Why don't we have politicians that know what they're doing?

Like economists working to figure out the country's budget, teachers deciding how education should be delivered and doctors/scientists coming up with ways to improve the NHS. Why instead do we have some random people making decisions about things they don't know much about?

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 1

Mayhem™

Because they're not the ones with a 2:1 in PPE from Oxford.

Reply 2

Legendary Quest

Original post by Mayhem™

Because they're not the ones with a 2:1 in PPE from Oxford.

And Eton educated

Reply 3

Harami Salami

The country is run by statisticians and economists, politics is a pantomime.

Reply 4

Bad Faith

Original post by Harami Salami

The country is run by statisticians and economists, politics is a pantomime.

I would disagree with that. If statistics was used to make decisions then cannabis would be legalised, as it is less harmful than alcohol and tobacco. That's just one example.

Reply 5

Harami Salami

Original post by Bad Faith

I would disagree with that. If statistics was used to make decisions then cannabis would be legalised, as it is less harmful than alcohol and tobacco. That's just one example.

I agree, but my belief is that the politicians broadly set the ideology (Corbyn vs Osborne for example), the experts recommend policy and the politicians sell what they can to the electorate. Britain is quite a socially conservative country, especially the older people and the working classes which is why the Tories don't bother with Cannabis legalisation even though most of them have probably snorted coke in the bathroom of the Ritz.

Reply 6

Snake_God

Original post by Bad Faith

They do know what their doing. They know fine well. What there doing is lining their pockets with our tax money and receiving hefty bonuses from the massive corporations they look after.

Simples

Reply 7

Bad Faith

Original post by I_Mir

They do know what their doing. They know fine well. What there doing is lining their pockets with our tax money and receiving hefty bonuses from the massive corporations they look after.

Simples

Ah, then I guess if I were to rephrase...my question would be why aren't the politicians actively making positive changes in our country? Also, why do they make decisions without being knowledgable with the topic they're dealing with?

Reply 8

Snake_God

Original post by Bad Faith

They are making positive changes for themselves. Politicians are supposed to look after the hard working people of the country by making positive changes, but the vast majority dont. People like Corbyn and Galloway are honest politicians thats why the media hates them. The prominent politicians are like Tony Blair a cold heated mass murderer who became one of the richest prime ministers ever through corruption and also like Osborne who owns 15% of a company that has payed a penny in tax over a 5 year period when they turnover 2bn a year. The remaining politicians are ruled by the corrupt ones they are influenced by them. Think of all the corruption in politics: governments secretly pushing through dodgy trade deals like TTIP behind public eyes, governments going easy on corporations like Google, Starbucks etc. who dont pay tax, privatization of the NHS no matter what the public think.

Its such a sham

Reply 9

LordMallard

I don't like outsourcing policy to unelected officials. Experts can also be biased and have their own ideas on how things should be run. They should be able to advise politicians but not have the final say. You mention economists, having a treasury run by Hayek would be very different than one being run by Keynes.

Reply 10

Aj12

Original post by Bad Faith

There was hefty opposition to the NHS from the medial profession during its implementation. Those working within a sector can have vested interests and so are not always the best people to lead it. You also have to consider the benefit of outside thinking on issues within a sector. An outsider who has not spent their career in one area may be able to bring other experiences to it.

Lets not pretend it is just politicians making these decisions as well, they have legions of advisers around them, many of whom have spent decades in those sectors and will know them as well as any one else.

Finally, this is a problem of democracy, by all means argue for a technocracy, but I doubt it'd ever have much support.

Reply 11

JIRAIYA-ERO-SENNIN

"If you the believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe"-Lord Salisbury

The point is that professionals can be every bit as self-serving as anyone else. If you put doctors in charge they'll think about what's best for doctors, same with teachers and scientists. If you believe that these people are not as prone to selfishness, folly and corruption as politicians then you have no understanding of human nature.

This is why we are a democracy, not a technocracy.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 12

Rakas21

Original post by Bad Faith

Quite simply it comes down to the fact that technocracy does not mean neutrality. The NUT for example is an extremely partisan body which believes in a narrow libertarian approach to education regardless of the fact that several Asian nations have a potentially superior education system. The BMA for example would never ever approve a policy of restricting NHS services (i.e. no longer providing transgender surgeries) because it would reduce the demand for them. As Aj12 points out, both Hayek and Keynes are renowned economists and yet take very different approaches.

Reply 13

whorace

Because these people don't get elected as representatives? Tbf most politicians know what they are doing, it's just what they are doing surprisingly isn't as easy as a classroom on socialism makes out. Government is complicated.

Reply 14

M14B

Original post by Bad Faith

I do not think they are as random as you think.

Reply 15

Plagioclase

Original post by Bad Faith

People probably wouldn't be as likely to vote for them. The politicians who win are those that tell people what they want to hear, not those who do the best job.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 16

username1204031

Original post by Harami Salami

Not remotely true. The politicians sell whatever the **** they want to sell, the experts don't get a say. And if the experts dare disagree they get sacked (see David Nutt, who lost his job for pointing out the facts). Our government actively suppresses factual discourse. Michael Gove's education reforms were the exact opposite of what the stats and research say we should be doing, but he went ahead with it anyway.

They can do this because the voters are easily manipulated idiots. Somehow they've managed to convince people that the economy is getting better (it's not), so people keep supporting them.