Yes. Considering the factor of senile imbecility, we should retire some and on grounds of pure insanity, we should get rid of most. If age is considered for an admission test, be it education or military service, it should be considered even for retirement. I wonder why they have not done it so far. Maybe, it is because when a one is old, one repents for his past sins and does something good to the people who they cheated all their lives. So these politicians are given a chance to give back atleast a bit of what they have taken all along.
A supreme court jugde retires at 65.
An employee at 58 - 60.
Because human being can not function efficiently as he/she grows old. As poticians are not human beings any longer, this rule does not apply to them.
2007-02-01 05:43:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by havah 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I completely agree with you on testing.
Call it the "No Politician Left Behind Act". We test our students annually to ensure their performance and issue grades to the schools, we could do the same for the political parties.
If Bush had been given a foreign affairs test in 2000, or asked to define "sovereign nation", he would not have been eligible to run.
OK, now all you have to do is convince these politicians to pass the laws that might render them ineligible to remain in their job. Get them to do term limits, ethics reform etc. while you are at it.
Term limits would be more fair and probably more acceptable than mandatory retirement.
2007-01-28 07:52:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by Jack C 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not necessary....If we are enough educated then we can select/vote the best person at the time of casting the vote.....
If the culprits like illiteracy and poverty are removed from the nation then retirement age limit for politicians/ministers doesn't exist
2007-01-30 03:50:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by Muzaffar R 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes! politicians should be licenses like other professionals. Requiring physical and mental exam every 4 years.
Bush would not be President if the law existed.....
2007-01-28 07:59:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by mr america 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
That would be lumping people into groups rather than allowing individualism.
Remember, America's best people are not running the country, they're running very successful companies.
2007-02-02 19:34:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Lucky for us our politicians usually depend on advisors who actually are educated and must be skilled and competitive to be promoted into advisory positions rather than being elected.
2007-01-28 06:56:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
if it was so they wud not b called politicians,they wud be called statesmen. we wud run out of leaders if we imposed these rules plus the average,educated citizen doesnt want politics.mayB in the future sumtime this wud B practical
2007-01-28 11:11:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by anuragada poojaari(ap) 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes
2007-01-31 19:09:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by jerry 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yep.
2007-01-28 06:54:05
·
answer #9
·
answered by BRITS OUT 2
·
0⤊
2⤋