3 ms·

I definitely don't consider whether it individual was late on his credit card bills or got evicted for rent to be a strike against his worthiness for public off

I definitely don't consider whether it individual was late on his credit card bills or got evicted for rent to be a strike against his worthiness for public office, in fact, it might even be a benefit in that he knows the problems of financial hardship and can empathize with the electorate. That's why I mentioned [sic] "high networth" individuals in my original post. I weight failure to pay your small bills when you inherited millions or are worth billions are far more indicative of bad management skills or unreliability than someone who is poor missing payments.

iamdave 9y ago
That's why I mentioned [sic] "high networth" individuals in my original post. I suppose you'll have to pardon my cynicism towards how exploitable the general public is, or rather, how exploitative 24 hour political coverage is, at large to be worrisome that this wont just end up in pronounced levels of Tall Poppy Syndrome spreading through the population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome Edit: Let me clarify something before it gets confused, I am not suggesting that the sort of inquiry on finances you're proposing is itself an example of Tall Poppy, I am saying that left unchecked the sort of thinking that goes into "we need use financials to vet the worthiness our prospective politicians" could have the result of overcorrecting the inquiry of integrity and objectivity in office to many of the symptoms endemic to the Tall Poppy phenomenon.
- igorkraw 9y ago
  Honestly, I don't think that ever becomes a problem in a sufficiently transparent and competitive democratic system. If there is true selection pressure, skill rises to the top. It also seems to me that if people are "superior" to others, they should be able to deal with what your link talks about. It therefore to feels to me a lot like the pseudo-meritrocratic rationalizations of people privileged by birth,environment or genetics (like us on this website, statistically speaking) that don't want to learn how to deal with people who won't blindly accept their status. Yes, sometimes that is annoying, irrational, inefficient. But it is also important, because no matter how smart we are we might be wrong.

iamdave 9y ago

That's why I mentioned [sic] "high networth" individuals in my original post. I suppose you'll have to pardon my cynicism towards how exploitable the general public is, or rather, how exploitative 24 hour political coverage is, at large to be worrisome that this wont just end up in pronounced levels of Tall Poppy Syndrome spreading through the population. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_poppy_syndrome Edit: Let me clarify something before it gets confused, I am not suggesting that the sort of inquiry on finances you're proposing is itself an example of Tall Poppy, I am saying that left unchecked the sort of thinking that goes into "we need use financials to vet the worthiness our prospective politicians" could have the result of overcorrecting the inquiry of integrity and objectivity in office to many of the symptoms endemic to the Tall Poppy phenomenon.

igorkraw 9y ago
Honestly, I don't think that ever becomes a problem in a sufficiently transparent and competitive democratic system. If there is true selection pressure, skill rises to the top. It also seems to me that if people are "superior" to others, they should be able to deal with what your link talks about. It therefore to feels to me a lot like the pseudo-meritrocratic rationalizations of people privileged by birth,environment or genetics (like us on this website, statistically speaking) that don't want to learn how to deal with people who won't blindly accept their status. Yes, sometimes that is annoying, irrational, inefficient. But it is also important, because no matter how smart we are we might be wrong.