The common knowledge that politics and politicians are not 100% honest is a fact that everyone in today's society accepts. If you were faced with the following scenerio, which would you choose, and why:
1. A political candidate that is 100% honest, no flaws, but unable to get the things done that your community is in dire need of; or
2. A political candidate that you know would do a little skimming off of the top and not 100% on the up and up, but because of his political connections could be extremely beneficial to your community, bringing improvements, jobs and monetary benefits where they are desperately needed most.
Think about your answer carefully, putting yourself in a situation where you can relate; i.e. bad schooling, terrible zoning problems, flooding dangers, etc.
Answers:
one of the problems we face in modern times is that people do accept less than honest politicians. it is considered a necessary evil to elect someone with connections even if there may be moral flaws. until we change our thinking and demand honesty and ethics from our elected officials, we will get what we deserve.
I think if the community is really that bad it is because of corrupt politicians like the second one so there is no need to continue that so pick the first and work locally to solve the problem.
I'll take honesty every time. Communities don't depend on government to get things done. Private enterprise can do everything better and cheaper than the government.
No comments:
Post a Comment