Why Are There So Many Idiots in Politics?

[GURPS]

Look, there have always been, and will always be, dumb people in the world. But you don’t give them power the way Democrats have. You hold them off with promises and distract them with shiny objects because they’re stupid.

Democrats, however, have run out of smart people to convince anymore – the emperor has no clothes, or more accurately the President has no brain cells. People are seeing what the party has become.

The best, and perhaps only good thing to come out of COVID is parent’s paid attention to what their kids were learning in school. Not their lesson plans, which good parents always paid attention to, but the stuff in between, the parts where gender is allegedly a mystery and fluid. Where sexuality is more important than math, and a new gender is born every 20 minutes and “bird” can be a pronoun.

If you wonder how there are so many idiots out there electing Democrats all you have to do is notice that we have a publicly funded factory churning out morons through a painstaking 13-year process of indoctrination.

COVID allowed parents to see behind the curtain for the first time. Now they’re looking at everything through fresh eyes.

Joe Biden’s BS is being rejected by the public. Republicans need to smear that disgust for Biden over all Democrats, since they are of the same mind, and November will right the ship of state.

However, we will still be inundated with idiots, only this time in the minority.

Why Are There So Many Idiots in Politics?

townhall.com

 

[Kyle]

Their stupidity is only exceeded by their voters.

 

[Hijinx]

Why are there so many idiots in politics.?

Because it beats the hell out of working for a living.

Look at AOC, Would you rather be tending bar and stealing tips or driving your Tesla and living high on the hog while avoiding paying your taxes and paying for your college .

Look At Fat boy Nadler, He would starve to death if he had to work, Schiff.? Nancy Pelosi? What else could she do? Steny Hoyer? Never had a real job in his life.

 

[limblips]

Which came first the idiot or the politician?

 

[vraiblonde]

Unfortunately idiots get represented in government too. It's built in to our system.

The problem is the media - they are deliberately trying to churn out more idiots and turn the normally abled into drooling morons. They also make us believe there are more idiots than there really are. I don't know a single person who would take their child to a performance of naked twerking middle aged men, and yet the media would have you believe this is perfectly normal entertainment for children. I don't know a single person who is gender confused, yet social media insists it's a norm and not an aberration.

It's fascinating to watch from an academic POV, but terrifying at the same time.

 

[HemiHauler]

And as many idiots there are in government, there are as many idiots who love those idiots representing them.

 

[SamSpade]

Thought it was a requirement.

I used to think idiocy was a requirement for upper level management - they spend all day schmoozing and have no idea what the rest of us are doing. Then of course I met many people in upper management who must be doing all the work, because they DO get it.

 

[Grumpy]

Thought it was a requirement.

I used to think idiocy was a requirement for upper level management - they spend all day schmoozing and have no idea what the rest of us are doing. Then of course I met many people in upper management who must be doing all the work, because they DO get it.

My thoughts on the govt orgs I worked with, other than mil and science, is that 10% of the workforce does 100% of the work.

 

[OccamsRazor]

My thoughts on the govt orgs I worked with, other than mil and science, is that 10% of the workforce does 100% of the work.

After multiple conversations with the 2 government employees that I neighbor with, I would say this number is probably a tad higher. Maybe 30-40%. There ARE people who work for the government that actually care about doing a good job and getting the work done. The problem is that they are the ones who get buried in tasking. A lot of the conversations I have include the phrase "People tasked with a job get it done quickly and competently. The problem is that they are also tasked with some of the work assigned to other employees because it is easier to do that than to deal with an employee that is sub-par."

 

[SamSpade]

After multiple conversations with the 2 government employees that I neighbor with, I would say this number is probably a tad higher. Maybe 30-40%. There ARE people who work for the government that actually care about doing a good job and getting the work done. The problem is that they are the ones who get buried in tasking. A lot of the conversations I have include the phrase "People tasked with a job get it done quickly and competently. The problem is that they are also tasked with some of the work assigned to other employees because it is easier to do that than to deal with an employee that is sub-par."

33 years as a civilian gov employee - and that is spot on. I work with some of the best people you will ever see - they run several projects, know every program, every jot and tittle, every spec and all of the history - of each. How they jumble all that in their head is beyond me.

And yeah - there are people who don't know crap, and we give them pointless work to do, because giving them mission critical stuff can cause nightmares. A LOT of the time, these are people who have been with government a long time, and their skills have become obsolete, but possibly through no fault of their own - or perhaps because of it - they have very little to bring to the technical table. I've seen this a LOT, where new technology gets brought in, and they're five to ten years to retirement - and we just give them actual work, but work no one else wants to do.

