World, Writing, Wealth discussion

18 views
The Lounge: Chat. Relax. Unwind. > Would you be a good president/PM/dictator/party chairman?

Comments Showing 1-34 of 34 (34 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Nik (last edited Jan 03, 2018 02:09AM) (new)

Nik Krasno | 14913 comments We often don't spare Trump, Putin and others from criticism, maybe being a little shy on Jinping, and that only because we don't have enough knowledgeable dudes to share his shortcomings...
However, if you'd be handed down the same mission, how would you do?
Would you violently disperse opposition/ distribute state coffers' treasures among compatriots/announce war/make peace/engage in something less dramatic?
As you probably imagine, it's not a profoundly serious thread..


message 2: by Michel (new)

Michel Poulin I probably wouldn't fare too well as a national leader, for one simple reason: I am too much of a 'Mister Nice Guy'. Political opponents would probably eat me raw in political debates. Remember the quote from the American politician in 'The Hunt for Red October': 'I am a politician, which means that when I am not kissing babies, I am stealing their lolipops'.


message 3: by Amalie (new)

Amalie Dawall (amaliedawall) I have been told plenty of times, that I'm a great leader. People seem to find it natural to follow me, and I think the key to that is that I'm confident in my choices, yet open to discussion, and also very caring of others - I listen and take into account what people tell me. Though when it comes to politics, my knowledge is limited, so being president would be quite the challenge and I don't think I'd be fit for a position like that. Though I don't find my self fit to do what Trump or Putin or other a like do, I don't see why I can't criticise what they do. I know I wouldn't be fit, and therefore I'd never take on a position like that. If I don't find them fit, I see no reason to support them, rather I think I could do better or not is not the point. It's about rather or not they could do better.


Master Melvin M.  Lusterio (aionheaven) | 9 comments As a good president, I rule with justice & righteousness for all eternity! Alleluia! Amen!😇👍👑


message 5: by Rita (last edited Jan 03, 2018 01:51PM) (new)

Rita Chapman | 152 comments I'd make an excellent benevolent dictator! Ask my husband. I'm beginning to think it's just what Australia needs.


message 6: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 14913 comments I see we have an excellent panel of prospective rulers here, fit for any socioeconomic model! Gotta advise the puppet-masters keeping a tight grip over real levers of power in our world to take a closer look at our candidates


message 7: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 10697 comments In the second book of my "First Contact" trilogy Fiona Bolton came and went as a leader, and when asked what her problem was, I quoted my own problems with leadership - not enough followers. My problem is, I see solutions to problems that nobody else seems to see, but if they do they don't want to see them. This is what leads to such scintillating book sales, and people disagreeing with so much of what I post on these discussions. So I think that I would fail spectacularly as a national leader, not that I am likely to be given a chance. The only good thing about it would be that while failing, at least I would not post irritating tweets.


message 8: by Segilola (new)

Segilola Salami (segilolasalami) | 405 comments Rita wrote: "I'd make an excellent benevolent dictator! Ask my husband. I'm beginning to think it's just what Australia needs."

Rita is a woman after my heart :D I would make an excellent benevolent dictator too


message 9: by Jen Pattison (new)

Jen Pattison | 409 comments Good heavens, no. I was once a junior manager in the civil service and I was rubbish at it, I hated managing staff (mind you, civil servants can be a stroppy, surly lot). I'm quite comfortable with the realisation that I'm a follower, not a leader. You can then point away and say the buck stops there!


message 10: by Scout (new)

Scout (goodreadscomscout) | 5791 comments Heck, no. Too much stress, and I haven't trusted my judgment since I married the wrong guy 30 years ago.


message 11: by Holly (new)

Holly (goldikova) I'm not world leader material. I am highly qualified to be a duchess, though........


message 12: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 14913 comments So far 1 prospective president, 2 dictators and a duchess. Not bad at all! Prime minister, anyone? Party chairman?


message 13: by Jen Pattison (new)

Jen Pattison | 409 comments Nik wrote: "So far 1 prospective president, 2 dictators and a duchess. Not bad at all! Prime minister, anyone? Party chairman?"

Tea lady. If they're not nice to me I can slip something in their tea.


message 14: by Philip (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 0 comments I'd be an ideal dictator - kill everyone - but then I'll have no one to dictate to. I can resign happy!


message 15: by Scout (new)

Scout (goodreadscomscout) | 5791 comments Have you thought this through, Philip? That means no sex for you :-)


message 16: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 10697 comments He would also have to grow his own food, make his own clothes, operate on himself if necessary. real fun.


message 17: by Scout (new)

Scout (goodreadscomscout) | 5791 comments Like Tom Hanks in Cast Away. Dictator of his own private island.


message 18: by Philip (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 0 comments Scout wrote: "Have you thought this through, Philip? That means no sex for you :-)"

Clearly I have not.

