Rachel Marsden writes an interesting article about why business stars make bad politicians. Amazingly – according to the piece, one of the reasons has to do with the huge amounts of their own money they spend – it seems to turn voters off that a political position can be purchased. But electing someone who has made enough money that they can blow some of it on a campaign is one of the reasons we should vote for a politician because these are the exact people who don’t owe any favors to special interest groups – they can make the best decision for their constituents without voters needing to worry about them taking bribes and kickbacks.
Another reason which I would have added to the article has to do with business leaders in the last ten years outsourcing work to India and China – negative ads were developed against Carly Fiorina, Meg Whitman and Linda McMahon, touting the fact they outsourced jobs.
The reality is that business leaders didn’t outsource jobs this decade would have expenses which were out of whack with other companies in their spaces and subsequently been in violation of doing what is in the best interest of the shareholders. This violation of fiduciary responsibility could bring on lawsuits.
In reality, if you want to figure out how to bring jobs to the US, it is best to elect someone who had to outsource themselves as they realize why the US is so uncompetitive first-hand and can do something about fixing the problem.
What is perhaps most amazing to me though in the case of California and Connecticut where all of the above-mentioned candidates reside – is they are both near bankruptcy – in debt way over their heads. How could voters not see the wisdom of electing successful business leaders when their financial plight is so grim?
And until business leaders do a better job of explaining their strengths to voters and why their unique sets of skills really matter, many of them will continue to lose.
Technorati
Del.icio.us
Slashdot
Digg
twitter