It does mean, as you say - we have some people in government who are freaking awesome. I work with a lady who's positively brilliant and amazingly cheerful - why does she stay? Because she gets to work from her new home - in ATLANTA - and still do her job.

THAT is why great people stay in government - and why awful people stay in government - you can't beat the perks, even if the pay sucks.

 

[OccamsRazor]

It does mean, as you say - we have some people in government who are freaking awesome. I work with a lady who's positively brilliant and amazingly cheerful - why does she stay? Because she gets to work from her new home - in ATLANTA - and still do her job.

This brings up a good subject. The 2 people that referenced are in different situations and I never speak to them together however, they are aware of each other's situations. One has been a full-time "on site" employee throughout the entire pandemic. The other has been working from home for about 2.5 years. Both have small children. The on-site employee is a single parent. The other is married but spouse works full-time in another profession.
When speaking with the single parent, a great pain that they have is that they have shilled out THOUSANDS over the pandemic for child care, gas to and from job site, etc. Meanwhile, the other has had their kids at home the entire time. Both earn about the same amount.
If you think about it, one of them basically got a $10-12K pay raise each year over the other due to savings in just child care. Both have equitable salaries. Both have equitable job responsibilities. Simply put, one got a raise. The other got the shaft!
Apparently, this issue has been raised many times however, it has never been addressed by their supervisors or their higher level bosses.

 

[SamSpade]

This brings up a good subject. The 2 people that referenced are in different situations and I never speak to them together however, they are aware of each other's situations. One has been a full-time "on site" employee throughout the entire pandemic. The other has been working from home for about 2.5 years. Both have small children. The on-site employee is a single parent. The other is married but spouse works full-time in another profession.
When speaking with the single parent, a great pain that they have is that they have shilled out THOUSANDS over the pandemic for child care, gas to and from job site, etc. Meanwhile, the other has had their kids at home the entire time. Both earn about the same amount.
If you think about it, one of them basically got a $10-12K pay raise each year over the other due to savings in just child care. Both have equitable salaries. Both have equitable job responsibilities. Simply put, one got a raise. The other got the shaft!
Apparently, this issue has been raised many times however, it has never been addressed by their supervisors or their higher level bosses.

(Shrug) Don't know. When my children were SMALL - not too long ago - I had to go up to DC and wife worked full time. We managed. Until we were able to adjust our work schedules, kids were in day care full time untl they were in school. Eventually we were able to adjust our schedules so once they were school age, someone was always home when they left or got home.

Until then, I used the DCFSA - Dependent Care FSA - deducted from my salary for the largest amount allowed, and paid the difference (which was small). At the time, I had to FAX the numbers and stuff every week and get the day care manager signature (which I learned eventually - get it once on a blank sheet, and make MANY COPIES).

We managed. I can't imagine how hard it is to be a single parent with small children, and it happened to both my sisters at one time. I can remember my older sister crushed because she had very little money at all and too much month left. She did NOT have government job.

To be honest about the working from home thing - and Musk - and all of the other stuff - it works great for us. Using Teams, we talk more than if we were at work in the building and our productivity is actually BETTER - ever since. I don't see ANY advantage to sending us back, for us OR the agency.

 

[OccamsRazor]

To be honest about the working from home thing - and Musk - and all of the other stuff - it works great for us. Using Teams, we talk more than if we were at work in the building and our productivity is actually BETTER - ever since. I don't see ANY advantage to sending us back, for us OR the agency.

How about this? Imagine you were in the shoes of the single parent I am neighbors with. What would be your opinion when you discovered that there are many others of equal pay, equal work, and equal work requirements but... they get to keep that child care money in their pocket working from home while you had to drive in every day and pay out for child care? I personally do not know too many government employees so it would be helpful to get another perspective for our next conversation.

 

[SamSpade]

How about this? Imagine you were in the shoes of the single parent I am neighbors with. What would be your opinion when you discovered that there are many others of equal pay, equal work, and equal work requirements but... they get to keep that child care money in their pocket working from home while you had to drive in every day and pay out for child care? I personally do not know too many government employees so it would be helpful to get another perspective for our next conversation.

