It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If the United States had a scientist as president, would all problems be solved?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 05:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by timidgal
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 
Academics are usually not diplomats and since we don't live in a bubble and need to make nice with others, I'm not quite sure if a scientist would have that particular skill set. I could be wrong and there could be some charismatic diplomatic scientists out there who have a sub-specialty in global economics, but I have a hard time picturing a scientist wanting to host a state dinner or pose for photo ops in the rose garden.




But thats the change we need though.
Academics do make nice with others..

Well we need someone who can change things, not someone who has charisma, i just checked the definition which is "Compelling attractiveness or charm that can inspire devotion in others."

I rather have someone, that can get things done, turn the system around, and bring some real noticeable change, stop famines, fund money for vaccines, make new employment, i don't want someone who makes fancy speeches, we need some one who can do the job, not tell us how they can.

There's more important things to do than pose for photo ops in the rose garden tho.
I rather have a leader who can cure famines, clean up the streets, make education much more accessible and of a higher quality, make it easier, but also teaching you more.
Someone who's just, i don't want a smooth talker,i want someone who believes in justice.
A leader who can re-right all the current wrongs that still go on.
edit on 8-9-2011 by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:15 AM
link   
It seems most politicians have only promised things, but never delivered on it, they never really did anything.
Current politicians, believe in the system, they don't condemn it, they can't see that it really needs changing.

Didn't lawyer obama say something about bringing the troops home, and many other things, he didn't deliver on, he has no real track record either.



Now heres Dirk Meyer, he has a B.S in Engineering and a B.S in Business Administration, a great speaker, designed a successful microprocessor, he out witted and put his company AMD, ahead of current giants Intel in the past, he beat Intel badly, so i'd hate to see what this guy could do to the enemies of america from a military stand point, point blank, don't mess with Dirk he will # you up, this guy has a track record, he's proven he can do it.

He knows education and the health care industry need to be updated, and he even stated he wouldn't stop there, he knows what's needed to be changed he says "computing has been the same for 25 years, to me thats not good", we need a guy like this as a leader, he recognized faults, and acknowledges it needs change.

He's a guy who would do whats fair, and not favor anyone.
Dirk is a guy that can get # done, he's someone i'd put my trust in to run a country.


Dirk Meyer being interview ^.

What i wanted to put foward with this, was that, see how much better the US could be run with a leader who is a scientist/engineer.
He know's precisely how to do things.
But people not in the public servant industry can't be president, shouldn't this be changed.
edit on 8-9-2011 by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

Originally posted by timidgal
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 
Academics are usually not diplomats and since we don't live in a bubble and need to make nice with others, I'm not quite sure if a scientist would have that particular skill set. I could be wrong and there could be some charismatic diplomatic scientists out there who have a sub-specialty in global economics, but I have a hard time picturing a scientist wanting to host a state dinner or pose for photo ops in the rose garden.




But thats the change we need though.
Academics do make nice with others...sometimes.

Well we need someone who can change things, not someone who has charisma, i just checked the definition which is "Compelling attractiveness or charm that can inspire devotion in others."

I rather have someone, that can get things done, turn the system around, and bring some real noticeable change, stop famines, fund money for vaccines, make new employment, i don't want someone who makes fancy speeches, we need some one who can do the job, not tell us how they can.

There's more important things to do than pose for photo ops in the rose garden tho.
I rather have a leader who can cure famines, clean up the streets, make education much more accessible and of a higher quality, make it easier, but also teaching you more.
Someone who's just, i don't want a smooth talker,i want someone who believes in justice.
A leader who can re-right all the current wrongs that still go on.
edit on 8-9-2011 by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien because: (no reason given)


Wow - you totally missed my tongue in cheek!!

With that said, we can't ignore the fact that there's a global arena as well that requires some political finesse. I get what you're saying and yes, the items you list are all important, but they only address a domestic agenda and we don't live in a vacuum - the world is a great big place and if we're going to fix the problems and the rep we've made for ourselves in recent years, we're going to need someone who CAN inspire devotion in others or we're going to continue to be perceived in a negative light.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by timidgal

Originally posted by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien

Originally posted by timidgal
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 
Academics are usually not diplomats and since we don't live in a bubble and need to make nice with others, I'm not quite sure if a scientist would have that particular skill set. I could be wrong and there could be some charismatic diplomatic scientists out there who have a sub-specialty in global economics, but I have a hard time picturing a scientist wanting to host a state dinner or pose for photo ops in the rose garden.




