resignations and polarisation

chewy

two questions in one lets see which one take a life of its own...

im not a big fan of all these calls for people to resign in business and politics, perhaps it would be better to make the person stay and correct the problems...?


sacking somone seems to get rid of the headline more then the problem,
it provides a false sense of security it may provide a sense of justice or vengence to the people wronged doens't increase the chance of the problem being solved if the guy stays

asking rumsfeld to resign won't change the the profit driven administration...
who to say the new name won't be worse ....
there replacing bremmer with neogropente


unless they are so totally incompetent that they may blow the place up are they not the still the person with the most knowledge of the org and will fix the problem quicker then a new person that will have to learn the ropes


polarisation work with me here i haven't quite formulated the thought into a good question....


im just thinking that all this strife in the world increases polarisation more people take opposing views, rather then a increase in comprismises...

does the so called middle ground get bigger or smaller

does the vocal minority get louder on either side

Victor

Originally posted by chewy
unless they are so totally incompetent that they may blow the place up are they not the still the person with the most knowledge of the org and will fix the problem quicker then a new person that will have to learn the ropes

He is but one man in a vast bureaucracy. There are many that can repalce him.

Occassional thinning of the helps. To think you can FUBAR and get away with it, is, well, unbelieveable.

chewy

its the beaucracy which fubar'd not the man

Victor

Originally posted by chewy
its the beaucracy which fubar'd not the man

Who is in charge of the bureaucracy and has been for nearly 4 years?