is not a moron"
The one thing, other than killing the high speed rail, that Walker promised when he first ran for governor, was to fix WI's roads.l
Now five years later, WI roads are is critical condition. Walker failed on so many levels!
Quote:
According to a Department of Transportation report, 71 percent of Wisconsin roads are in "mediocre to poor" condition. Moreover, Wisconsin is home to the third-worst road conditions in the nation, just ahead of Connecticut and Illinois.
Right, "turning the biggest profit possible" is not the #1 goal of government, but it is the #1 goal of a for-profit business.
If one ran a business with "Turning the biggest possible profit" as the #1 long term goal, one would soon find themselves bankrupt and w/o customers.
Sustainable profit is a good long term goal but a leader must determine the details of how to get there via competencies such as:
Innovation
Excellent service
Managing efficiency
People management
Etc - you get the jist.
To think that the traits that allow one to succeed in a business environment cannot apply to success in government is ridiculous and simple minded. It also leads to the mindset that one must vote for those who have experience in gov't. (i.e. Hillary, Bush, Biden, McConnell, Obama, Walker etc) Bad call - not the training needed to succeed.
Senators and representatives in particular make terrible Presidents. Think about it. What responsibility and accountability does a Congress person ever have? At least a Governor has some accountability.
Back to topic:
Scott Walker only had one line to his story (I fought the unions and won). While a good line, it is hardly adequate to garner enough support to be President. He never stood a chance.
If one ran a business with "Turning the biggest possible profit" as the #1 long term goal, one would soon find themselves bankrupt and w/o customers.
Sustainable profit is a good long term goal but a leader must determine the details of how to get there via competencies such as:
Innovation
Excellent service
Managing efficiency
People management
Etc - you get the jist.
And why, exactly, are those "details" important?
The #1 object of a business is to "make money." It ceases to exist without turning a profit; its success is based entirely upon profits and growth.
So yes, that will always be "the #1 long term goal," achieved with a balance of "details" such as your list.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,937 posts, read 36,951,955 times
Reputation: 40635
The only thing I can agree on that list is that I think Governors seem to make more effective leaders. Preferably I'd have someone with both, legislative and Governorship experience.
The thing is many of the traits most needed in a political setting aren't really analagous at all in C level executiveship. Coalition building, compromise, doing the right thing for the constituency when the marketplace doesn't want it, etc. And realizing that as President you're nothing at all like a CEO working for a Board at the core. Nothing at all alike. Business ideas do more harm than good in good government.
It is not a good indicator if ability to plan or contain emotional decision making. It is an indicator of need for instant gratification as opposed to sustainable long term thinking.
Wealth is a positive indicator (if self made) I want more people to have it, especially those who wish to lead.
I don't like when career politicians (and SW is a career politician) became rich (as it would be an indication that they become rich at expense of their constituents). I don't mind them being rich before they take political career, but then again, I'd hope they won't become richer by being a politician.
^ I agree for the most part, but wealth is certainly not a positive indicator across the board, self-made or not. I'm not sure what your experience is with really wealthy folks, but some are truly sociopathic. Makes sense, no? Some are merely bright and hard-working, some a little of that + a lot of luck, but it's certainly not easy to amass a personal fortune in a decade or two without breaking some eggs along the way.
I think it was supposed to be a jab "at politicians" anyway, not a true indicator of what he/she would vote for.
As one local cop said, money does not make you not a jerk if you already been one, they make you a jerk with money.
I have spent way more than 10 seconds thinking about it - you make a blatantly false statement.
I agree with your opponent. Business is a for-profit avenue, government is supposed to be non-profit. Another big difference is that while a business has no authoritative powers to force anything on anybody, government actually is a monopoly on such powers. And third, businesses need to hide as much as possible of trade secrets, and government is supposed to inform the people of what is going on. So, while there are certain similarities between a government and a business, they aren't the same animals.
I agree with your opponent. Business is a for-profit avenue, government is supposed to be non-profit. Another big difference is that while a business has no authoritative powers to force anything on anybody, government actually is a monopoly on such powers. And third, businesses need to hide as much as possible of trade secrets, and government is supposed to inform the people of what is going on. So, while there are certain similarities between a government and a business, they aren't the same animals.
Guys- there is a lack of understanding of leadership here. To assume that successful leadership of one is mutually exclusive of successful leadership in the other is, pardon the word, INSANE.
I never said that business and gov't are the same. What I am saying is that regardless of entity, successful people have been able to switch venues and attain success. There are traits we can look for in leaders.
The key thing is a track record of leadership success and more of that will come from private business or nonprofit than a track record of 30 yrs in government.
What do you really think of a politician who says: "Throughout my career I have fought for the middle class." To me - I think SO WHAT!
Better questions are: What have you accomplished? What big deal has your name on it?
Who looks to you as a leader and game changer? What is your leadership style?
Most politicians are NOT Leaders. This is evidenced by their willingness to stay in Washington for decades.
A true leader would move through that place and then onto other more fruitful venues.
I stand by my comments that more Business people should be in Washington.
Walker also needs to move out of government and into the real world.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
