News Bush's Cabinet - The Corporate Connection

  • Thread starter Thread starter Adam
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Connection
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the composition of Bush's Cabinet, highlighting concerns about the prevalence of members with backgrounds in big oil, energy, and mining. Participants express mixed views on the merits of having corporate leaders in government, with some arguing that their business experience could be beneficial for governance. However, significant skepticism arises regarding the potential for conflicts of interest, particularly when these leaders may prioritize deregulation that could harm public welfare. Critics point out that corporate leaders often prioritize profit over the public good, raising ethical questions about their ability to serve effectively in government roles. The conversation also references past political figures, contrasting their actions with current leaders and questioning the integrity of both corporate executives and politicians. Overall, the thread reflects a deep concern about the implications of corporate influence in government and the balance between experience and ethical governance.
Adam
Messages
65
Reaction score
1
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by Adam
Members of Bush's Cabinet, all from big oil and energy and mining? You bet.]
Having corporate leaders in government is far better than having career politicians. I highly recommend Tom Clancy's "Executive Orders."
 


Originally posted by russ_watters
Having corporate leaders in government is far better than having career politicians. I highly recommend Tom Clancy's "Executive Orders."
Pointing us towards fiction, huh? LOL, ok, it can't be any worse than the fiction that is modern politics!

Having corporate leaders in government is not the best thing in the world, because the first thing they push for is deregulation, which inevitably leads to trouble.
 
Well, I think that you could guess what I think about the fact that big business people, many of whom are in oil and energy, being the leaders of the country, and then their industries subsequently getting great government contracts and policy changes.
 
Would it be fair to not let people with corporate connections be President? I mean, a lot of the corporate skills could overlap with the Presidential ones?
 
Originally posted by Dave
Would it be fair to not let people with corporate connections be President? I mean, a lot of the corporate skills could overlap with the Presidential ones?

Is it fair to appoint someone to run an agency for the benefit of the people, when it is in his financial interests to run it into the ground instead?
 
Originally posted by Zero
Is it fair to appoint someone to run an agency for the benefit of the people, when it is in his financial interests to run it into the ground instead?

I guess that answer would be no...
 
terrific quote, DD. so far as I've heard, it's Bechtel (search 'big dig' in boston) and Worldcom (search 'biggest fraud in history') that've been anointed with the Iraqi booty.
You know, one of the things that Clinton did, was to sign policy that flew in the face of the very industries that supported him, because it was in the best interest of the country to do so. Few men are as devoted to principle.
 
Originally posted by schwarzchildradius
...Clinton... because it was in the best interest of the country to do so. Few men are as devoted to principle.
Hehe. You serious? I guess you probably are.
 
  • #10
Thanks, RW, yes I'm serious. It's just too bad that Gore smoked so much pot etc, he couda been a contenda!
 
  • #11
Having corporate leaders in government is not the best thing in the world, because the first thing they push for is deregulation, which inevitably leads to trouble.

I'm not saying that I disagree with you Zero, but you must take into account that there are many benefits too. These people can see a bigger picture than an every day politician and in addition, I would like to say that if they are from:

all from big oil and energy and mining
as Adam said, then they would probably be good choices in this time period for two reasons. 1) They have experience running such large companies that they would probably be better off helping run a country than some senator that at most has represented his/her state and never had any real experience running a country or business.
2)Right now, we need those things; Energy, Oil, and for Mining all sorts of things like Gold for example.
 
  • #12
The problem is, these people want to deregulate everything...and as it has become abumdantly clear, unregulated business is a bad idea.
 
  • #13
Shadow, the big problem with your post is that it has the assumption that CEOs will care about others. Big oil CEOS are big oil CEOs because they were cutthroat and maximized profits for their own business, regardless of how their actions affect others.
 
  • #14
Big oil CEOS are big oil CEOs because they were cutthroat and maximized profits for their own business, regardless of how their actions affect others.

With all due respect dan that pretty much sums up quite a few politicians these days. Some would give anything for power.
 

Similar threads

Replies
85
Views
8K
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
27
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
38
Views
11K
Back
Top