I don't have an answer - I've seen all sorts of unfairness, absolutely everywhere. I've been in private industry where people were fired because someone in management just didn't like the kid. My wife had a job where, due to an excused - and approved - absence of a month, came back and found her job had been - dropped. I've seen good people who can't get a break. I've worked in divisions where the top managment held up grade promotions - just - because (since they have to be approved) - and the only reasonable explanation is sheer malice.

I don't have an answer. Just as I don't know why we DO have people who seriously should be fired. Because of the way work is done in the government, others who SHOULD GET RAISES - but there's nothing to give them. We have year end bonsues based on reviews - and I have seen whole divisions determine just how many people should be allowed to have this or that level of performance review because there's not enough money to give them. It's like that professor in college who told the class the first day he was only giving out ONE "A" that semester, it didn't matter if you got every test score right.

I don't know why they were telling government employees last year they had to get the COVID vaccine - even if they worked from home - or face dismissal. I know of people who were given pay grade increases - but did not have to supervise staff - because someone above them wanted to keep them around.

I've generally accepted that some things in life are just unfair. (I just deleted a very wordy piece describing my own experience where I was terminated unfairly - where my wife was also, because of jealousies in the workplace). We HAD to have people work from home, because more and more agencies were moving into our already crowded building and it simply required desk sharing - which can't be done without someone working from home.

The only upside I know of is, eventually your kid doesn't need daycare.

 

[OccamsRazor]

I don't have an answer - I've seen all sorts of unfairness, absolutely everywhere. I've been in private industry where people were fired because someone in management just didn't like the kid. My wife had a job where, due to an excused - and approved - absence of a month, came back and found her job had been - dropped. I've seen good people who can't get a break. I've worked in divisions where the top managment held up grade promotions - just - because (since they have to be approved) - and the only reasonable explanation is sheer malice.

I don't have an answer. Just as I don't know why we DO have people who seriously should be fired. Because of the way work is done in the government, others who SHOULD GET RAISES - but there's nothing to give them. We have year end bonsues based on reviews - and I have seen whole divisions determine just how many people should be allowed to have this or that level of performance review because there's not enough money to give them. It's like that professor in college who told the class the first day he was only giving out ONE "A" that semester, it didn't matter if you got every test score right.

I don't know why they were telling government employees last year they had to get the COVID vaccine - even if they worked from home - or face dismissal. I know of people who were given pay grade increases - but did not have to supervise staff - because someone above them wanted to keep them around.

I've generally accepted that some things in life are just unfair. (I just deleted a very wordy piece describing my own experience where I was terminated unfairly - where my wife was also, because of jealousies in the workplace). We HAD to have people work from home, because more and more agencies were moving into our already crowded building and it simply required desk sharing - which can't be done without someone working from home.

The only upside I know of is, eventually your kid doesn't need daycare.

All of this only leads to one truth. It will cause the employee to perform at just a high enough level to maintain employment. Then, they become part of the percentage that depends on the smaller group to get the job done. And honestly, I can't blame them

 

[SamSpade]

All of this only leads to one truth. It will cause the employee to perform at just a high enough level to maintain employment. Then, they become part of the percentage that depends on the smaller group to get the job done. And honestly, I can't blame them

You've hit on one inescapable truth when you have any mechanism in place that protects continued employment and manages advancement and raises in an across the board effort to try to be "fair" to everyone. It doesn't matter if the mechanism is a union, or tenure, or government. EVENTUALLY it creates lethargy, because working harder gains nothing, and working less doesn't jeopardize your job.

Some of it depends on the person - I recall in my early days with the government, I worked with a very dynamic group of go-getters who were always learning the latest trick with some obscure software, some clever use of something, using their spare time to learn system stuff that no one else knew. The division used their tools long after they'd left for greener pastures.

Those who are still around - they're just looking for the exit for retirement. They're done. They won't advance anymore, they won't win any awards and no promotions are really available any more. Not really. They just want to punch their ticket and go. And it's a shame, but I do say that one of the advantages of government is, it's not SUPPOSED to get bigger - agencies usually don't GROW in size. And one of the disadvantages is - it doesn't get bigger - which means it's hard to reward good work with promotions, because the "company" can't grow.

 

[OccamsRazor]

Those who are still around - they're just looking for the exit for retirement. They're done. They won't advance anymore, they won't win any awards and no promotions are really available any more. Not really. They just want to punch their ticket and go. And it's a shame, but I do say that one of the advantages of government is, it's not SUPPOSED to get bigger - agencies usually don't GROW in size. And one of the disadvantages is - it doesn't get bigger - which means it's hard to reward good work with promotions, because the "company" can't grow.

