We have a society based on capital market and processing of goods to maintain the state. Moreover, the State will decide how to stay afloat receiving capital and goods that can generate wealth for the country. And of course, citizens are the State and give the government authority to act on your behalf. So much seems
everything works fine.
The state consists of two distinct parts (which are not related to the separation of powers): the first is the political class and the second public officials.
is clear that anyone who becomes part of the state has to be paid. It is necessary for the proper functioning of the state but not only of individual citizens in it.
officials do work (and charge for it) but have no power to manipulate the State, like any other citizen who work outside the civil service by the State also has power to manipulate the state.
And now politicians. Here, however, comes the rogue. Politicians tienen una retribución económica, que no es un sueldo, por lo tanto diríase que no cobran por trabajar, o lo que es lo mismo: no trabajan. Cierto, solo son representantes de la voluntad de los ciudadanos. Sin embargo reciben cierta cantidad de dinero por la pérdida de tiempo que les ocasiona estar representando a los ciudadanos. Es obvio que no tenga la obligación de prestar un servicio al no tener un sueldo ni una relación contractual (económica) con el ciudadano. Entonces, dependiendo de la situación del político, éste recibirá unas cantidades de dinero u otras en función de su situación, pero no de su trabajo. Cobrará por lo que representa, no por lo que hace.
Se puede decir que el político is receiving a certain amount of money by the time it is disposed and the site where it should be. Therefore, the politician gets the money because they are talking about matters of state in situations that are incumbent. It is logical that the politician does not get any money because they are eating at home with his family or to be watching football with his friends.
This seems a trifle is not so. In fact, the politician is being paid for work as if it were not devoting his time to the state, would be doing other work for which revenues have to stay. Thus, the salary received by the politician is a benefit to the state, because it creates a barrier through which the politician will not be sold to other interests than the state, in short, will not be sold to other interests other than the one that concerns all citizens.
Thus, the salary becomes the protection of the State to maintain the "right to rebellion" of any citizen or political power and thus create an open and free society based on the differentiation of all citizens and non- tyrannizing in favor of any idea of \u200b\u200buniqueness.
Through the salaries of officials and politicians, the state is guaranteeing freedom of action of all citizens, and at the same time, officials and politicians are decreasing the country's economic improvement. But it is a necessity, any structure needs to organize and thereby improves performance. If the civil and political work as expected and consistent with their duties, the country is benefited and the country's wealth increases.
For this reason, officials and politicians, have an obligation not only to perform their task in the best possible way, but to avoid unnecessary costs to the state to make the country more profitable.
On the other side of the coin we have the opposite situation. When a citizen able to stabilize their economic situation relaxes in achieving their tasks.
happens however, that get a civil service post in the city bears the need to monetize their stay in it. In the event that the employment is for life this will not clear quickly, and even does not always happen. Just because of working as an officer stops a citizen attending his work, that only happens very rarely.
What does happen is a waste of the country's social reality. Having a stable and lasting personal situation, the civil service no longer perceive the need for restraint in spending. There comes a time not so important to spend a page or a clip, use five minutes or so to compose a document. You can even get to neglect the city. Although I did say two things together are totally contrary: first is the citizen who is paying the salary and makes for the officials to work they pay for society to function, and moreover, the city is paying To carry out the task with the lowest economic cost, with lower spending on raw materials. The citizen pays attention, the city pays for something intangible: the society.
Thus, the official did not see the difference between using a tool (like a computer) that is cheaper or more expensive, or that its maintenance is cheaper or more expensive. In case you have option to choose the tool will choose the most desirable, not the cheapest. Even opt for the more prepared for the task in hand. This is so because the staff are not aware of what the social needs for which it contracted. The reason is the false belief that performing a particular task is the sole use of an official. In fact, the civil service is not only necessary to perform a specific task, but also to meet the needs of every citizen in every one of the sections. The social part of work by staff has lost some of them, only those officials who maintain the social contract as a premise of his work is deliberately kept action is required. We arrived after this
politicians. At work. I know that politicians do not like to receive a salary, or to do work for society. They are a little higher. I do not know why. Or want to know.
The reality is that a politician should receive a salary and must perform work. Unlike an officer gets his place for a specified period based on some specific requirements for the position will develop, the politician, is voted by the public from time to time to represent, or rather, so that his name run the country. With a dual objective: the citizen and society.
For this reason, salary received by the political (I know I should not call it salary) has to protect it from being "bought" by larger amounts to make their political integrity is exposed and does not perform the task for which it was voted. So the salary is high. However
opposite is true. Removed
of salary. Because it has eliminated the concept of work. A politician does not work, just beyond.
Removed the concept of equity. Because having no goal to comply may breach the duty of the citizen.
The ultimate goal of policy is no longer either the public or society, but their class interests, maintain the system with the same weaknesses in order continuar con el mismo quebranto sobre la sociedad.
El político ha dejado de ser un ciudadano íntegro para la sociedad, solo lo es para el estamento político y sus congéneres. De esta forma, la cantidad de dinero que recibe el político solo es para que mantenga su estatus social, ya no es para que proteja a la sociedad, ni para que sirva al ciudadano.
En definitiva, el sistema político ha instaurado la “protección al caciquismo”.
De esta forma, con una clase política cuyo único fin es mantener su estatus, lo único que se consigue con su retribución no asalariada es eliminar la posibilidad de representación ciudadana.
***
Con estos dos enfoques visceral have two problems in society today:
1. Excessive costs.
2. Unrepresented citizens through the government.
the first case, one of the best solutions for society, it is retrofit salary costs. We will post an example. As the computer system of the country, is based largely on a proprietary operating system, which must pay the annual renewal of licenses. Today there are enough free tools to convert the computer system of the country towards a free operating system. Convert spending on licenses to recruitment is more profitable for the country. It is also safer for the country. It also makes us stronger external disasters.
For the second case, you could say that one solution would be to not issue any payment to any politician, but it would be even worse, since they generate a conceptual damage in the political class would generate a loss of political confidence and assume that the only valid way to survive is through the pursuit of alternative compensation.
One possibility would be to define the functions of a politician, so he could not cover more actions that can actually observe. This will need to multiply the amount politicians needed. This would lead to are missing in the amounts due. Using the technological means available today (internet) to make no additional cost (per diem, travel) their duties. And, of course, have exactly the same taxation as other citizens. ***
But in all this there is a problem: it is not beneficial for the political class. There is only one way: get the political class to evolve, to perform rapid and profound change. I like to think in the fourth sense of the SAR, to the detriment of the latter. I mean the word revolution.
0 comments:
Post a Comment