But thats the change we need though.
Academics do make nice with others...sometimes.

Well we need someone who can change things, not someone who has charisma, i just checked the definition which is "Compelling attractiveness or charm that can inspire devotion in others."

I rather have someone, that can get things done, turn the system around, and bring some real noticeable change, stop famines, fund money for vaccines, make new employment, i don't want someone who makes fancy speeches, we need some one who can do the job, not tell us how they can.

There's more important things to do than pose for photo ops in the rose garden tho.
I rather have a leader who can cure famines, clean up the streets, make education much more accessible and of a higher quality, make it easier, but also teaching you more.
Someone who's just, i don't want a smooth talker,i want someone who believes in justice.
A leader who can re-right all the current wrongs that still go on.
edit on 8-9-2011 by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien because: (no reason given)


Wow - you totally missed my tongue in cheek!!

With that said, we can't ignore the fact that there's a global arena as well that requires some political finesse. I get what you're saying and yes, the items you list are all important, but they only address a domestic agenda and we don't live in a vacuum - the world is a great big place and if we're going to fix the problems and the rep we've made for ourselves in recent years, we're going to need someone who CAN inspire devotion in others or we're going to continue to be perceived in a negative light.


Well when i said "stop famines" and funding cures for vaccines i was implying in a global sense.........since oh you know those famines that plague africa and asia are a pretty serious problem, i was hoping for a scientific leader could solve that, it's a logical decision which only a scientist can execute, since 99% of the worlds population own only 1% of the worlds wealth, he could reverse all of that, as well if a vaccine was made it could be used worldwide obviously, you didn't realize that?
Hell, vaccines for virus's are basically covered up, a scientific leader would reverse all this damn corruption.

Well what i got of your post, was that your more interested in more of "flash over substance" thing.

"Academics are usually not diplomats and since we don't live in a bubble and need to make nice with others" "
but I have a hard time picturing a scientist wanting to host a state dinner or pose for photo ops in the rose garden."


That's a highly closed minded way of thinking, academics make the world run, it's not bossy diplomats, plus higher intelligence = being more open minded.

Why on earth would anyone want photos of a leader to pose and have dinners for rich pricks in a rose garden is beyond me.
About 25000 people die every day of hunger or hunger-related causes, a good leader wouldn't even dare to host dinners, how about...hosting a good supply for the worlds poor?
It's a much more productive thing to do, than to appease to rich aristocrats.

You completely missed the point of getting a scientist as a leader, it would be for total change, it would mean getting rid of these useless things, like presidential banquets,hosting other world leaders, or god forbid royalty plus as for"making nice with others" well im sure the new appointed science leader, can send every other pompous world leader a basket of fruit and chocolate.....but imo making nice with others, would be getting back the money corporations and the federal reserve bank have stolen, putting that surplus in education, infrastructure, technology, science,welfare for the disenfranchised, and humanitarian aid, i mean we'd have quintillions left over if the money from the federal reserve bank and corporations were taken back, and the best way of making nice to others, is to use that surplus aswell to get food and give it to the poor in africa and asia...im not sure what your definition of "making nice with others" is, but hey, saving someone from famine, is more than nice in my book.

Please get a clue, for the love of god, i would rather be demonized for the rest of my life if it means helping others, who are dying, # half the world are illiterate and are starving, why the # would i want to take some pointless photo with some rich prick from europe?
Human life means more than useless vanity.
edit on 8-9-2011 by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:38 AM
link   
Many negative thoughts about selecting the most educated among us to be leaders. Yet the motto is "deny ignorance." Funny, and a good indicator of why democracy will never produce excellence.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by links234

Originally posted by Jazzyguy

Quick, name a scientist member of your government’s top offices.


The head of the Department of Energy is a physicist!

