Here we go again... Nepotism is out of control.

Terry Cox81 · 2004-01-13T14:44:20+00:00

Elections are over. I'm satisfied. It’s all right-wing from top to bottom. Voted Libertarian, but hey, at least the Democrats are out. Ran into a buddy of mine…

mistyscout6 Newcomer

6 messages
joined Oct 2005

#41 · Jan 15, 2004

Can someone please just lay it out for me
I honestly think the government agencies wouldn't even be able to function—let alone actually get things done—if they just cut 10% of the staff instead of constantly shuffling people from one department to another. I mean, if everyone working there is truly a top-tier expert or some kind of indispensable genius, then they shouldn't have any trouble finding a decent job in the private sector, right?

Terry Cox81 NewcomerOP

7 messages
joined Dec 2004

#42 · Jan 15, 2004

Mario said:You're saying "Here we go again..."

Are you crazy or just waking up from a coma? When did it ever actually stop? 😁 😂

Maybe I'm wrong, but it feels like there's been less of it over the last three years. Maybe I just hang out with too many Republicans.😉

Kenneth Reed2 Newcomer

3 messages
joined Feb 2004

#43 · Jan 15, 2004

Bradley Fisher20 said:Honestly, just swapping out the faces in charge isn't enough. We need an entirely different breed of political leaders altogether. I’m talking about people who would walk away from any outside interests or perks before they even step foot in office—folks who are strictly focused on the common good.

Yeah, right... does that kind of person even exist on this planet??

Drew White7 Newcomer

3 messages
joined Feb 2004

#44 · Jan 15, 2004

Kenneth Reed2 said:haha... you think we actually have stuff like that here on Earth??

Nah, not on this rock, but apparently it's happening over on Mars. Word is coming in from "Spirit".

Bradley Fisher20 Active Member

142 messages
joined May 2005

#45 · Jan 15, 2004

Kenneth Reed2 said:uh-huh... you really think there's anything like that left on this planet??

Look, Sinko, don't even sweat it. The free market will spit out guys like that eventually. People actually need people like you, and the public sure as hell will reward you accordingly.

We aren't talking about some group of crappy idealists here. This is just basic damn common sense. Something any sane person should get pretty easily...

Melissa Myers5 Member

22 messages
joined Feb 2004

#46 · Jan 16, 2004

Whatever said:Well, honestly, that’s just how things work here. I mean, you can't expect George W. Bush to be some massive, all-consuming monster who personally keeps tabs on every single mid-level bureaucrat who feels the need to hire every incompetent cousin they have in the family tree...

Exactly, even if George W. Bush managed to polish up the party's public image, the underlying mindset of the people inside—not just his party, but pretty much any group that gets its hands on power—never actually changes.
We can sit here and pretend to be these grand moralists all we want, but let's be real: if the opportunity came up, most of us would jump at the chance to land a job through a well-placed connection.

Arthur Martinez7 Active Member

202 messages
joined Dec 2005

#47 · Jan 16, 2004

Is it really such a scandal to land a job through a personal connection? I don't think so. In fact, building a solid network is a fundamental part of professional life in America; having those connections can certainly streamline many processes and open doors that might otherwise remain closed.
The real issue arises when we allow incompetence to take root. When people are hired based solely on who they know rather than what they can actually do, the entire system begins to erode. Isn't it true that merit should always be the ultimate deciding factor?

Melissa Myers5 Member

22 messages
joined Feb 2004

#48 · Jan 16, 2004

Arthur Martinez7 said:Look, I don't see anything wrong with using connections to land a job... Honestly, having a solid network in life is essential because it lets you bypass so much red tape and get things done way faster than going through the front door every single time. The real issue—and this is what gets me worked up—is when people here in the States use those connections to shove completely incompetent individuals into roles they have no business holding.

Alright, I think I may have misspoken or failed to be clear enough in my previous point.
If I find myself in a position where I can't land a role that actually matches my degree, but someone pulls a few strings to offer me a different position that isn't even in my field—yet it pays incredibly well—why on earth wouldn't I take it? If I'm not qualified for it, fine, but if the paycheck is there, why should I pass it up?