Do they eliminate positions when people retire? Why can't they promote from within to those now vacant positions? This would free up space(s) for people to advance.
No meritorious raises? Don't government workers have pay groups? Why can't they give personnel who deserve it an advancement to a higher pay group?

 

[SamSpade]

Do they eliminate positions when people retire? Why can't they promote from within to those now vacant positions? This would free up space(s) for people to advance.
No meritorious raises? Don't government workers have pay groups? Why can't they give personnel who deserve it an advancement to a higher pay group?

No, they don't eliminate positions when people reture - but if you have a division of say 200+ people, one division chief, 4 assistant division chiefs and maybe a dozen branch chiefs - you might have room to advance. You might also grow old waiting if that's your thing.

I'm comparing it to - once I worked delivering pizzas. THERE was a job where hustling paid off. You got more deliveries and the boss wanted you to do them, because you were good. Our store wanted to open a new one, and they offered the new store - to me. I turned them down. I was flattered, but the fact was, I didn't want a career in pizza. This either doesn't or rarely happens in government. They don't open a new research section and ask you to lead (SOMETIMES - they do. But it's rare). But private industry does it all the time.

Suffice it to say, upward mobility doesn't happen a LOT. In my current job, when my boss retires, I'm far and away the most eligible person. I've done EVERYTHING in the section and half the code was written by me. I don't want his job. It pays better, but his job is all political. Paperwork. Fights and arguments and stress. Paperwork to document paperwork. And it gets worse every year.

Raises based on merit CAN happen - but in 30+ years I've never seen anyone get one. At least not in any agency I've been connected with. I know some agencies have something I've heard called "pay banding". (I don't know what it is, but it sounds like merit pay). Like I said, I've heard of pay grade increases done on the spot - for outstanding work. They take time, and they need piles of approvals. So they usually don't happen. I do think I have one coming down the pike - at least, I've been promised one.

But no, you get a step increase and depending on the job you're in, you MAY get a pay grade promotion - but it stops at management level. To get another pay increase, you must interview and compete for the position, usually because someone leaves - there are NO on the spot promotions. No one says, outstanding performance review, we promote you. They say attaboy - umm - (shrug).

It's not - BLEAK. I get paid very well. I am content. But busting my ass gets me zero.

 

[HemiHauler]

One take away from this: working for the government sounds positively AWFUL. No wonder the ones I know personally are soulless and humorless shells of their former selves.

 

[OccamsRazor]

No, they don't eliminate positions when people reture - but if you have a division of say 200+ people, one division chief, 4 assistant division chiefs and maybe a dozen branch chiefs - you might have room to advance. You might also grow old waiting if that's your thing.

I'm comparing it to - once I worked delivering pizzas. THERE was a job where hustling paid off. You got more deliveries and the boss wanted you to do them, because you were good. Our store wanted to open a new one, and they offered the new store - to me. I turned them down. I was flattered, but the fact was, I didn't want a career in pizza. This either doesn't or rarely happens in government. They don't open a new research section and ask you to lead (SOMETIMES - they do. But it's rare). But private industry does it all the time.

Suffice it to say, upward mobility doesn't happen a LOT. In my current job, when my boss retires, I'm far and away the most eligible person. I've done EVERYTHING in the section and half the code was written by me. I don't want his job. It pays better, but his job is all political. Paperwork. Fights and arguments and stress. Paperwork to document paperwork. And it gets worse every year.

Raises based on merit CAN happen - but in 30+ years I've never seen anyone get one. At least not in any agency I've been connected with. I know some agencies have something I've heard called "pay banding". (I don't know what it is, but it sounds like merit pay). Like I said, I've heard of pay grade increases done on the spot - for outstanding work. They take time, and they need piles of approvals. So they usually don't happen. I do think I have one coming down the pike - at least, I've been promised one.

But no, you get a step increase and depending on the job you're in, you MAY get a pay grade promotion - but it stops at management level. To get another pay increase, you must interview and compete for the position, usually because someone leaves - there are NO on the spot promotions. No one says, outstanding performance review, we promote you. They say attaboy - umm - (shrug).

It's not - BLEAK. I get paid very well. I am content. But busting my ass gets me zero.

Once again reinforcing the FACT that people in these positions will only work hard enough to keep their jobs. Nothing more, nothing less. Unfortunate.