6 ms·

Honestly I have more faith in hacker news users than congress.

solardev 3y ago
I wish more of us would run for Congress. I'd much rather have a government of technocrats of various stripes than ex lawyers and rich business types. IMO governments, like websites, should be boring but effective, focused on small day to day improvements, not all flash and empty marketing chasing cultural trends...
- smegger001 3y ago
  I don't know, while lawyers and MBA's are not who I would choose to run the country, I am not sure the I would pick people with the motto "run fast and break things" in charge either.
  - jonasdegendt 3y ago
    But what if we implemented agile and scrum? :^) Imagine the retros!
    - smegger001 3y ago
      >But what if we implemented agile and scrum? thats what i am afraid of.
  - int_19h 3y ago
    It would be an improvement over "just break things", no?
  - Biganon 3y ago
    That's Facebook / Meta. They do not represent us
  - plagiarist 3y ago
    It's already broken. We could at least have fast internet and net neutrality.
- ls612 3y ago
  You’re always gonna have a ton of lawyers in congress and state legislatures because if you were interested in law enough to become a lawyer you are disproportionately likely to want to write laws.
- samgtx 3y ago
  This is like saying more lawyers should be writing software. Lawyers have extensive education and experience in the law and so work with..the law.
  - bigstrat2003 3y ago
    I don't discount the value of having expertise in law among those who write our laws. That said, I think that lawyers have their own significant blind spots as well. A lawyer is an expert on the law, but also will often be out of touch with the actual lives and needs of the people. Ideally, Congress should have lawyers - but also plenty of non lawyers (from diverse backgrounds), who can bring their own experiences and perspectives that lawyers lack.
  - solardev 3y ago
    Well, that's how you get "laws by lawyers, for lawyers", like "software by engineers, for engineers". Maybe Congress needs the equivalent of UX and product types who actually care about what the people want... and can explain how it works to us in fancy how-to videos.
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      > Maybe Congress needs the equivalent of UX and product types who actually care about what the people want... Members of Congress have plenty of support devoted to both what people say they want and what they actually positively respond to. That’s...the entire political side of the operation.
- jdd33 3y ago
  Look into the Technocracy movement and why it failed.
- christianqchung 3y ago
  If you like this idea, read the Fifth Risk by Michael Lewis (he also wrote the Big Short which you may have seen). The book essentially argues that this is already the case in many (crucially not all) government departments. I like to TL;DR the book to other people as "the deep state is good, actually". Of course, the government itself is absolutely not helmed by technocratic politicians.
  - CRConrad 3y ago
    Quentin? Your second given name, I mean. Mine is Romanus. (Just idly curious, since we share the first.)
- OJFord 3y ago
  I don't know about the US, but the simple answer in the UK IMO is that politics doesn't pay enough. So you get egos, old money, and people with concurrent business interests. But try convincing a democracy that politicians should be paid more.
  - LightBug1 3y ago
    Doesn't pay enough? I believe the basic pay is £86k. They're not brain surgeons or rocket scientists, so even that is not that bad. But I believe the average gravy train bumps this up 3X with extras. It's a literal gravy train of subsidies and expenses and allowances! Sure the basic pay is, well, it's arguably not that bad ... but the gravy on top is tremendous. Not to mention the network contacts which plug their gravy train into the more lucrative gravy superhighway later.
    - nindalf 3y ago
      > They're not brain surgeons or rocket scientists Yeah, voters don't want to pay MPs more. Yet when voters are asked, they want highly intelligent, motivated people. They want them to have technical expertise, which means time spent in higher education. Then they want them to work a full time job in Parliament during the week, but also be open to constituency concerns on the weekend. And once all of this is pointed out, voters concede that maybe MPs deserve to be paid on par with professionals like doctors. (It's a different matter that UK doctors are underpaid). > But I believe the average gravy train bumps this up 3X with extras. Citation needed. They're on a shorter leash now with expenses. Don't go citing one or two bad apples either, show us what the median MP claims as expenses. According to you, it should be around £170k a year. In general, politicians and their aides in the UK are underpaid. Most capable people find they're better off working in Canary Wharf or elsewhere in London. An example is the head of economic policy for the Labour Party earning £50k while writing policy for a £2 trn economy. (https://www.economist.com/britain/2023/01/19/british-politics-needs-more-money https://www.economist.com/britain/2023/01/19/british-politic...)
      - LightBug1 3y ago