Arthur Martinez7 Active Member

202 messages
joined Dec 2005

#49 · Jan 16, 2004

Melissa Myers5 said:Alright, I see where the confusion lies; perhaps my initial point wasn't as clear as it could have been.
If I find myself unable to land a job in my actual field despite my degree, yet someone pulls a few strings to offer me a high-paying role in an entirely different industry, am I truly unqualified if I don't have the specific training? If the paycheck is solid, why on earth wouldn't I take it?

It really depends on the context, doesn't it? If you accept a position as a server at a local diner, it isn't exactly a life-altering catastrophe; you’ll likely pick up the ropes within a week. However, I highly doubt anyone would consider stepping into the shoes of a cardiovascular surgeon or a heavy machinery operator without the proper credentials. In those cases, there is a profound weight of responsibility regarding human lives.
But look at how things work here in the States—you see people with nothing more than a high school diploma landing roles like the CEO of a major utility company through pure nepotism, even when they wouldn't know the first thing about managing a corporation.

Nicholas Doyle36 Newcomer

1 message
joined Jan 2004

#50 · Jan 16, 2004

Arthur Martinez7 said:Look, getting a job through a connection isn't really the issue... I mean, having a network is just part of life, right? It helps you get stuff done way faster... The real headache starts when incompetent people are the ones getting hired through those connections here in the States.

Now this is a good one. Very good.
So, we've got competent people getting hired via networking while the incompetent ones are stuck dealing with the unemployment office. Honestly, I think we should probably just hire the incompetent ones through connections instead.
Justice for all, I guess.

Melissa Myers5 Member

22 messages
joined Feb 2004

#51 · Jan 16, 2004

Arthur Martinez7 said:It really depends on how you look at it... if you’re just picking up a gig as a server at a local diner, it isn't exactly a catastrophe because you can pick up the ropes in about a week, but I highly doubt anyone would even consider letting someone step into a role as a cardiovascular surgeon or a long-haul trucker without the proper credentials and training.

Look, even if his cousin managed to pull some strings, he wouldn't be able to fake his way into being the President of the United States, let alone some mid-level government official.

But here in this country, you see these people with nothing more than a high school diploma landing executive roles at massive state-run utilities through pure nepotism, despite having absolutely zero clue how to actually manage a corporation.

That’s a whole different level of dysfunction.

vividlynx68 Active Member

118 messages
joined Apr 2008

#52 · Nov 4, 2015

By the way—it’s probably worth reviving a twelve-year-old thread (the final page of this PDF) just so people can see how things used to be. And what we're about to face all over again... 😬

Mark Harris66 Active Member

158 messages
joined Oct 2016

#53 · Nov 4, 2015

You really think there hasn't been favoritism over the last few years—and even now—to go around? Like it was somehow just for the Democrats while the Republicans were totally off the hook? 😁

vividlynx68 Active Member

118 messages
joined Apr 2008

#54 · Nov 4, 2015

Not at all. It was just amusing to see what people were arguing about in the oldest thread on this subforum—if it had been started yesterday, it would actually be relevant, unlike most of the garbage on the last page 😁

crimsonwolf21 Member

25 messages
joined Jan 2014

#55 · Nov 4, 2015

Mark Harris66 said:You really think there hasn't been favoritism over the last few years—and even now—to go around? Like it was somehow just for the Democrats while the Republicans were totally off the hook? 😁

The proof is staring us in the face—this whole country is rotten, from the politicians straight down to the citizens. If people actually gave a damn about prosperity, 90% of these career politicians would already be rotting in prison. This nation is a lost cause, and these elections are going to prove it. I’m sick of living in a place where I have to choose between two piles of garbage—you can't even tell which one is more criminal. It's a total disaster.

gentlemoose57 Active Member

72 messages
joined May 2014

#56 · Nov 4, 2015

crimsonwolf21 said:The proof is staring us in the face—this whole country is rotten, from the politicians straight down to the citizens. If people actually gave a damn about prosperity, 90% of these career politicians would already be rotting in prison. This nation is a lost cause, and these elections are going to prove it. I’m sick of living in a place where I have to choose between two piles of garbage—you can't even tell which one is more criminal. It's a total disaster.