Coincidentally, he is a chinese american.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:47 AM
link   
just a thought

the US has been off warmongering in someone else's country all my life and then some

stop the warmongering = stop the banksters lending the government money

thats serious kudos

you would think more could be achieved if the POTUS offered one hand in peace without the other hand holding the biggest latest techno gun

yes its a dream.......




posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grumble
Many negative thoughts about selecting the most educated among us to be leaders. Yet the motto is "deny ignorance." Funny, and a good indicator of why democracy will never produce excellence.


Well said!
Smart isn't cool sadly.
And we are the ones who are suffering because of that, people would rather be entertained with sports, or whats on T.V, then for change.

We need to change everything, sports players and celebs need to stop getting paid so much.
People who work in the sciences, after graduating barely break $50k in the first year.
For a scientist to become leader, everyone's mindset needs to change.
People condemn intelligence, and praise sports and stupidity, it needs to change.

But then again you can see the replies in this thread, vanity is favored over intelligence.
edit on 8-9-2011 by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 
No offense but you are reading me so completely wrong and I'm not going to waste any more of our time. I understood precisely what you were saying in your OP and you really don't know me well enough to make the assuptions and statements you've made. You've totally misinterpreted everything I said and if you can't tell when I'm being sardonic about something, then you and I are not a good match to converse. That's what diplomacy is all about and you need to have the finesse to gauge your conversant's message and respond in kind. You can't seem to grasp that subtlety where I'm concerned so I'm respectfully bowing out of this conversation. You need to learn how to play nice because that IS how the world goes around my friend.


edit on 9/8/2011 by timidgal because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by timidgal
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 
No offense but you are reading me so completely wrong and I'm not going to waste any more of our time. I understood precisely what you were saying in your OP and you really don't know me well enough to make the assuptions and statements you've made. You've totally misinterpreted everything I said and if you can't tell when I'm being sardonic about something, then you and I are not a good match to converse. That's what diplomacy is all about and you need to have the finesse to gauge your conversant's message and respond in kind. You can't seem to grasp that subtlety where I'm concerned so I'm respectfully bowing out of this conversation. You need to learn how to play nice because that IS how the world goes around my friend.


edit on 9/8/2011 by timidgal because: (no reason given)


Well if you think your right and im wrong, i obviously can't correct the wrong way of thinking.
I understand it's easier to say someone is wrong, instead of acknowledging anything, so as you wish,
Cya.
edit on 8-9-2011 by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Highlander64
just a thought

the US has been off warmongering in someone else's country all my life and then some

stop the warmongering = stop the banksters lending the government money

thats serious kudos

you would think more could be achieved if the POTUS offered one hand in peace without the other hand holding the biggest latest techno gun

yes its a dream.......



Exactly, the people who are being voted in, are being voted in by people who don't know what they're doing.
The replies in this thread are shocking.

What you said " offered one hand in peace without the other hand holding the biggest latest techno gun", is exactly how many people think, people would always stubbornly say they're right, they would rather vote for someone who they think would be good, simply because of pointless characteristics like skin color, gender or what political part they're from.
They would never vote for someone who actually is a good candidate.

People rather see the president having vanity with other world leaders, posing for pointless dinners whilst many starve and die is a much more productive thing tho i guess.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 
Are we even speaking the same language??? Where on earth did I say anything about one of us being right or wrong? Your inappropriate attack left no room for me to even respond or you would have known that you and I are of similar thought on these issues. What is wrong with you? By the way, it's a rhetorical question so PLEASE don't even respond. Hope I made that point clear enough for you because you certainly didn't understand one iota of anything else I said...



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 



I agree

and lets not forget that the US murders more than a million unborn children a year through abortion, countless through black gov't supported drug trafficking, guns, starvation, improper supply of medicines, just the tip of the iceberg

fix your backyard b4 you venture to fix the nations mr or mrs potus!!!

edit on 8-9-2011 by Highlander64 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by timidgal
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 
Are we even speaking the same language??? Where on earth did I say anything about one of us being right or wrong? Your inappropriate attack left no room for me to even respond or you would have known that you and I are of similar thought on these issues. What is wrong with you? By the way, it's a rhetorical question so PLEASE don't even respond. Hope I made that point clear enough for you because you certainly didn't understand one iota of anything else I said...



