TED Conversations

Henry Woeltjen

TEDCRED 10+

This conversation is closed.

What Is The Correct Answer?

We are all influenced by politics. It's either directly through education and participation, or it materializes because of influence applied through legislation or regulation.

People seem to hold political views based on their own personal opinion. However, I don't think they consider long-term impacts, and long-term impacts are probably the only real reason we have government regulation.

I don't believe we can move forward on the back of general opinion. If we can acknowledge that many people are not educated when it comes to economics and general government procedure how can we value a popular vote?

I think it is important that we begin to educate ourselves on how things really work. Economics is not so complicated that you cannot, at the very least, understand the basic concepts.

How important do you think education is?

More importantly...do you believe we should have a global focus....or continue to run our country by how people feel in that given year?

I think we need to apply legislation according to its long-term impacts as it relates to our long-term goals. It's really the only thing that makes sense.

So the next time people on TV are talking about "EQUITY" or "CDO" you should probably take a look at what those terms mean.

Further than that...let's stop making our electoral system a joke. If you go out and vote please ensure you research your candidates.

Voting based on the color of the pin he or she wears...is obviously ridiculous.

Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Dec 13 2012: Democracy itself comes with the inherent flaw of Argumentum ad Populum, a line of fallacious argumentation that no one can coherently use for reasoning as to (i) why something is true/false and/or (ii) why we should act on it or dismiss it, in matters such as this. (Public perspective and yet-to-be policy).

    Education in the understanding of exactly what a candidate is/does/believes is incedibly important, however its important to note that there are also issues that come with that aswell which are rarely accounted for (thus only a step in the right direction but not the end goal).
    For example/
    -Politicians lie
    -Politicians promise more than whats attainable
    -Those required to enact/remove a policy don't necessary allow the changes the candidate wants
    -Politicians are not necessarily qualified themselves in all (or even most) of the matters they will eventually deal with
    -Short-term and Long-term strategic voting can divide voters
    -Agreeable policies can be later rejected, disliked policies that we ignore during campaigns can become a primary focus.
    etc etc.

    Personally I believe that only the most qualified and educated in any given field should govern that single field along with a similarly qualified congress for those individual departments, with anonymously selected independent regulators spectating their actions and progress, removing them from office infavor of the next viable candidate if they fail and keeping them in that position if they don't. But thats just me and very much a pipe-dream for the forseeable future.

    Still, education on the candidates is a great leap forwards, although to make this viable, the voting process would need to be drastically changed and the government would need to be the sole funder of all campaigners, giving all candidates an equal opportunity to present their policies to the masses who (lets be honest here) wont voluntarily research what isn't spoon-fed, atleast at present.
    • Dec 13 2012: Xavier.
      You stated, 1. "Politicians lie
      2. Politicians promise more than what's attainable."
      Number two is also a lie.
      Intentional or not.

      Better me thinks to always begin with:
      "all politicians lie."
      That stands a better chance of getting proof from them and real results achieved, based on promises made.

      I certainly do not believe one word, from one politician, any longer.
      I think any one who does is a fool and a brainwashed one at that.
      If they don't prove themselves, then I know exactly who and what they are. Liars and crooks.

      You said:
      "Those required to enact/remove a policy don't necessar(il)y allow the changes the candidate wants"
      That's cheating. Another word for it is corruption.
      We need to have the same policy they tell us they do, for ourselves and that is a "zero-tolerance policy"
      that is applicable to them.

      That would demonstrate that we have the ultimate power and that we will use it.
      Right now the reverse is true and here is something else that is also true.

      Politicians know exactly what they are doing. They do what they do on purpose. They are not stupid or uneducated. Don't fool yourself about it.
      They have no intention of solving the problems of any constituents, meaning you and me and all our fellow citizens.

      What this points to is that one "expert" should never solely govern any single field, ever.
      They should be used like a round-robin library of reference that a temporary elected group of conscientious and concerned citizens use to take in information and then figure out how best to use it or implement it. All done with the knowledge of the citizens themselves. Anyone, in any position of power, trust and influence, must be 100% transparent and answerable, even immediately so, for everything they do, propose and attempt to carry out.

      Another comment you made:
      " anonymously selected independent regulators spectating their actions and progress..."

      Anonymous to who, from who, or for who? Just who is anonymous?

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.