4 ms·

Damn, the Canadians must be so proud to have such an awesome leader. video link - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZBLSjF56S8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z

Damn, the Canadians must be so proud to have such an awesome leader. video link - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZBLSjF56S8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZBLSjF56S8

sn41 10y ago
Yes, this is a great achievement. But there are precedents - the Singapore PM is a Senior Wrangler [1], a former Indian president was a rocket scientist [2] - oh, and some nasty fellow in the middle east was an ophthalmologist in London [3], lest we forget. I believe technical competence is uncorrelated to adminisitrative effectiveness. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Hsien_Loong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Hsien_Loong [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._P._J._Abdul_Kalam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._P._J._Abdul_Kalam [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad
- morgante 10y ago
  > I believe technical competence is uncorrelated to adminisitrative effectiveness. I don't. Many Asian nations (including Singapore, China, etc.) are largely governed by engineering majors and I do believe this has been helpful for improving administrative effectiveness. This stands in stark contrast to countries where governance is dominated by either lawyers (the US) or military members (many other developing nations).
  - TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
    Or career-track politicians. (The UK.) Law and politics warp your view of the world because everything becomes a subjective, debatable matter of opinion. Politics is especially dangerous because the definition of a successful argument is one that increases your power. Facts are tangential at best, distracting and unwelcome at worst. The corresponding problem for people with STEM backgrounds is a lack of understanding that this is how politics works. If your approach is based on facts, model-building, and reality testing, it's incredibly easy to be blindsided by a career politician - or career manager - who only cares about public opinion, and is perfectly prepared to lie professionally if they make more money and/or gain more power from it.
    - sn41 10y ago
      I agree with the conclusion of the last paragraph. My problem with STEM majors is that the softer virtues, like humanity, mercy and a certain large-heartedness which are needed to govern a large group are missing. ("Govern a large country like you fry small fish" - Lao Tzu, meaning govern with minimal interference) I have found this disturbing view among many of the bay-area programmer friends I have - that life is a cut-and-dry game in which the losers in life deserve nothing - which I do not agree with. The animosity that the programmers face as a community in SFO may be down precisely to their view of others.
      - morgante 10y ago
        I don't think you should stereotype to all STEM majors (internationally) based on a small collection of your programmer friends. Plenty of STEM majors appreciate soft virtues and are large-hearted. In fact, I'd argue that lawyers are far more likely to see the evil in everyone (it's practically their job_ and to be oppose to mercy.
  - adrenalinelol 10y ago
    I don't think any meaningful correlation can be drawn from what a head-of-state or high ranking politician studied in college or where they went to college to their aptitude/competence for governance. Our last two presidents have professional degrees from the same institution (Harvard) and they do not govern in the same fashion in most areas other than counter-terrorism. China also doesn't choose it's politicians via elections, thus someone who is highly technical and let me stereotype here for a second... most likely not charismatic and/or having developed a sense of political empathy... facets that a lawyer or career manager (MBA) are more likely to develop, would be able to move up in the ranks (in the CCP in this case). However, this doesn't really reflect on HOW someone chooses to implement policy or govern, comparing China vs U.S. is apples and oranges because you can't legitimately protest the CCP, this isn't the case of the major parties in the U.S. Thus the policies will be molded to some extent of popular opinion, which is normally not true in a dictatorship.