So you keep responding to me with insults, and then tell me to not reply.
Like i said earlier, if that's what you understand, as you wish then.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Highlander64
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 



I agree

and lets not forget that the US murders more than a million unborn childrena year through abortion, countless through black gov't supported drug trafficking, guns, starvation, improper supply of medicines, just the tip of the iceberg

fix yoru backyard b4 you venture to fix the nations!!!


What background?

But yeah, the government really operates on a double standard.
But with that said, do people who vote these people in, do they technically support all of this, since they do vote these people in, i wonder what's peoples fascination with the wrong thing over the right thing?
Or is just because they don't know it could be better?



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 07:47 AM
link   
backyard mate - its an aussie term for the area behind your house where you have a fence a lawn and a set of swings for the kids

it is mandatory for all aussies over 18 to vote and you get fined if you do not vote
if you dont have a few policies you will never win an election here
we dont spend billions campaigning with marching bands and stars and stripes gatsby hats and ticker tape and rhetorical speeches of yes we can

here in aust this is considered to be pompous BS

the money obama bin laden and his competitors are about to spend on his 2012 campaign would feed a 3rd world nation

we can only sit and wonder from afar



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Sorry but Poindexters should remain just what they are and serve the purpose with their blinders..being a Scientist. We definitely need a good bunch of them which has always been the backbone of the cutting edge technology that we are still able to produce. Be it Space, Computers or Medicine, US has contributed to a great extent to the world's economy.

I know one too many scientists outside ATS and they pretty much are way too deeply involved and living in their own specialty of expertise that it is very very hard for them to focus on other aspects as simple as a Wife
Let alone managing an entire Nation.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
 


Because scientists don't make great speech persons.

In order to enamor the masses, you need charisma and skill in using speech. Thats why politicians throughout history have ALWAYS won this race. They can compose themselves and smile through that thick skin they have. They can make 'everyone' happy. And you know what making everyone happy entitles...making corporations, NGOs etc etc happy isn't an easy job. And oh yes, they can be bought.

Well, I suppose scientists can be bought too, but they're always nerdy types who lack proper attire and hair cut, forget charisma lol


edit on 8-9-2011 by nusnus because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by yourmaker
my government would be a Technocratic Demarchy.

it doesn't exist, but under my control it would combine the best of a Technocracy and a Demarchy.


Technocracy - Technocracy is a form of government in which engineers, scientists, health professionals, and other technical experts are in control of decision making in their respective fields.



Demarchy - Demarchy (or lottocracy) is a form of government in which the state is governed by randomly selected decision makers who have been selected by sortition (lot) from a broadly inclusive pool of eligible citizens


I would combine the two by randomly selecting eligable Experts to govern according to their own common sense and moral principles.

Also they would have at least one Citizen advisor each.



made that post in a different thread but I suppose it works here.

thats my style of government. to answer your question. it would work, if the people they were surrounded with were geuinely intelligent and empathetic. the world's problems would drain away due to the power being directed positively.



posted on Sep, 8 2011 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by RadeonGFXRHumanGTXisAlien
Now i know that professionals aren't electable, this is mainly due to, if a professional was electable, the US would run a lot better.

Why has there never been a president who was a scientist?

Practically all of the leaders of the united states have been in professions in the commerce field.
Why are there no scientists (physicists, biologists, math professors etc) who have been presidents?
Wouldn't they make better leaders?
They would know how people work, how the brain works, and how to advance and bring things foward.
They would make much better decisions than any past president, they'd be fair, just and honest
I mean in the past election, it was based on either sex, or race (hilary, mccain and obama), those are poor reasons to vote your next leader in imo, people were going to vote mccain, simply because he wasn't black, and they were going to vote for hilary simply because she was female, and people voted for obama simply because he was black.
Why not have, a biochemist or physicist as main running candidates? if either one gets voted in, we both win either way.

It seems throughout presidential history, most of the leaders, have made decisions based on double standards, and ones that didn't make sense.
‎"All men are created equal" - Thomas Jefferson,



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join