politicans- self interest or public?

Question

Do Politicians/Government Officials Make Their Decisions to serve self interest or public Interest?
I know that it depends on the politician/government official, but overlooking that. could you give examples/reasons too?
thanks in advance.

Answer 1

Self interest, Why if they want to make a good service they always has to be rich? Why are they are looking for the vote of people who are as rich as they are. They don't really care for the people, but for them and for the people who are like they.

Answer 2

Few people will buy this, but I think most politicians try to represent the public interest. Of course, people will rebut this by citing cases of corruption, where obviously self-interest comes first. However, I believe corruption occurs in a minority of cases.

Few politicians would last long if their constituents did not believe they were well-represented. Therefore, a politician who wishes to serve more than one term in office must support the public interest.

Even in cases where it seems that politicians are serving their own self-interests, a case can be made that they are actually looking out for the public interest. For instance, when Congress raises its own salary, some politicians might point out that high salaries are needed to attract qualified people to the job, and to help prevent corruption and bribery. There is a certain amount of truth in this, even though others may think raising the minimum wage would serve the public interest more.

To take another example: a politician might agree to make interest payments on a home loan tax-deductible; if he owns his own home, he too will be able to take this tax deduction. Many people would consider such a law in the public interest, but it is also in the self-interest of many lawmakers.

Answer 3

good question politicians on the national level are definitely in it for self interest. ask yourself this question. when was the last time a politician told it like it was without worring about being "pc",wow that would be a breath of fresh air.all we have now are a bunch of panderers who will cater to whom ever their speaking in front of.....

Answer 4

for sure, no flesh presser, in spite of being "outed" and then apologizing after the certainty, would ever very own as much as serving their very own activity quite than the well-known public activity. regrettably, there are clean very own ties that take place in many flesh presser's histories that create conflicts of activity. Take, as an occasion, Dick Cheney's courting with Halliburton. in spite of the undeniable fact that, the main deadly difficulty in politics in the present day is in all possibility the potential that lobbyists have over some politicians. on a similar time as some politicians would possibly no longer precisely be "self-serving," the certainty that lobbyists can throw funds at politicians and then carry the promise of destiny funds and help over their heads in return for political favors endangers politicians' objectivity and accountability to the well-known public. it fairly is very authentic in relation to the media, who at as quickly as administration flesh presser's "face time" on the air, hence via extension, their point of exposure, popularity, and popularity.

Answer 5

Give me a few terms in office to word my answer.

Answer 6

My feeling-if they're doing their job, they don't have to be a media w----!