posted on Nov, 18 2017 @ 03:41 AM
I have seen so many people in seats of power who I wouldn't trust to mow my lawn, yet they are supposed to decide on gun control and other legal
issues? Really? Is there a joke here I'm not seeing?" Is all of this some kind of mass Truman show where the producers are waiting for us to rise
up, rip these dumb asses out of office and demand competence?
First of all I think ALL teachers in any school that gets ANY form of government $$ should have to pass standardized tests, and these should be
moderately difficult and comprehensive. Private teachers should have the option to take the test as well. I'm not talking about tests or degrees
from universities b/c they lost credibility about 40+ years ago and have basically been diploma mills since then with a small number of students there
to actually learn (though they may get lower grades than people who cheated the whole way through and learned basically nothing). These tests would
be constructed to they can no be 'cheated" on and I think essay is best or writing answers in sentences. Sure it would take time to grade them, but
if it keeps Numbskull-Know-Nothing-Neil out of a teaching job and gives it to Studious Steve, then it is worth a years salary just for that test
alone! I think this also needs to be done for professors.
We also need to review how test are written, given and taken for professionals. Test should not EVER be re-used but the test can be similar but
change up the way the question is asked, the numbers, sequences of how the data is presented, etc. If the test taker can't understand the question
then that in itself is a test in comprehension and a major test right there!
If a person is going to hold an elected position, there needs to be some base line level of knowledge. If you are dealing with a town, being the
mayor let's say, then the town should come up with questions that should be asked to all candidates that are relevant to the town and would be
important to running the town - anything from knowing the demographics, religions, industries present in town, history, ethnic history (who makes up
the town - was it founded by italians or irish or germans, or Caribbean blacks, etc), are there any financial concerns (is it in debt) and how did it
get there and what is being done, etc. Then questions about general municipal management, civil administration questions, procedural questions,
emergency preparedness, planning for the future, etc. these questions would be generated by either a large committee and also submitted by those
within the community (individuals, businesses, churches, schools, etc). The questions would not be shown ahead of time to any contestant. The
testing committee would get the answers and score the results based upon the answers (originally provided by the submitter of the question). The
scores would be made public and they would get a rating (1-10) in various areas on how they did. The political hopefuls would be given a study guide
or outline of possible testing topics so that they have an idea of what may be asked and it would be up to them to study a broad range of information
and REALLY know it, thus knowing the town, and this would weed out people who were there for power, the paycheck and allow those that actually care to
remain. It would be obvious those who tried to learn about the town by the answers and even if not 100% correct wouldn't mean they are unqualified
as they could learn the proper answer and from there on it wouldn't be a "game" to keep out the con-men.
This need to be done on a larger level like house and senate members for each state government as well as congressmen ad senators on the federal
level..... I'm sure there are other gov jobs which need better qualified members and testing should be implemented there as well.
If we CAN get people who are qualified and can do GOOD for the local, state or fed gov, then I think they should be paid much more than they are now -
maybe tie pay to performance somehow - based upon voter approval rating maybe? The small amount of money paid in salary to gov officials is nothing
compared to the money lost due to incompetency and plain stupidity (and greed most likely). If the officials were in the top 5% in their relative
field, had integrity and were honest (but knew when they had to stretch truth, tell white lies, etc in negotiations with other countries or dealing
with media in sensitive topics - NOT malevolent or self-serving lies or stretches of truth) it would be worth paying them much more than current
salaries as it would pay off in the positive results in all areas in which they work. One man earning $200,000/year (senator) hands out a
$500,000,000 no bid contract for a small military base where an honest representative (verified through new testing procedures and undercover sting
solicitation tests) determines the same base can be built for just over $100,000,000 and puts it up for bid and it goes to 40 different contractors -
mostly small biz's instead of a mega company where less than 1% of that half billion makes it to the workers. The saved $400,000,000 can be used for
other projects which are also not over-priced and maybe there will be money for things like public health care, national infrastructure, investment in
GOOD schools and universities, etc.
I'm just saying WE NEED THE IDIOTS/MORONS/CON-People (yes there are fraudster women) OUT OF THE GOVERNMENT and ESPECIALLY out of education and the
I also think there should be constant under-cover stings to find out if government officials (especially judges and police officers) are corrupt.