A Thought Experiment...

[Alan B]

I remain mindful of the word "can", though.

Erm, yes, indeed.

Perhaps 'might be' would have been a better choice.

[Hermit]

It's a hypothetical proposition and it is not suggested that it should be considered for actual implementation, which some of you seem to think and lambaste it accordingly.

Hypotheticals are no more than brain farts when they become divorced from any chance of implementation in the real world, though some of them have the redeeming feature of being funny or at least moderately amusing, such as How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?

My preference is for constructing hypothetical scenarios and the problems they tease out that could conceivably happen in the real world, such as this one:



Geoffrey Robertson's long running TV series, Hypotheticals, was a good watch. Unfortunately DVDs are difficult to obtain and insanely expensive.

[pErvinalia]

I think a larger problem is lobbying and the revolving door between politics and industry.

[Alan B]

I think a larger problem is lobbying and the revolving door between politics and industry.

True. But would there be a 'revolving door' if there were no financial inducements?

[pErvinalia]

I'm not sure what you mean by "financial inducements". The financial inducement comes after politics when they walk into industry jobs.

[Alan B]

I'm not sure what you mean by "financial inducements". The financial inducement comes after politics when they walk into industry jobs.

Yes. But there is a move afoot in some quarters to place a limit of two to five years before ex-politicians can take up employment in industry, particularly in positions that would allow undue political influence with their previous employer. I'm not sure, but I believe some countries actually impose such a limit.

[pErvinalia]

Some of our states here in Australia have that rule, I think. If it's not official yet, it's being talked about. Which is a good thing. The problem, like any measure meant to regulate political life, is that these things are almost impossible to implement. The politicians are unique in that they are self regulating. They get to determine what new oversight or accountabiilty measures they are subject to. It's fucking ridiculous. We desperately need a federal anti-corruption body here, but the major parties won't sign up to it, as they know a fuckload of their representatives would fall foul of it. It's utterly ridiculous and shameless. There isn't actually any good argument against greater oversight of politicians. The politicians can barely even pretend to raise an argument against it. But they don't have to. There's nothing we can do about it in the short term. In the longer term, political upheaval occurs and these things are forced. But politics is a short term game. The fucking system is rotten.

[Alan B]

The fucking system is rotten.

Yeah. And it all revolves around financial greed.

[pErvinalia]

Yeah, and power. Most of the top politicians can get more money working in the private sector. I think they do it for the power. Any extra money they can earn on the way through is a good bonus, though.

[Hermit]

The politicians are unique in that they are self regulating.

Which they do with tremendous enthusiasm.