4 ms·

Well, if you care about your city or country, you have to care about many things that are not immediately in front of you. And the Internet is one of the main p

Well, if you care about your city or country, you have to care about many things that are not immediately in front of you. And the Internet is one of the main places where such things can be learned about.

randomdata 3y ago
Most cities and counties see the people of those cities/countries hire representatives to discover and report on the things that should be cared about that are not immediately in front of the average person going about their day. If you alone feel you also need to duplicate their efforts, you may just have control issues, but if the need is genuine and shared by many then you need to rally the people to get the problem solved. Paying an employee to do nothing while you pick up the slack is a plain waste of resources.
- simiones 3y ago
  You still have to care whether your representatives are actually doing the job you voted them in for and are paying your taxes for. You can't just say "I voted for someone who promised to build shelters for homeless people, so homeless people now have shelter". Ideally, the press would actually report on what is happening, but the incentives just aren't there for thorough and accurate reporting. You either get highly partisan press that lies or just omits important parts of what is happening because the ones paying the bills want them to, or you get an anemic press that can't do more than trawl FB or, worse, official declarations for info.
  - randomdata 3y ago
    When you sit down and go over the reports and give direction with your employee each week, it should stand out pretty clearly if they are not doing their job. No different than any other organization where you hire employees. Cities and countries are not somehow magically different. Of course, you don't just vote for the employee you like and never speak to them again. That would be just plain silly. Being the boss doesn't mean you can sit idle on a sandy beach for the rest of your life. Although that is not nearly as silly as hiring an employee and then doing their job for them. There is no point in hiring anyone if you want to do the job yourself. You go through the employee election process because you recognize that it is more efficient for one person to do the work on your, and your neighbour's, behalf. You are choosing to hand off the work to someone else precisely so you do not have to do it.
    - simiones 3y ago
      So how do you tell if your representatives are doing their job as promised, without reading (online, in print, on TV/Radio) about news from the local area? You could look at their reports, but how do you know if their reports are true?
      - randomdata 3y ago
        1. You can read the local news (online, in print, on TV/Radio), but how do you know it is providing true and relevant information? 2. If you cannot establish enough trust with the employee you are choosing to hire, why are you selecting anyone? If you are going to do the work yourself, why not do the work yourself? 3. As before, there is nothing special about cities and countries when as compared to any other organization. If you have a widget factory, how do you ensure that your hired engineers are designing widgets that meet your expectations and requirements? Do you simply push them aside and design the widgets yourself in case what they designed wasn't up to snuff?
        tsimionescu 3y ago
        1. I don't 100%, but video evidence and multiple sources helps a lot. 2. Managers typically have a handful of direct reports that they can check and trust. Also, managers can fire their employees on the spot, reduce their pay etc. You have nowhere near that level of control over your representatives, and you have many more representatives than any normal manager has direct reports. 3. While I trust my direct reports and employees, I very much occasionally verify that their work is being done. I don't need to design a widget myself: I can find out if the widget works or not by checking how well it holds up, what the QA department finds and so on.
        randomdata 3y ago
        > I don't 100%, but video evidence and multiple sources helps a lot. Then have your worker collect video evidence and information from multiple sources to have on hand when you need greater assurances. You're the boss. They're simply there to relieve you from having to do the job yourself. It is reasonable to expect them to do the job like you would. > you have many more representatives than any normal manager has direct reports. Government systems can differ, but typically you hire one employee for any one government that you oversee. It is likely that you are in charge of a few governments (e.g. federal, state, municipal), but unlikely more than a small handful. It would be quite unusual for a manager to have fewer direct reports in an organization of any meaningful size. > You have nowhere near that level of control over your representatives You most certainly do as long as you have the rest of the board on your side. Finding consensus with the board may be a challenge, but that's true of any organization. The sitting board at the widget factory isn't bowing to your every wish either. > While I trust my direct reports and employees, I very much occasionally verify that their work is being done. So why not do the same with the employee you hire to watch over political matters?
int_19h 3y ago
Lately it feels more like things that aren't "immediately in front of you" are getting dragged into conversations where they don't really make sense. This year, my town had a referendum on whether to raise taxes to fund a public pool to replace a 70-year-old one that is falling apart. The public conversation was only focused on actual pros and cons of that particular project rather briefly, quickly devolving first into a general fight over development vs lack thereof, and from there to national economic policy, crime etc. And I have a distinct feeling that most people who actually voted ended up being swayed (one way or the other) by those arguments - the partisan alignment of support & opposition at the end was very blatant.