So I need to keep alive a bevy of suitable mates. People to grow food and medical support. Then I'll need some guards to protect me and all the support staff to keep the support staff in place.

Nope my plan won't work They'll always be someone trying to takeover.

If Dictator is out, are there any other jobs going?


message 19: by Philip (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 0 comments Scout wrote: "Like Tom Hanks in Cast Away. Dictator of his own private island."

Dictating to a football.

So I need to revise - I need my own private island but there is still the sex issue. I like tropical islands but...


message 20: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 10697 comments Steve Bannon is probably asking that right now!


message 21: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 14913 comments Philip wrote: "If Dictator is out, are there any other jobs going? ..."

We still have a vacancy for Prime Minister here


message 22: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 14913 comments Sparing a small harem solves some of the issues raised


message 23: by Philip (new)

Philip (phenweb) | 0 comments We have a vacant Prime Minister here but technically in the role despite a comprehensive capability to screw it up. Still the opposition are no better - they seem to think its 1973 and we're on the verge of a socialist revolution..

Guess I'll have to stick to random unread author and commentard.


message 24: by Scout (new)

Scout (goodreadscomscout) | 5791 comments What's so bad about a socialist revolution?


message 25: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 10697 comments Ha ha. We have a secretive Lenin amongst us!


message 26: by Scout (new)

Scout (goodreadscomscout) | 5791 comments :-) Just giving proponents a chance to speak up.


message 27: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 14913 comments 'Socialist' probably isn't bad for most of the population, 'revolution' may be a bit radical -:)


message 28: by Michel (new)

Michel Poulin Hey, we Canadians are socialists in good standing! The Americans keep calling us up 'socialists' and even (gasp) 'communists'!


message 29: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 10697 comments Well, Michell, you do have some red on that flag!


message 30: by Michel (last edited Jan 14, 2018 12:43PM) (new)

Michel Poulin Yes, we do! Canada was also just found to be the advanced country in the World where the poorest 20% of the citizens improved the most their lives (and revenues), compared to what happened to the 20% richest Canadians. Our poors standard of living went up by 24%, while our richest citizens went up by only 16% (don't worry for them: they are not exactly starving, just had to cut a bit on the caviar). We beat France, Japan, Portugal and another European country in that matter. In contrast, the U.S.A. did about the reverse of Canada: 17% of their poorest citizens saw improvement in their situation, while 26% of their richest people got fatter (they call that 'trickle down economy', hum...).


message 31: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 10697 comments I think trickle down refers to what goes down the plug hole.


message 32: by Scout (new)

Scout (goodreadscomscout) | 5791 comments How did you get the richest Canadians to go along with this? And how did this impact your economy?


message 33: by Michel (last edited Jan 19, 2018 06:25AM) (new)

Michel Poulin Well, it is partly because of the Canadian tax system, which goes fairly easy on the Canadians with low revenues and takes proportionally more from the richest Canadians. That tends to balance a bit the divide between rich and poor. Also, a lot of the tax revenues are used to help the citizens in general (public health care, education, family benefits, etc.) and the poorer citizens (children benefits for big families, welfare benefits, etc.). The Canadian government is, proportionally to the USA, able to spend more on social programs because we don't have a garguantuan defense budget in which we sink hundreds of billions of dollars.

Why do rich Canadians go along with that? First, they don't control the tax system, they can only try to cheat it (which they do when they can). The government's annual budgets (and the changes to the tax rates) are voted on by the Parliament, with all members from all parties (Liberal, Conservative, New Democrat Party, Green Party, Bloc Québecois, plus a few minor parties) voting on the budget, which is in essence a no-confidence vote. If the budget goes down in Parliament, so does the government. This ensures that the voices of all the citizens are heard on the subject, and not only those of the rich and influential. I personally believe that the two party system in the USA is the cause of much of the governance problem in the country.

Finally, there is what I would call a purely subjective reason: us Canadians have a reputation for being nice people. Oh, we do have our share of bad people, but I sincerely believe that the Canadian society is overal a caring society.


message 34: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 10697 comments As Michel notes, the US could easily afford far better social programs if it taxed the richer Americans more, and if its military spending was not so huge. I gather it spends more than the next twenty big military spenders combined, and most of those are allies. It seems that there is something in the American psyche that says being poor is their own fault, and if they only got off their backsides all would be well. If you look at employers, leaving aside the US government (the US military is the biggest employer in the world!) the two biggest employers are, I believe, Walmart and MacDonalds. I would like to see most of those rich guys forced to start their lives working on the minimum wages offered by them. It might give them a better perspective on how hard it is to get ahead these days.


back to top