    - morgante 10y ago
      First of all, in the world scheme President Obama and President Bush are quite close together in their governing strategies and policies. That's the nature of the kind of politician we elect in the United States. However, it extends far beyond the head of state. All levels of government in Chinese government are dominated by engineers instead of lawyers or career politicians. > However, this doesn't really reflect on HOW someone chooses to implement policy or govern Of course it does. We even have a word for it: technocracy. There are dramatic differences and if you don't think that then I'm curious why you delved into perpetrating negative stereotypes about engineers.
      - adrenalinelol 10y ago
        I don't agree that Bush and Obama share governing strategies. For example GWB was very comfortable out-sourcing large problems to his lieutenants, whereas Obama seems to do it only if he feels it'd result in a better outcome if he wasn't personally involved. Items such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the VP/Rumsfeld, Mortgage crisis to Paulson/Bernanke, etc... Contrast this to Obama where he held multiple cabinet meetings with regard troop levels in Afghanistan early in his presidency. On foreign policy they also differ where GWB seemed to be very decisive (or overly depending on who you ask). Whereas Obama to this day exercises extreme caution, at least publicly. I could cite a lot of examples, but of course this is more the realm of opinion. On my somewhat poorly worded point about engineers on average being less interpersonal than a typical lawyer/mba. I don't view such attributes negatively; my intention was to point out that engineers' day-to-day jobs don't normally involve work oriented social interaction with people they don't know(i.e. someone other than their team). Putting it another way a lawyer/manager without strong interpersonal skills has a lower career ceiling than an engineer with personality trait. Thus it isn't unreasonable to assume said fields attract different types of people. Thus governance being a partial function of what subject someone opted for in school would in my opinion act as a very small variable in contrast to why X person choose said subject. > Of course it does. We even have a word for it: technocracy. It's an apples to oranges comparison if it's China(or Singapore) vs. the U.S. The governments of the former don't have anything close to real representation for it's people(More China than Singapore), thus the policy makers don't have to seriously consider popular opinion outside of keeping the populace from revolting, which is a far cry from the American system where an individual politician can be unseated within a short time frame.
  - dnautics 10y ago
    Of course in those asian nations you describe there is also a stronger tendency to view society as something to be "engineered". Herbert Hoover was the US's most prominent Engineer-president, and although history has been revised to make him seem like a laissez-faire president, he was (especially compared to his predecessor Coolidge) an economically interventionist president. The Hoover presidency did not turn out so well.
    - morgante 10y ago
      > Of course in those asian nations you describe there is also a stronger tendency to view society as something to be "engineered". Indeed. It's important to keep in mind that a technocratic leader will likely not do well or have effective results in a political system dominated by lawyers (as Hoover shows).
      - dnautics 10y ago
        Hoover largely got the program he wanted
- afrancis 10y ago
  And there is Margaret Thatcher, who had a Bachelors in Science: Chemistry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Thatcher#Early_life_and_education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Thatcher#Early_life_a...). Canada's former P.M Stephen Harper, in his early twenties, was a computer programmer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Harper#Early_life_and_education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Harper#Early_life_and_...).
- oliwary 10y ago
  And, as someone mentioned above, Angela Merkel is a physical chemist and has earned a doctorate in Quantum Chemistry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Merkel#Early_life_and_education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Merkel#Early_life_and_e...