randomdata 3y ago

Most cities and counties see the people of those cities/countries hire representatives to discover and report on the things that should be cared about that are not immediately in front of the average person going about their day. If you alone feel you also need to duplicate their efforts, you may just have control issues, but if the need is genuine and shared by many then you need to rally the people to get the problem solved. Paying an employee to do nothing while you pick up the slack is a plain waste of resources.

simiones 3y ago
You still have to care whether your representatives are actually doing the job you voted them in for and are paying your taxes for. You can't just say "I voted for someone who promised to build shelters for homeless people, so homeless people now have shelter". Ideally, the press would actually report on what is happening, but the incentives just aren't there for thorough and accurate reporting. You either get highly partisan press that lies or just omits important parts of what is happening because the ones paying the bills want them to, or you get an anemic press that can't do more than trawl FB or, worse, official declarations for info.
- randomdata 3y ago
  When you sit down and go over the reports and give direction with your employee each week, it should stand out pretty clearly if they are not doing their job. No different than any other organization where you hire employees. Cities and countries are not somehow magically different. Of course, you don't just vote for the employee you like and never speak to them again. That would be just plain silly. Being the boss doesn't mean you can sit idle on a sandy beach for the rest of your life. Although that is not nearly as silly as hiring an employee and then doing their job for them. There is no point in hiring anyone if you want to do the job yourself. You go through the employee election process because you recognize that it is more efficient for one person to do the work on your, and your neighbour's, behalf. You are choosing to hand off the work to someone else precisely so you do not have to do it.
  - simiones 3y ago
    So how do you tell if your representatives are doing their job as promised, without reading (online, in print, on TV/Radio) about news from the local area? You could look at their reports, but how do you know if their reports are true?
    - randomdata 3y ago
      1. You can read the local news (online, in print, on TV/Radio), but how do you know it is providing true and relevant information? 2. If you cannot establish enough trust with the employee you are choosing to hire, why are you selecting anyone? If you are going to do the work yourself, why not do the work yourself? 3. As before, there is nothing special about cities and countries when as compared to any other organization. If you have a widget factory, how do you ensure that your hired engineers are designing widgets that meet your expectations and requirements? Do you simply push them aside and design the widgets yourself in case what they designed wasn't up to snuff?
      - tsimionescu 3y ago
        1. I don't 100%, but video evidence and multiple sources helps a lot. 2. Managers typically have a handful of direct reports that they can check and trust. Also, managers can fire their employees on the spot, reduce their pay etc. You have nowhere near that level of control over your representatives, and you have many more representatives than any normal manager has direct reports. 3. While I trust my direct reports and employees, I very much occasionally verify that their work is being done. I don't need to design a widget myself: I can find out if the widget works or not by checking how well it holds up, what the QA department finds and so on.
        randomdata 3y ago
        > I don't 100%, but video evidence and multiple sources helps a lot. Then have your worker collect video evidence and information from multiple sources to have on hand when you need greater assurances. You're the boss. They're simply there to relieve you from having to do the job yourself. It is reasonable to expect them to do the job like you would. > you have many more representatives than any normal manager has direct reports. Government systems can differ, but typically you hire one employee for any one government that you oversee. It is likely that you are in charge of a few governments (e.g. federal, state, municipal), but unlikely more than a small handful. It would be quite unusual for a manager to have fewer direct reports in an organization of any meaningful size. > You have nowhere near that level of control over your representatives You most certainly do as long as you have the rest of the board on your side. Finding consensus with the board may be a challenge, but that's true of any organization. The sitting board at the widget factory isn't bowing to your every wish either. > While I trust my direct reports and employees, I very much occasionally verify that their work is being done. So why not do the same with the employee you hire to watch over political matters?

int_19h 3y ago

Lately it feels more like things that aren't "immediately in front of you" are getting dragged into conversations where they don't really make sense. This year, my town had a referendum on whether to raise taxes to fund a public pool to replace a 70-year-old one that is falling apart. The public conversation was only focused on actual pros and cons of that particular project rather briefly, quickly devolving first into a general fight over development vs lack thereof, and from there to national economic policy, crime etc. And I have a distinct feeling that most people who actually voted ended up being swayed (one way or the other) by those arguments - the partisan alignment of support & opposition at the end was very blatant.