With all the talk regarding the election and politics in general, is there any good reason NOT to impose term limits on congress?
Let’s face it, we shouldn’t have people like Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell in congress.
People constantly complain about politics and how dirty/partisan it has become... so why not term limits and keep the young blood comin’
| +50 | Interviews Are So Fake | 33 | 8h | |
| +33 | 2024 UK Election - Tories finished? | 21 | 1d | |
| +29 | ADHD ! | 14 | 2h | |
| +29 | Non-Competes Banned | 34 | 2h | |
| +29 | Being Christian in investment banking | 14 | 2d | |
| How do I become Sigma | 15 | 1d | ||
| +19 | Moelis has the cutest Analysts? | 4 | 2d | |
| +18 | Best NYC neighborhood for single 30M | 12 | 4d | |
| +16 | Underage intern, drinking? | 7 | 2d | |
| +13 | Secretive vs Universal Prestige? | 7 | 2d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
Yes. You don’t want a lot of rookies running the government any more than you’d want a bunch of analysts running an investment bank.
While I agree in part, I think that experience should be acquired before getting into politics. Politics should not be a candidate’s source of experience.
Currently, a lot of them have become career politicians and somehow become millionaires in the process. Not only that, but I fee like each party’s sole objective has become to beat the other.
We should have businesspeople, working class people, teachers, police officers, etc. Not people who’s most meaningful experience is politics itself. My 2 cents.
I’m a huge fan of people who aren’t career politicians. Non-political experience does not make you inherently good at politics though, it just makes you a well-rounded person.
Governing experience makes you good at governing.
Whose to say they wouldn’t be successful? You just don’t know because it has not been tried. All CEOs, CFOs, CIOs, etc were all analysts at one point.
And what’s the difference?
Experience.
Not true - not every CEO has been an analyst.
Can't think of one. Would 100% get behind:
- Congressional term limits
- Ban unrelated riders on bills
- Reinstate the super majority requirement for the Senate to confirm SCOTUS nominees
Force these people to work together a bit more and actually try to accomplish something during whatever time they have.
Agreed. I’d also include a mandatory retirement age of 70. Nobody in their senior age should be making decisions for future generations.
I was legit wanting to type out forced retirement for all public offices at age ~70 but felt maybe that's a bit much. Couldn't agree more. Watching the Elders of Congress try to ask Zuckerberg how he runs such a big website for "free" made it abundantly clear no one that old can keep up. Or at the very least that the ones who can stay in the private sector for the most part.
This is a dumb idea. Any sort of age limit is just ridiculous. Some people start having cognitive problems in their 50s. Some people are completely intact through their 90s.
People die at different ages too.
Some old people will keep up to different trends in the world. Some middle aged people already lost touch with reality and new developments.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2018/01/18/five-reasons-to-oppose-congressional-term-limits/
Cumque sapiente voluptas nostrum eum tempore. Id consequuntur qui consequatur qui molestiae. Tempore deleniti rem omnis necessitatibus ipsa cupiditate officiis.
Et aut dolores impedit nesciunt quos vero. Aut cum voluptatem necessitatibus voluptatem. Ducimus temporibus cumque laborum accusantium iure. Fuga ut blanditiis neque voluptates. Facilis sed sint odio rem ipsum.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...