Damn, the Canadians must be so proud to have such an awesome leader. video link - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZBLSjF56S8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZBLSjF56S8

sn41 10y ago

Yes, this is a great achievement. But there are precedents - the Singapore PM is a Senior Wrangler [1], a former Indian president was a rocket scientist [2] - oh, and some nasty fellow in the middle east was an ophthalmologist in London [3], lest we forget. I believe technical competence is uncorrelated to adminisitrative effectiveness. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Hsien_Loong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Hsien_Loong [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._P._J._Abdul_Kalam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A._P._J._Abdul_Kalam [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad

morgante 10y ago
> I believe technical competence is uncorrelated to adminisitrative effectiveness. I don't. Many Asian nations (including Singapore, China, etc.) are largely governed by engineering majors and I do believe this has been helpful for improving administrative effectiveness. This stands in stark contrast to countries where governance is dominated by either lawyers (the US) or military members (many other developing nations).
- TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
  Or career-track politicians. (The UK.) Law and politics warp your view of the world because everything becomes a subjective, debatable matter of opinion. Politics is especially dangerous because the definition of a successful argument is one that increases your power. Facts are tangential at best, distracting and unwelcome at worst. The corresponding problem for people with STEM backgrounds is a lack of understanding that this is how politics works. If your approach is based on facts, model-building, and reality testing, it's incredibly easy to be blindsided by a career politician - or career manager - who only cares about public opinion, and is perfectly prepared to lie professionally if they make more money and/or gain more power from it.
  - sn41 10y ago
    I agree with the conclusion of the last paragraph. My problem with STEM majors is that the softer virtues, like humanity, mercy and a certain large-heartedness which are needed to govern a large group are missing. ("Govern a large country like you fry small fish" - Lao Tzu, meaning govern with minimal interference) I have found this disturbing view among many of the bay-area programmer friends I have - that life is a cut-and-dry game in which the losers in life deserve nothing - which I do not agree with. The animosity that the programmers face as a community in SFO may be down precisely to their view of others.
    - morgante 10y ago
      I don't think you should stereotype to all STEM majors (internationally) based on a small collection of your programmer friends. Plenty of STEM majors appreciate soft virtues and are large-hearted. In fact, I'd argue that lawyers are far more likely to see the evil in everyone (it's practically their job_ and to be oppose to mercy.
- adrenalinelol 10y ago
  I don't think any meaningful correlation can be drawn from what a head-of-state or high ranking politician studied in college or where they went to college to their aptitude/competence for governance. Our last two presidents have professional degrees from the same institution (Harvard) and they do not govern in the same fashion in most areas other than counter-terrorism. China also doesn't choose it's politicians via elections, thus someone who is highly technical and let me stereotype here for a second... most likely not charismatic and/or having developed a sense of political empathy... facets that a lawyer or career manager (MBA) are more likely to develop, would be able to move up in the ranks (in the CCP in this case). However, this doesn't really reflect on HOW someone chooses to implement policy or govern, comparing China vs U.S. is apples and oranges because you can't legitimately protest the CCP, this isn't the case of the major parties in the U.S. Thus the policies will be molded to some extent of popular opinion, which is normally not true in a dictatorship.
  - morgante 10y ago
    First of all, in the world scheme President Obama and President Bush are quite close together in their governing strategies and policies. That's the nature of the kind of politician we elect in the United States. However, it extends far beyond the head of state. All levels of government in Chinese government are dominated by engineers instead of lawyers or career politicians. > However, this doesn't really reflect on HOW someone chooses to implement policy or govern Of course it does. We even have a word for it: technocracy. There are dramatic differences and if you don't think that then I'm curious why you delved into perpetrating negative stereotypes about engineers.
    - adrenalinelol 10y ago
      I don't agree that Bush and Obama share governing strategies. For example GWB was very comfortable out-sourcing large problems to his lieutenants, whereas Obama seems to do it only if he feels it'd result in a better outcome if he wasn't personally involved. Items such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to the VP/Rumsfeld, Mortgage crisis to Paulson/Bernanke, etc... Contrast this to Obama where he held multiple cabinet meetings with regard troop levels in Afghanistan early in his presidency. On foreign policy they also differ where GWB seemed to be very decisive (or overly depending on who you ask). Whereas Obama to this day exercises extreme caution, at least publicly. I could cite a lot of examples, but of course this is more the realm of opinion. On my somewhat poorly worded point about engineers on average being less interpersonal than a typical lawyer/mba. I don't view such attributes negatively; my intention was to point out that engineers' day-to-day jobs don't normally involve work oriented social interaction with people they don't know(i.e. someone other than their team). Putting it another way a lawyer/manager without strong interpersonal skills has a lower career ceiling than an engineer with personality trait. Thus it isn't unreasonable to assume said fields attract different types of people. Thus governance being a partial function of what subject someone opted for in school would in my opinion act as a very small variable in contrast to why X person choose said subject. > Of course it does. We even have a word for it: technocracy. It's an apples to oranges comparison if it's China(or Singapore) vs. the U.S. The governments of the former don't have anything close to real representation for it's people(More China than Singapore), thus the policy makers don't have to seriously consider popular opinion outside of keeping the populace from revolting, which is a far cry from the American system where an individual politician can be unseated within a short time frame.
- dnautics 10y ago
  Of course in those asian nations you describe there is also a stronger tendency to view society as something to be "engineered". Herbert Hoover was the US's most prominent Engineer-president, and although history has been revised to make him seem like a laissez-faire president, he was (especially compared to his predecessor Coolidge) an economically interventionist president. The Hoover presidency did not turn out so well.
  - morgante 10y ago
    > Of course in those asian nations you describe there is also a stronger tendency to view society as something to be "engineered". Indeed. It's important to keep in mind that a technocratic leader will likely not do well or have effective results in a political system dominated by lawyers (as Hoover shows).
    - dnautics 10y ago
      Hoover largely got the program he wanted
afrancis 10y ago
And there is Margaret Thatcher, who had a Bachelors in Science: Chemistry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Thatcher#Early_life_and_education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Thatcher#Early_life_a...). Canada's former P.M Stephen Harper, in his early twenties, was a computer programmer (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Harper#Early_life_and_education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Harper#Early_life_and_...).
oliwary 10y ago
And, as someone mentioned above, Angela Merkel is a physical chemist and has earned a doctorate in Quantum Chemistry. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Merkel#Early_life_and_education https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Merkel#Early_life_and_e...