gordondaviesmoustache said:
Damocles said:
Why?
What benefits does having a bunch of 50 year old people deciding the current and future legislation of the people? How is this in anyway representative of the populace? How do when then get a Prime Minister under the age of 60? Unless you think a Prime Minister who has no experience in Parliament is a good idea?
You don't know if this man is power hungry, unprincipled or anodyne nor whether his path to becoming an MP was thrust upon him or a long term career plan. You've made up traits that he holds then have gotten angry about him holding those traits.
Not quite sure how having twenty years experience of the real world makes you 50.
I believe those who govern us should have a meaningful degree of experience of the lives we all lead. That way politicians can make decisions about the way laws are made with a sufficient degree of context. For that reason I would make the minimum age for an MP to be 40. It would put off significant numbers of those who are in it merely for its own ends, as the barriers to entry would be much more exacting.
My assessment of his character in terms of him being power hungry is based on the fact he's standing for parliament without any discernible life extraneous that aspiration, other than being an amateur photographer, which makes him sinfully anodyne.
Perhaps it was 'thrust upon him' when he was studying politics at university.
I misread it as 30 originally.
Your argument is a simplistic one when you boil it down and suggests that management cannot come without shopfloor experience. Suggesting that the CEO of Microsoft should have 20 years of programming experience is fatuous at best.
The United Kingdom is a Corporation for all intents and purposes. The Chairman of the Board is the Queen and the CEO is the Prime Minister. Why the Director of Communication or Director of Human Resources needs to have experience in the company beforehand isn't adequately explained.
This is obviously ignoring the massive fallacy that politics "isn't the real world" or is "less real" than other tasks.
Then there's the fact that whether we like it or not, 32 million people in this country are under the age of 40 and you have arbitrarily decided that they may not be represented in Parliament by somebody of their own generation.
This whole idea is ill-conceived, undemocratic and relies on the logic that to manage a system who must fully understand every part of that system. Any experience in the so-called real world and the structure of businesses should show you the fallacy in that.
