I would like to propose that people elected to government like every other person who applies for a job anywhere else are professional in their own right. Unlike doctors they don?t possess standard training. Unlike lawyers they don?t possess a body that regulates their conduct. But they are still there to do some particular job which requires a particular skill set.
By my proposition politicians in government then a key derivation do not set policies so as to be re-elected (some like GW Bush can?t even be re-elected because of law) but genuinely for the good of their employers who are the electorate. In the same way that architects will draw plans for their clients. Like any other profession you will find individuals ho make unethical decisions for example take advantage of their position.
If Economic theory can appreciate that policies set by governments and manifestos tabled by candidates (I would like to call this their CV) are genuinely for the good of a nation then focus can be diverted t more important issues of ethics and accountability.
If a chief executive lies about their balance sheet they will face dire consequences. Because we have not been able to appreciate that a PM is no different nothing happens if for example a sovereign nation is invaded on orders of the PM based on false allegations. There is no body that regulates and say, right what has just happened here is wrong. Because you are part of our profession we are bringing charges for misconduct.
The second key derivation from my proposition is in this day and age there shouldn?t be anything called a dictatorship. Because if someone can set a policy that shrinks an economy by 75% in a space of 3 years then there should be a body that just comes in and says this is unacceptable.
If people come out to smear each other?s campaign in public it should be unethical. Imagine all the big corporations coming out with smear campaigns for their competitors?
dsgono+Apr 13 2005, 12:45 PM–>(dsgono @ Apr 13 2005, 12:45 PM) If people come out to smear each other?s campaign in public it should be unethical. Imagine all the big corporations coming out with smear campaigns for their competitors?
I agree with your post on the whole, however, the points you make are a matter of life…
“Dog eat Dog” is the phrase, I believe.
Basically, if you could do anything you could to get the better over your competition, then you would, wouldn’t you?
For example, Tesco now accept Sainsbury’s vouchers. To advertise this, they have designed posters which are very similar to posters that Sainsbury’s would use. i.e. Blue and Orange colour scheme.
Now, although this practice isn’t illegal in any way, it is still unethical. But does this actually matter to the retailer? No.
At the end of the day, it’s all about beating the competition – and that’s simply what is being done during the election campaign.