ClumsyMonkey.net

ok, where you work, is it a private organization or public?

If it is private then it is not the same.

We're talking about organizations here that YOU pay for without a choice like public education. You don't have a choice about how much money you send them. In the US, the board you help elect decides how much money the school needs. If you don't think the education is well funded, you elect someone who promises to increase educational spending. If you think too much of the money is going to waste, you elect someone who promises to fix it. If that person doesn't deliver, you elect someone else next time around.

Going back to your example. Let's pretend it is public and that the choice of lifeguard matters. If I went to your organization, chances are I know the candidates. I know who is better than who. You're giving me names when I don't live there. The people who frequent this place should decide who is watching them. You present to the people their certificates so they know they are capable. I don't think its fair that I go somewhere that I paid for and have no say on who the lifeguard is.

I'm happy to know that if my money is going towards something through taxes, that means I have a say, all be it a small one, but some say at least on how it operates. I'm surprised that you are happy with others deciding what to do with your money without consulting you.

Clumsyboy wrote:this is totally unrelated but i learned something in American History and it kinda bugs me, in american any yokel can be elected Sherif, in fact most political postions are electe, am i right? if not correct me, but does that not seem retarded that someone with absolutely no experience could be in postitions such as this? also is it not a huge waste of tax money for a popularity contest between people? what if the more charismatic man wins instead of the better man for the job? i understand the idea of using democracy, but i think in this case it's a bad idea, it should be through promtion and seniority, or maybe vote amoung co-workers, but the current system as i understand it seems totally bunk, just my oppion though and if i have a faulty understanding of the american system please correct me

Your right the sheriff do get elected by the people. there is no real qualification for this position other then you have to be a registered voter in the county you are elected in. and in many cases, counties elect incompetent people. the thing about this is that this guy can use his political power along with a state funded large budget to staff a good amound of people under him to uphold the law in his respected county. This sheriff can appoint deputies that are extensively knowlegable in criminal justice. so yeah, this guy can be a moron, but the people around him do the work and keep him on the up and up.

Good point Reno. I was going to say something to that affect. Going back to the Life Guard example. We know very well that the people wouldn't be choosing the life guards directly. They would choose some sort of representative of the organization. Public relations officer maybe? Either way, then THAT person would choose lifeguards that would best fit the job. It is that person's responsibility to be sure that the lifeguards are up to snuff. If the people still don't like the lifeguards, then they report back to the public relations officer and let him/her know. Remember, the US is a republic, not a democracy.

we do have asupervisor that works for the city, (we're city run), but that's just an example of choosing people, it's easy to tell that ALL elections are a popularity contest, the most dazzling man will win, and almost all teh commercials and such you see from BOTH sides are lies and mistruths to convince you to vote for them, here we do elect school board trustees and such, but we don't vote on every single position like the states, a sheriif should not be worrying about getting re-elceted when he makes decisions, and i don't want a politician running my police department i want a experienced and trained cop, i don't know it just seems to make more sence, likei said before, other then what both sides tell you, and there certificates you really know nothing about the people you vote for, so why not lewt someone who does know them choose who is more qualified, someone tnat knows what they're talking about, plus america has a horribel record for voting most people don't vote, and many that do know nothing about the people they vote for, so they will just choos eteh guy they like the best, so mayeb that asshole that everyone hates is actually the best cop in town, but people arn't going to vote for him based on popularity. Plus in our system we still can control who's in power, we casn't choose who are the best, because really do we know shit?, but we can choose to get rid of corrupt or useless ones, although we get them less because any yokel can't become a sheriff

so in some cases it's ok to choose your leaders but in others it is not? What are the factors that determine this?

yeah the sherriff system is a bit flawed simply because people don't come out to vote and are not aware of what one person offers as compared to the other. they think that if they are not voting for the president then it's useless. if you live in a county that for the most part is completely urban then the sherriff will just be another patrol man on the streets, and will give most of his power to the police chief, who is appointed.

no i'm just saying some political postions should be chosen, but you guys vote on WAY more postions then we do, it's almost unneeded and our freedom is in no way hurt, it just seems like a waste of money, for a popularity contest, and adding politics to stuff liek that only brings corruption, the sherrif should be only concentrating on his job not his election, he might make diffrent choices if politics are concerned

once again...your right, we don't need to elect everyone and their mother into office, but we do....go figure.

yeah, i'm not trashing democracy or anything because we vote on things to, we just don't spend time and money voting on every position, good to see at least someone here seems to be logical and can look at things from diffrent points of view without automatically going into defence mode, it's democracy if no one criticizes it it doesn't work. and i feel guilty for having stereotypes about texans

it's all gravy man. the way i see it we don't need school boards here neither. they only cause alot of troubles. what i would like to see is TEA (Texas Education Agency) or ESC (Education Services Council) send an agent to every school with the laws and legal things that will make a school function alot better. that would do alot of good and cut alot of the polotics.

Clumsyboy wrote:good to see at least someone here seems to be logical and can look at things from diffrent points of view without automatically going into defence mode

That's not cool dude. If you don't like my opinion, fine, but don't call me illogical, closeminded, and defensive.

sorry i didn't mean it that way, but it seems that you automatically take the american side and go into defence mode, i was just being critical of government, which is what makes democracy work, maybe you do just happen to have oppions that always concide with traditional american ones, i just forget that some people are traditional or conservitive

ps that last bit wasn't an attack it's honest

No problem. And you're right, I am very conservative.

yeah, me being very liberal (not government party) have trouble remembering not everyone is conservitive