I wish more of us would run for Congress. I'd much rather have a government of technocrats of various stripes than ex lawyers and rich business types. IMO governments, like websites, should be boring but effective, focused on small day to day improvements, not all flash and empty marketing chasing cultural trends...

smegger001 3y ago
I don't know, while lawyers and MBA's are not who I would choose to run the country, I am not sure the I would pick people with the motto "run fast and break things" in charge either.
- jonasdegendt 3y ago
  But what if we implemented agile and scrum? :^) Imagine the retros!
  - smegger001 3y ago
    >But what if we implemented agile and scrum? thats what i am afraid of.
- int_19h 3y ago
  It would be an improvement over "just break things", no?
- Biganon 3y ago
  That's Facebook / Meta. They do not represent us
- plagiarist 3y ago
  It's already broken. We could at least have fast internet and net neutrality.
ls612 3y ago
You’re always gonna have a ton of lawyers in congress and state legislatures because if you were interested in law enough to become a lawyer you are disproportionately likely to want to write laws.
samgtx 3y ago
This is like saying more lawyers should be writing software. Lawyers have extensive education and experience in the law and so work with..the law.
- bigstrat2003 3y ago
  I don't discount the value of having expertise in law among those who write our laws. That said, I think that lawyers have their own significant blind spots as well. A lawyer is an expert on the law, but also will often be out of touch with the actual lives and needs of the people. Ideally, Congress should have lawyers - but also plenty of non lawyers (from diverse backgrounds), who can bring their own experiences and perspectives that lawyers lack.
- solardev 3y ago
  Well, that's how you get "laws by lawyers, for lawyers", like "software by engineers, for engineers". Maybe Congress needs the equivalent of UX and product types who actually care about what the people want... and can explain how it works to us in fancy how-to videos.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > Maybe Congress needs the equivalent of UX and product types who actually care about what the people want... Members of Congress have plenty of support devoted to both what people say they want and what they actually positively respond to. That’s...the entire political side of the operation.
jdd33 3y ago
Look into the Technocracy movement and why it failed.
christianqchung 3y ago
If you like this idea, read the Fifth Risk by Michael Lewis (he also wrote the Big Short which you may have seen). The book essentially argues that this is already the case in many (crucially not all) government departments. I like to TL;DR the book to other people as "the deep state is good, actually". Of course, the government itself is absolutely not helmed by technocratic politicians.
- CRConrad 3y ago
  Quentin? Your second given name, I mean. Mine is Romanus. (Just idly curious, since we share the first.)
OJFord 3y ago
I don't know about the US, but the simple answer in the UK IMO is that politics doesn't pay enough. So you get egos, old money, and people with concurrent business interests. But try convincing a democracy that politicians should be paid more.
- LightBug1 3y ago
  Doesn't pay enough? I believe the basic pay is £86k. They're not brain surgeons or rocket scientists, so even that is not that bad. But I believe the average gravy train bumps this up 3X with extras. It's a literal gravy train of subsidies and expenses and allowances! Sure the basic pay is, well, it's arguably not that bad ... but the gravy on top is tremendous. Not to mention the network contacts which plug their gravy train into the more lucrative gravy superhighway later.
  - nindalf 3y ago
    > They're not brain surgeons or rocket scientists Yeah, voters don't want to pay MPs more. Yet when voters are asked, they want highly intelligent, motivated people. They want them to have technical expertise, which means time spent in higher education. Then they want them to work a full time job in Parliament during the week, but also be open to constituency concerns on the weekend. And once all of this is pointed out, voters concede that maybe MPs deserve to be paid on par with professionals like doctors. (It's a different matter that UK doctors are underpaid). > But I believe the average gravy train bumps this up 3X with extras. Citation needed. They're on a shorter leash now with expenses. Don't go citing one or two bad apples either, show us what the median MP claims as expenses. According to you, it should be around £170k a year. In general, politicians and their aides in the UK are underpaid. Most capable people find they're better off working in Canary Wharf or elsewhere in London. An example is the head of economic policy for the Labour Party earning £50k while writing policy for a £2 trn economy. (https://www.economist.com/britain/2023/01/19/british-politics-needs-more-money https://www.economist.com/britain/2023/01/19/british-politic...)
    - LightBug1 3y ago