Look, it’s rare for politicians to be truly detached from the public. The issue isn't corruption for the sake of being corrupt—it's that the average person isn't part of the "inner circle" getting the perks.

I mean, think about it—how many people would actually turn down a "connection" at a hospital to skip the line, even if it meant taking a bigger health risk? It’s hard to blame someone for being suspicious of corruption when they're practically incentivized to participate in it just to get by.

neonhound18 Active Member

192 messages
joined Apr 2013

#57 · Nov 4, 2015

crimsonwolf21 said:The proof is staring us in the face—this whole country is rotten, from the politicians straight down to the citizens. If people actually gave a damn about prosperity, 90% of these career politicians would already be rotting in prison. This nation is a lost cause, and these elections are going to prove it. I’m sick of living in a place where I have to choose between two piles of garbage—you can't even tell which one is more criminal. It's a total disaster.

If you happen to harbor the delusion that people elsewhere are somehow more honest, I really must tell you that you're mistaken; even in Canada, they brought in some Swedish folks to run what was essentially a failing bank, and those Swedes started acting just like the typical corrupt bureaucrats we see in everyday American life. The only real distinction is that in Sweden, there's a functioning judicial system that manages to penalize the major offenses somewhat effectively, but otherwise, they aren't any better than we are. 😉

crimsonwolf21 Member

25 messages
joined Jan 2014

#58 · Nov 4, 2015

gentlemoose57 said:Look, it’s rare for politicians to be truly detached from the public. The issue isn't corruption for the sake of being corrupt—it's that the average person isn't part of the "inner circle" getting the perks.

I mean, think about it—how many people would actually turn down a "connection" at a hospital to skip the line, even if it meant taking a bigger health risk? It’s hard to blame someone for being suspicious of corruption when they're practically incentivized to participate in it just to get by.

Look, I get it—there's a level of tolerance for this stuff everywhere, but what's happening here has totally lost the plot. It feels like if you're young and actually have any ambition, you're basically doomed. Anyone who thinks things are going to magically improve once the Republican Party takes over—honestly, they're either an idiot or just a total opportunist.

Anthony Garcia19 Active Member

116 messages
joined Aug 2012

#59 · Nov 4, 2015

Look, people don't vote for politicians because they want corruption. They vote because they hope for the opposite—they expect leaders to actually drive the kind of progress that moves society forward.

That’s why I think blaming the public instead of the politicians is a mistake. Politicians are the ones with the actual power to set the direction and make things happen. Most folks just adapt to the reality they're given because, honestly, sometimes that's the only way to get by. Sure, you have those rare idealists who refuse to bend, but their voices are usually too quiet to really shift the needle for the majority...

crimsonwolf21 Member

25 messages
joined Jan 2014

#60 · Nov 4, 2015

neonhound18 said:If you happen to harbor the delusion that people elsewhere are somehow more honest, I really must tell you that you're mistaken; even in Canada, they brought in some Swedish folks to run what was essentially a failing bank, and those Swedes started acting just like the typical corrupt bureaucrats we see in everyday American life. The only real distinction is that in Sweden, there's a functioning judicial system that manages to penalize the major offenses somewhat effectively, but otherwise, they aren't any better than we are. 😉

Look, obviously a Swede isn't going to act the same way in Sweden as they would in the Congo. But do we seriously have to aim for Congo-level chaos? It could be better, sure, but there isn't a single real leader in sight who can actually steer this country toward a decent future. Every single option on the table is just more of the same old garbage—basically a fast track to disaster. Things won't get truly alarming until there's nobody left worth saving and the whole system just collapses under its own weight. Is that really what we need?

Here we go again... Nepotism is out of control.

🔗 Similar threads